DOI 10.1007/s1091501500530
Abstract Simulating coreannular flow is an important task in the oil industry. Many
attempts have been made to simulate vertical upflow or downflow. However, in the case
of horizontal pipes, simulation is likely to succeed when the effect of gravity is ignored,
because the motion of the fluid is no longer axisymmetric. This gravityignoring
simulation is acceptable when the density of oil is almost similar to that of water, but in
most cases, densitymatching does not occur in reality. A few attempts have been made to
simulate flow in horizontal pipes (Ooms et al. in Phys Fluids 25:032102, 2013), but these
attempts used 2D crosssectional simulation or 3D simulation of a specific moment. This
paper discusses several results for coreannular flow in horizontal pipes with gravity
effect, using full 3D simulation. Using a level set method, we express the interface of
coreannular flow and compare different cases with different parameters.
1 Introduction
The transportation of heavy crude oil through a pipe is a naturally important problem in oil
industry. Among several efficient modes of transportation, lubricating a pipe with a low
viscosity fluid, such as water, is a wellused technique. The primary idea behind
lubricating pipes is the property of lowviscosity fluid to encapsulate highviscosity fluid.
This type of flow is designated as coreannular flow, which features one fluid at the core
and another fluid in the annulus.
B Myungjoo Kang
mkang@snu.ac.kr
1
3
J Sci Comput
Byungjoon Lee
asone30@snu.ac.kr
1 Department of Mathematical Sciences, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
1
3
Many attempts have experimented on [1] and simulated coreannular flow [2,3].
However, in many cases, a vertical or parallel pipe without gravity is used because it is
difficult to analyze parallel pipes owing to the effect of gravity. Additionally, in previous
simulations, many researchers assumed that the given flow was axisymmetric in a stable
regime, which is not true for a parallel pipe with gravity. Recently, one study [4] attempted
to simulate a horizontal coreannular flow by using the VOF method [2], but this
simulation examined a 2D crosssectional plane and a 3D simulation of a specific moment.
The purpose of this study is to perform a full 3D simulation on coreannular flow in a
horizontal pipe while considering the gravity effect. To describe the interface between oil
and water, we selected a level set method [5]. In many simulations on incompressible fluid
[6,7], level set formulation is wellsuited for visualizing the interface. Because oil and
water have very different viscosities, we primarily attempted to perform the simulation
based on the boundary capturing method [7,8]. This is viewed as an extension of Kangs
work [9] in terms of using a level set method. However, in 3D simulation, axisymmetric
coordinates must be transformed into regular grid coordinates with irregular boundary
domain for a cylindrical pipe, which complicates the simulation.
In this paper, we will provide numerical results on coreannular flow in a parallel pipe
in full 3D domain. This paper discusses the following: governing equation and parameters
of simulation are given in Sect. 2. In Sect. 3, information is given about the numerical
method based on level set. This section also provides a discussion on boundary conditions
when a domain has an irregular boundary. Finally, we give numerical results in Sect. 4.
Coreannular flow, as part of a twofluid flow, can be expressed with the NavierStokes
equation:
u 1
+ u u = ( P + (2S)) + F (1)
t
where is the density, the viscosity, and S the viscous stress tensor,
. u i
1 u j . (2)
+
Sij = xi x j
2
and F is the source term, such as acceleration exerted by gravity and surface tension. In
coreannular fluid, P = f x + p for the driven pressure gradient vector f and the axis
coordinate vector x. Because oil and water are liquids, the velocity u must be subject to
the
incompressibility condition:
u = 0 (3)
In this paper, oil is designated as fluid 1 and water as fluid 2. Using a level set method, we
represent the interface between oil and water, which is moved by the following equation:
+ u = 0 (4)
t
Here, is a signed distance function to the interface between oil and water.
J Sci Comput
For convenience, we use the dimensionless form of Eq. (1). The following variables are
used for expressing dimensionless form:
x = Rx , u = V 0u , t = R t
V0
(5)
P = Poil(V0)2, = oil, = oil
where dimensionless variables are denoted as *; R is the undisturbed reference interface
position; and V0 is the centerline velocity. Transforming Eq. (1) into dimensionless form
and dropping *, we have
px . .
1 (2u x )x + (u y + vx ) y + ((u z + . .
1 R
wx ))z
ut + u u = + f1
Re oil V02
+
. . (6)
py 1 ((u y + vx ))x + (2v y ) y + (vz + w y ) z
R
=
vt + u v Re +
+ V02
. g (7)
1 R
.
+ f2
oil V02
pz . .
1 ((u z + wx ))x + (vz + w y ) y + (2wz . .
)z 1 R
wt + u w = + 2 f3
Re oil V0
+
(8)
RV
where the Reynolds number, Re = oiloil 0 , f = ( f1, f2, f3), is driven by the pressure
gradient.
Because there is discontinuity at the interface between oil and water, smoothed density
and viscosity are used for this equation:
() = 1 + ( 1) H (), (9)
() = 1 + ( 1) H (), (10)
where = water /oil , = water /oil and H () is the Heaviside function, as follows:
0, if < 0,
H () = 1 , if = 0, (11)
2
1, if > 0.
where r is the distance from the axis of the axial direction to the interface. The velocity is
imposed only for the axial direction.
An interfacial tension parameter is J = R11/12. Reynolds numbers, Rei , are defined
by Rei = i V0(0) R1/i , i = 1, 2, where Re 1/Re 2 = m/ .
3 Numerical Formulation
In this simulation, we introduce two different level set functions: one for the interface
between oil and water, and the other for the cylinderical pipe. For convenience, f is set
for the former function, and c for the latter.
The level set technique is used to describe the interface [10]. We initialize f to be the
signed distance function from the interface between oil and water. Then, the interface can
be expressed as the zero level set of f as
= {x  f (x, t) = 0} (14)
The oil and water regions will be described by f < 0 and f > 0. Then, velocities in
each phase can be written as
.
u oil , f 0
u= (15)
uwater , f > 0.
where u is the velocity of fluid. When using the level set method, the level set function is
set to move along with the given velocity through the following equation:
( f )t + u f = 0. (16)
The unit normal on the interface and curvature of the interface can be computed as
f (17)
n=
 f 
= n (18)
where the unit normal is drawn from the oil into the water.
In this study, we select the initial function of the interface as follows:
f (x(r, x )) = R1 + C cos(x ) (19)
where C is the amplitude and is the wave number.
3.1.2 Level Set Function for Boundary Condition
Because the current simulation is a full 3D simulation in the pipe, the boundary for com
putation is not axisaligned. To address the boundary conditions, we introduce the level set
function for the pipe:
c(x(r, x )) = R2 (20)
During the entire simulation, the boundary pipe is never changed, so we only use this level
set function for determining the boundary conditions of the simulation.
In Eqs. (9) and (10), density and viscosity are defined discontinuously near the interface,
which causes numerical difficulties in implementation. For this reason, we present a
numerical Heaviside function with a fixed width, which is proportional to the spatial mesh
size, as follows:
1, if > (21)
;
H () =
0, if <
;
.
.
1 x
1 .
1+ + sin , otherwise
.
2
Here, is the prescribed width. Now, we can replace () and () in Eqs. (9) and (10)
with smoothed density and viscosity functions, which are denoted as () and ().
() = + (1 ) H (), (22)
() = + (1 ) H (), (23)
We set = 1.56x .
3.3 Projection Method
This method was initially proposed by Chorin [11], whereas an explicit version of the
method was presented by Fortin et al. [12]. This explicit method is a fractional step method
with first
order accuracy in time. Let
= (un, vn, wn). In the first step, we explicitly compute a
Vn
provisional value, V , with
n
. . n 1
V V
n
V +
6t
V (2S) F = 0 (24)
Re
which is the momentum equation with no pressure gradient. Only the discretization in time
equations
is considered here. Then, in the second step, we correct V by considering the
n+1
V
V 1 0 (25)
pn+1
+ =
6tn+1
V =0 (26)
By using the divergence of Eq. (24) and by making use of Eq. (26) which states that V
n+1
must be a divergencefree vector, .we gain the.Poisson equation:
1 n+1 1
= V (27)
p
6t
The boundary condition for p is obtained by projecting vector Eq. (26) on the outward
normal unit N to the boundary . Thus, we obtain the Neumann condition:
. . . N (28)
pn+1 .
n+ V
=
N 1
V
6t
where V is the value of V on . To summarize, Eq.(24) produces V ; the
solution of
the Neumann problem [Eq. (27)] produces p n+1 ; finally, the velocity, V n+1, is
computed
from Eq. (25). More details are provided in a previous study [13].
We use a MAC grid to solve the NavierStokes equation as usual. All vector quantities,
such as un , are stored at cell face; scalar quantities, suchf as n , are located at the cell
center.
In one time step, we initially solve for un+1, then update fn+1. The numerical procedure
is as follows:
Step 1. Initialize f (x, t) as a signed distance function to the initial front.
Step 2. Solve the NavierStokes
n+1/2
equations [Eqs. (6),(7), and (8)] to obtain un+1.
Step 3. Propagate n to by using level set equation (16) with the velocity obtained
f f
at Step 2. n+1/2
Step 4. Reinitialize and obtain n+1.
f f
The advection terms in Eqs. (1) and (4) can be discretized as follows:
.
.. u. ui +1/2, j,k ui +1, j,k ui,
V = .
i +1/2, j,k
. j,k
6x. .
vi +1/2, j,k ui +1/2, j +1/2,k ui +1/2, j 1/2,k
+
. 6y
wi +1/2, j,k ui +1/2, j,k+1/2 ui +1/2, (29)
.
j,k1/2
+
6z
. .
.. . . u i, j,k i +1/2, j,k i 1/2, v.i, j,k i, j +1/2,k i, j 1/2,k
V i, j,k = .
j,k +
6x 6y
.
wi, j,k .i, j,k+1/2 i, (30)
j,k1/2
+
6z
Velocity advection for v and w are treated similarly. In Eqs. (29) and (30), ui +1, j,k ,
i +1/2, j,k must be obtained by using proper approximation. Here, we use ENO 3rd for
velocity and WENO 5th for level set approximation [1416].
The viscous term (2S) in Eq. (1) can be discretized by using central differencing. For
example, in x directional velocity u,
. . . . (31)
1 (2u x )x + (u y + vx ) y + ((u z + wx ))z
Re
i +1/2, j,k
. . .
we have (u y + (u y + vx )
.
= vx )
. .
((u + v )) i +1/2, j +1/2,k i +1/2, j 1/2,k
y x y i +1/2, j,k 6y
where ui +1/2, j +1,k ui +1/2, j,k vi +1, j +1/2,k ui, j
6y +1/2,k
(u y + vx)i +1/2, j +1/2,k 6x
= +
1 .
i +1/2, j +1/2,k = i +1, j,k + i, j,k + i +1, j +1,k + i, j,k
4
.
The other terms in Eq. (31) and the y, z directional velocities v, w can be discretized
similarly.
Because the difference in viscosity between oil and water is relatively large, viscous terms
must be updated in a strictly small time step to ensure stability. This causes the entire sim
ulation to be inefficient in terms of CFL time restrictions. To modify this, we used the
unconditionally stable semiimplicit technique [3] for updating viscosity terms.
In the semiimplicit method, each velocity is updated only as an implicit or explicit term.
That is,
. . . . ..
2u x + . .u + v + u + wn z
n
..
u un . n . 1 y x z x
n
V u = x y + F1
6t
n
(32)
Re
+
+ +
. . .. . . . ..
n .
n
v vn .n . n 1 uy + 2vy
vz + z
x y
V v = v w + F2
6t x y
Re (33)
+
. .
. . n ..x . .v + + 2w z
u + w .. n
w wn + .n
1
6t
V w =
. Re
n
z+ wx z y z (34)
y
+ F3
uvelocity . . ...
.
. . .
t
.
6
I 2 + + u = explicit term x
Re x y y z z
(35)
x
vvelocity . . ...
.
. . .
t
.
6
I + 2 + v = explicit term y
Re x y y z z
(36)
x
wvelocity
. .
6t . . .
+ + w = explicit term z
. . ...
I 2 (37)
Re x y y z z
where
x
. 6t . . .
n n
ex plicit term x = u 6t . . n + wn + 6t F1
un + Re v
. x y
V . x z
. 6t . . n. . .
n .
ex plicit term y = v n 6t . vn + u y n + 6t F2
Re w
x
+ y
V z
. 6t ..
n ..
ex plicit term z = w n 6t . wn + Re n + vn + 6t F3
u
.
V z x . z y
These systems are symmetric positive definite (SPD). Hence, we can solve these by
using a fast algorithm such as the preconditioned conjugate gradient (PCG) method. A
previous study [3] recommended a factorization scheme to solve these systems. When we
simulate this element, we found that the semiimplicit solver requires <30 iterations,
except for the first step because of the time step. This implies that the efficiency of the
semiimplicit step is not degraded when we solve this part directly. Hence, we solve the
semiimplicit part directly rather than using a factorization scheme.
N 6t
Because the solution
of this Neumann problem is independent with the choice of V
, we can select V=
n+1 V for simplicity; that is,
. .n+1
p
=0 (40)
N
The condition of compatibility for the Neumann problem is
.
, . , n+1 .
p d = N d
.n+1
0= V V
N 6t .
, n+1
.
that is, = V V d (41)
6t
, ,
n
+1
V d = V d = 0 (42)
It is important for the discretization with respect to space to conserve the preceding
compat ibility condition.
This is the homogeneous Neumann Poisson problem, which is a singular system, Ax =
b, in discretized form. Generally, when we solve singular system with PCG, some
special
treatment must be needed. By noting that e, the vector of all ones, is a basis of null space
of A, we solved ( AN + 1 ee t )y = b, where N is the number of row, and orthogonalize y
with respect to e to have real solution x . This modification guarantees null space of A is
shifted
away and we can find the solution (unique upto constant) on the restricted space of the
Krylov sequences of CG Span.
3.6.1 Variable Coefficient Poissons Equation with Jump Condition: Surface Tension
Effect Considered
Instead of using a continuous surface tension (CSF) model [17], we use a boundary
condition capturing (BCC) model for solving pressure [7,8].
In the case of a smoothed out viscosity, the jump condition in pressure at interface is
known to be [ p] = , where
[ p] = pwater poil
. pn+1. =
1
V
6t
. .n+1 0, [ p] = (43)
p =
N
where = 1 . Because the BCC method can be extended in dimensionbydimension
fashion, we present only one case to solve this. Assume that interface is located between
xi, j,k and xi 1, j,k , i, j,k < 0, and i 1, j,k > 0. Then, the discretized version of Eq. (43)
is as follows:
. . . ..
. p
+ ,
p
i +1/2, i +1, j,k pi, i, j,k pi 1, j,k
i 1/2, x
j,k j,k 6
j,k
6x
6x
. .
pi, j +1,k pi,
+ i, j .
+1/2,k j,k
6y
. . .
i, j pi, j,k pi, j 1,k pi, j,k+1 pi,
.. , 6y + i, j,k+1/2 .
1/2,k j,k
. 6y .. , 6z
pi , j ,k pi , j ,k 1 1 . .
i, j,k1/2 6z = V (44)
6z 6t i,
j,k
p
In the preceding formula, ( ) has discretization with mixed sign on pressure, p. This
x x
mixing sign degrades the numerical solution of the PDE. Hence, the sign is unified by using
the jump condition on p, p = p+ ( ) .
J Sci Comput
. . . ..
. p + ,
p
i +1/2, i +1, j,k pi, i, j,k pi 1, j,k
i 1/2, x
j,k j,k 6
j,k
6x
6x
. . . ..
. p ,
p
i +1/2, i +1, j,k pi, i, j,k pi 1, j,k
i 1/2, x
j,k j,k 6
j,k
6x
6x .
. .
. p p
+
i +1, j,k pi, i, j,k pi, j,k () ,
j,k
i +1/2, j,k i 1/2, j,k
6x 6x
6x
. . . .. ,
pi +1, j,k pi, pi, j,k pi 1, j,k
i +1/2, . i 1/2, x
j,k j,k j,k 6
6x
. . 6x
pi, j +1,k pi,
+ i, j .
+1/2,k j ,k
6y
. . .
i, j pi, j,k pi, j 1,k pi, j,k+1 pi,
.. , 6y + i, j,k+1/2 .
1/2,k j ,k
. 6y 6z
j,k pi, j,k1
..pi,, 1 . i 1/2, j,k ()
.
i, j,k1/2 6z = V +
6z 6t i, j,k (6x)2
(46)
3.7 Reinitialization
Although Eq. (16) will move the level set = 0 at the correct velocity, will no longer
be a distance function (i.e.,   /= 1); can become irregular after a certain period of
time. Maintaining as a distance function is essential for providing the interface with a
width
J Sci Comput
fixed in time. Computation of surface tension is difficult near a steep gradient in the
distance function. The values for (), especially for large density ratios, will be greatly
distorted if
  is far from 1.
Conventional routines for reinitializing a distance function have to explicitly find the
contour, = 0, and reset at all points close to the front. An iteration method for
reinitializing is described in the following.
Given a region, + , with 0 on + and = 0 on , evolve the equation t =
1   until reaches steady state. If is already close to a distance function, then
one should not have to evolve too far in time.
Unfortunately, one still has to prescribe boundary conditions on +, which requires
explicitly finding the interface. However, we can eliminate the problem of finding the
inter face. Consider the following function, 0(x), whose zero level set is the airliquid
interface: 0(x) need not to be a distance function. We will construct a function, (x),
with the proper ties that its zero level set is the same as 0(x) and that is the signed
normal distance to the interface. This is achieved by solving the following problem to
steady state:
t = S(0 ) .1 , 2 + 2 + 2 . (47)
x y z
(x, 0) = 0(x) (48)
where S is the signed function [6]. For numerical purposes, it is useful to smooth the sign
function as
0 (49)
S ( ) =
0 ,
02 +
2
However, Russo and Smereka [18] remarked that this approach can cause the zero levelset
to move into the closest grid node because of inconsistency with upwinding approximation
near interface. In order to fix this problem, they suggested the following modified version
of Eq. (47).
. n 6t . .
0
. , n if (i, j, k)
n+1 i, j,k  Di, j,k
6x
i, j,k sgn i, 6x
0 j,k
i, j,k = . . G ()i, j,k , otherwise (50)
n
6t sgn
i, j,k i, j,k
where . . . . . .
,max a 2 , b2 + max c2 , d 2 + max e2 , f 2 1, if 0 > 0
i,
, + + + (51)
G()i, j,k = j,k
max a2 , b .
2
. . 2 . . .
+ max c , d 2 + max e2 , f 2 1, if 0
<0
+ + + i, j,k
0
26i, j,k
Di, j,k = . .2 .
1
.. 0 . 0 0 .2 . 2
0 0
2
i +1, j,k i 1, + i, j +1,k i, j 0 + i, j,k+1 i,
(52)
j,k 1,k j,k1
Because the computational domain is not a regular grid, it is necessary to establish the
boundary conditions. This is the primary contribution of this work. We use a subcell
resolution technique for each case:
J Sci Comput
Fig. 1 Points near the boundary of the domain. Blue circles are related only to one point inside the domain,
whereas red squares are related to two points (Color figure online)
Define the interpolated boundary level set (c)i +1/2, j,k , (c)i, j +1/2,k , (c)i, j,k+1/2 as
fol lows:
1 . .
(c )i +1/2, j,k = (c )i, j,k + (c )i 1, j,k (50)
2
1 . .
(c )i, j +1/2,k = (c )i, j,k + (c )i, j 1,k (51)
2
1. .
(c )i, j,k+1/2 = (c )i, j,k + (c )i, j,k1 (52)
2
According to the sign of c, we can determine whether a given domain is inside or
outside. For example, consider the case when (c)i +1/2, j,k < 0, (c)i +3/2, j,k > 0,
which is represented by blue circles in Fig. 1.
For velocity advection and viscous terms, define ui +3/2, j,k as
2u + (2 2)ui +1/2, j,k + ( 2 + 1)ui 1/2, j,k
ui +3/2, j,k = (53)
2+
where
(c)i +1/2, j,k  (54)
=
(c)i +1/2, j,k  + (c)i +3/2,
j,k 
This setup provides the velocity boundary condition on the pipe at secondorder
accuracy, which is consistent with our seondorder accurate time integration. In the ENO
3rd method, we require more than one stencil point. Establish points on the stencil outside
D
J Sci Comput
the domain as large values with large variation. For example, in the
(i, j,preceding
k) case,
establish ui +5/2, j,k = (10t)10,
where t = ((i + 5/2) (i + 1/2)).
In red squares, two different values can be assigned for one point. Instead of using these
two values independently, we use bilinear interpolation to save memory in the CPU.
p8 p7
Fig. 2 Cell near the boundary C
region s p6
p5 t
sl sp
sf
p3
A p4
sb
p1 B p2
In projection step, we need to solve the Poisson equation with Neumann boundary
condition:
. .
p =0 (55)
n
Here, we extended the direct discretization in [20] to three dimensional space. Assume that
lies in the cell Ci, j,k . Now, applying divergence theorem to the integral form of (43) on
Ci, j,k results in
, . , ,
.
pn+1 dV = pn+1 nd 1 VdV
Ci, (Ci, j,k) S = Ci, j,k 6t
j,k (55)
(56)
where pi 1, 6x
pl = pi, j 1,k pi, j,k
j,k pi,
pb = j,k
6y
J Sci Comput
For time discretization, we select the secondorder TVD Runge Kutta method. This can be
written as a convex combination of velocity update procedure. Let us define the update
step as
n+1= U . nV (61)
. V
Then, the secondorder TVD Runge Kutta method is
(62)
1 .
n+1 1
V
+ U U .
n 2
= V V
2
n ..
It is important that all time advancing steps, including the level set update, reinitialization,
and velocity update, are approximated by the secondorder TVD Runge Kutta method.
Otherwise, the order of the entire simulation can be degraded, which causes severe errors
in the final result. More details are provided in a previous study [16].
Except for the implicit term, which is unconditionally stable, a CFL time restriction may
be needed for stability. For this study, the time condition is presented in dimensionless
terms [7].
1. Advection Term
Dimensional Form
u v wmax
A +
max 6z
max +
c= 6y
Dimensionless 6x
Form
umax vmax wmax
Ac = + +
6x 6y 6z
Fc = 6x
3. Surface Tension Term
 
Dimensional
Form
Sc = oil
min( , wat )(min(6x 6y, 6z))2
er ,
Dimensionless Form
1

We 
Sc =
min(, 1)(min(6x , 6y, 6z))2
From the semiimplicit viscous solver, the CFL condition for the viscous term
. .. .
oil water 2
Vc = max ,
oil water (6x)2 + (6y)2 + (6z)2
is released.
In our simulation, a CFL restriction of 12 is used. Hence,
. , .
( A )2 + 4(F )2 + 4(S )2 1
+ c c c
6t A c
2 2
4 Numerical Experiments
4.1.1 Example 1
Fig. 3 Upflow with Re1 = 0.94938, a = 1.28, m = 0.00166, = 1.1, J = 0.07961, K = 0.4552,
V0 = 10.034 cm s1, = 2.0, C = 0.001
Fig. 4 The contour of pressure field on cross sectional plane including centerline corresponding to the
interface at t = 140
Fig. 6 The contour of pressure field on cross sectional plane including centerline corresponding to the
interface at t = 20
4.1.2 Example 2
In this example, we establish an amount of water to be relatively large compared with that
in example 1, a = 1.61. Corresponding parameters for this simulation are as follows:
Fig. 8 Sotgia et al. [22]. The periodicity of wave is varying depending on the oil and water velocity
Now, we discuss the cases of horizontal flow in a pipe. In Sotgia et al. [22], they
performed experiments based on their test facility with 10m long pipeline in Fig. 7. This
is quite long campared with its crosssectional raidus which give us a limitation of
computation. Also, It is known that there exist parameters which make fluid motion to be
periodic for coreannular
(a) t=0 (b) t = 10
(c) t = 25 (d) t = 40
(e) t = 55 (f) t = 65
Fig. 9 Horizontal flow with Re1 = 3.73754, a = 1.61, m = 0.00166, = 1.1, J = 0.063354, K =
2.030303, V0 = 83.91 cm s1, = 2.4, C = 0.01
flow by experiments in [22]. In this paper, we are focusing on periodic regime for
comparing with recent results in [4] by choosing parameters as the same with the one of
periodic regime case. We assume that the flow moves from right to left by negative
pressure gradient.
4.2.1 Example 3
In this example, we add more water than in the vertical case, and let the corecenterline be
sufficiently fast for choosing similar parameter with [4,22]. Corresponding parameters are
as follows:
Except for the amplitude of initial wave, parameters are as same with as those in example
2. Because water is relatively heavier than oil, a large amount levitates the oil. We can
verify this effect from Figs. 9 and 10 and we can see the flow pattern quitely agrees on
experimental case, Fig. 8.
4.2.2 Example 4
(c) t = 40 (d) t = 60
(e) t = 80
Fig. 11 Horizontal flow with Re1 = 0.94938, a = 1.28, m = 0.00166, = 1.1, J = 0.07961, K =
0.9993, V0 = 53.4918 cm s1, = 2, C = 0.001
first move downward due to the gravity. However, a few seconds later, as the total velocity
increases, oil begins to levitate. Additionally, we can verify that the total amount of water
is increased as time passes. The results are shown in Figs. 11 and 12.
To verify the effect of changing the centerline velocity, we change K from the value in
example 4 into K = 0.4552 and K = 2.030303. Figures 6 and 7 show each result.
We
Fig. 12 The contour of pressure field on cross sectional plane including centerline corresponding to the
interface at t = 80
(c) t = 40 (d) t = 60
(e) t = 80
Fig. 13 Horizontal flow with Re1 = 0.94938, a = 1.28, m = 0.00166, = 1.1, J = 0.07961, K =
0.4552, V0 = 10.034 cm s1, = 2, C = 0.001
(c) t = 40 (d) t = 60
(e) t = 80
Fig. 15 Horizontal flow with Re1 = 0.94938, a = 1.28, m = 0.00166, = 1.1, J = 0.07961, K =
2.030303, V0 = 83.91 cm s1, = 2, C = 0.001
can conclude that the centerline velocity of the core flow affects the wavy crest and
thickness of the core flow and the height of levitation. Because the amount of water is
relatively low compared to example 3, the height of levitation is low. Additionally, we can
verify that when core flow moves around the pipe, a wavy interface occurs because of the
buoyancy force from the water near the pipe. Figs. 13, 14, 15, and 16 give results.
In this example, we vary the finite amplitude from that in example 4 to C = 0.01 and
C = 0.05. Figures 17 and 19 show each result and Figs. 18 and 20 show pressure. The
perturbed amplitude for the initial pipe can affect the pressure around the pipe wall. The
pipe
with relatively large amplitude (Fig. 19) tends to be smoother than the other, and carries
more of the core flow due to the initial pressure profile.
(a) t=0 (b) t = 20
(c) t = 40 (d) t = 60
(e) t = 80
Fig. 17 Horizontal flow with Re1 = 0.94938, a = 1.28, m = 0.00166, = 1.1, J = 0.07961, K =
0.9993, V0 = 53.4918 cm s1, = 2, C = 0.01
Fig. 18 The contour of pressure field on cross sectional plane including centerline corresponding to the
interface at t = 80
Next, we verify the effect of changing the amount of water by controlling a. Let us change
a to a = 1.61. The amount of water plays an important role in the levitation of the core
flow. As the amount of fluid in the annulus grows, the buoyancy force from the annulus
strengthens.
This makes the core fluid levitate from the pipe wall. Flows and pressure profiles can be
verified in Figs. 21 and 22.
(a) t=0 (b) t = 20
(c) t = 40 (d) t = 60
(e) t = 80
Fig. 19 Horizontal flow with Re1 = 0.94938, a = 1.28, m = 0.00166, = 1.1, J = 0.07961, K =
0.9993, V0 = 53.4918 cm s1, = 2, C = 0.05
Fig. 20 The contour of pressure field on cross sectional plane including centerline corresponding to the
interface at t = 80
Finally, we investigate the effects of several different Reynolds numbers, Re1, by varying
the Reynolds number in example 3 to Re1 = 1.5 and Re1 = 2.5. As the Reynolds number
grows, the viscosity effect of the core flow decreases. Hence, we can expect that the core
flow will levitate to a relatively high height when the Reynolds number is small. Figures
23 and 24 show that this expectation is correct.
(a) t=0 (b) t = 10
(c) t = 25 (d) t = 40
(e) t = 55 (f) t = 65
Fig. 21 Horizontal flow with Re1 = 0.94938, a = 1.61, m = 0.00166, = 1.1, J = 0.07961, K =
0.9993, V0 = 53.4918 cm s1, = 2, C = 0.01
Fig. 22 The contour of pressure field on cross sectional plane including centerline corresponding to the
interface at t = 60
For simulations, we use a computer with a 3.5 Ghz Intel(R) i72700K processor.
Simulation is coded by using Visual C++, OpenGL as a graphical tool, and Boost as a
multithreading tool. We use eight cores for multithreading. Total and simulation times for
one step of each simulation are represented on the right edge of each figure.
(a) t=0 (b) t = 25
(c) t = 40 (d) t = 65
Fig. 23 Horizontal flow with Re1 = 1.5, a = 1.61, m = 0.00166, = 1.1, J = 0.063354, K =
2.030303,
V0 = 83.91 cm s1, = 2.4, C = 0.01
(c) t = 40 (d) t = 65
Fig. 24 Horizontal flow with Re1 = 2.5, a = 1.61, m = 0.00166, = 1.1, J = 0.063354, K =
2.030303,
V0 = 83.91 cm s1, = 2.4, C = 0.01
References
1. Bai, R., Chen, K., Joseph, D.D.: Lubricated pipelining: stability of coreannular flow. Part 5.
Experiments and comparison with theory. J. Fluid Mech. 240, 97142 (1992)
2. Li, J., Renardy, Y.Y., Renardy, M.: Direct simulation of unsteady axisymmetric coreannular flow with
high viscosity ratio. J. Fluid. Mech. 391, 123149 (1998)
3. Li, J., Renardy, Y.Y., Renardy, M.: A numerical study of periodic disturbances on twolayer Couette
flow. Phys. Fluids. 10(12), 30563071 (1998)
4. Ooms, G., Pourquie, M.J.B.M., Beerens, J.C.: On the levitation force in horizontal coreannular flow
with a large viscosity ratio and small density ratio. Phys. Fluids 25, 032102 (2013)
5. Osher, S., Setian, J.A.: Fronts propagating with curvature dependent speed: algorithms based on
Hamilton Jacobi formulations. J. Comput. Phys. 79, 1249 (1988)
6. Sussman, M., Smereka, P., Osher, S.: A level set approach for computing solutions to incompressible
twophase flow. J. Comput. Phys. 114, 146159 (1994)
7. Kang, M., Fedkiw, R.P., Liu, X.D.: A boundary condition capturing method for multiphase
incompressible flow. J. Sci. Comput. 15, 323360 (2000)
8. Liu, X.D., Fedkiw, R.P., Kang, M.: A boundary condition capturing method for Poissons equation on
irregular domains. J. Comput. Phys. 160, 151178 (2000)
9. Kang, M., Shim, H., Osher, S.: Level set based simulations of twophase oilwater flows in pipes. J.
Sci. Comput. 31, 153 (2006)
10. Osher, S., Fedikew, R.: Level Set Methods and Dynamic Implicit Surfaces. Springer, New York (2003)
11. Chorin, A.J.: Numerical solution of the NavierStokes equations. Math. Comput. 22, 745 (1968)
12. Fortin, M., Peyret, R., Temam, R.: Rsolution numrique des quations de NavierStokes pour un
fluide incompressible. J. Mcanique 10, 357390 (1971)
13. Peyret, R., Taylor, T.D.: Computational Methods for Fluid Flow. Springer, New York (1982)
14. Osher, S., Shu, C.W.: Highorder essentially nonoscillatory schemes for HamiltonJacobi equation.
SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 28, 907922 (1991)
15. Jiang, G.S., Peng, D.: Weighted ENO schemes for HamiltonJacobi equations. SIAM J. Sci. Comput.
21, 21262143 (2000)
16. Shu, C.W., Osher, S.: Efficient implementation of essentially nonoscillatory shock capturing schemes.
J. Comput. Phys. 83, 32 (1988)
17. Brackbill, J.U., Kothe, D.B., Zemach, C.: A continuum method for modeling surface tension. J.
Comput. Phys. 100, 335354 (1992)
18. Russo, G., Semereka, P.: A remark on computing distance functions. J. Comput. Phys. 163, 5167 (2000)
19. Chn, A., Min, C., Gibou, F.: Secondorder accurate computation of curvatures in a level set
framework using novel highorder reinitialization schemes. J. Sci. Comput. 35, 114131 (2008)
20. Purvis, J.W., Burkhalter, J.E.: Prediction of critical mach number for store configurations. AIAA J. 17,
11701177 (1979)
21. Joseph, D.D., Renardy, Y.Y.: Fundamentals of TwoFluid Dynamics, Part II, Lubricated Transport,
Drops and Miscible Liquids, Springer, New York (1993)
22. Sotgia, G., Tartarini, P., Stalio, E.: Experimental analysis of flow regimes and pressure drop reduction
in oilwater mixtures. Int. J. Multiph. Flow 34, 1161 (2008)