Effect of divergent angle and water flowrate on mean bubble size in venturi-type generator: An experimental and computational approach

Niellambare Nadumaran; E. A. Alias; M. H. Hamidi; N. H. Johari

doi:10.15282/jmes.19.2.2025.8.0836

Authors

Niellambare Nadumaran Faculty of Mechanical and Automotive Engineering Technology, Universiti Malaysia Pahang Al-Sultan Abdullah, 26600 Pekan, Pahang, Malaysia
E. A. Alias Faculty of Mechanical and Automotive Engineering Technology, Universiti Malaysia Pahang Al-Sultan Abdullah, 26600 Pekan, Pahang, Malaysia
M. H. Hamidi Faculty of Mechanical and Automotive Engineering Technology, Universiti Malaysia Pahang Al-Sultan Abdullah, 26600 Pekan, Pahang, Malaysia
N. H. Johari Faculty of Mechanical and Automotive Engineering Technology, Universiti Malaysia Pahang Al-Sultan Abdullah, 26600 Pekan, Pahang, Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15282/jmes.19.2.2025.8.0836

Keywords:

Microbubble, Bubble size, Divergent Angle, Water flowrate

Abstract

Venturi nozzles, valued for their simple design and flexibility, are widely used to generate microbubbles (MB) via hydrodynamic cavitation, particularly in water treatment and agriculture. MB efficiency depends on bubble size, which is influenced by the Venturi geometry and flow parameters, such as divergent angle and water flow rate. However, the relationship between these factors and bubble size remains underexplored, especially through combined experimental and simulation approaches. This study addresses that gap by combining experimental visualization and computational fluid dynamics to assess the impact of divergent angle and water flow rate on MB generation. Three Venturi nozzles with divergent angles of 8°, 10°, and 12°, and flow rates of 13 L/min, 33 L/min, and 66 L/min were tested. Bubble size was measured using high-speed imaging and analyzed in MATLAB. Simulations were performed using ANSYS FLUENT with a coupled Eulerian–Lagrangian model and a Population Balance Model, enabling the detailed prediction of bubble size. Experimental and simulation results showed a relative error of less than 5%, confirming the reliability of simulations. Increasing the divergent angle and flow rate decreased the MB distribution, yielding smaller bubbles. The Venturi 3 (12° divergent angle) produced the smallest bubbles, measured experimentally at 519 µm and in simulations at 505 µm, at a flow rate of 66 L/min. The strong agreement between experimental and simulation results, with a maximum error of 4%, was supported by velocity profile analysis, which revealed the highest velocity (14.09 m/s) in Venturi 3, resulting in the formation of the smallest bubbles. These findings not only validate the effectiveness of the simulations in predicting bubble size but also offer valuable insights for optimising venturi designs.

References

[1] V. Balasubramanian, K. Adalarasu, R. Regulapati, “Comparing dynamic and stationary standing postures in an assembly task,” International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, vol. 39, no. 5, pp. 649–654, 2009.

[2] N. M. Ali, F. Dzaharudin, E. A. Alias, “Nonlinear dynamics of a shell encapsulated microbubble near solid boundary in an ultrasonic field,” Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Sciences, vol. 14, pp. 7235–7243, 2020.

[3] A. Erny, D. Fatimah, I. Muhammad, “Fundamental characteristics of microbubbles in water and diesel fuel,” in Proceedings of the MATEC Web of Conferences: International Conference on Advanced Technology and Applied Sciences (ICaTAS 2018), vol. 225, pp. 1–6, 2018.

[4] E. A. Alias, “Skin friction reduction by micro bubbles in pipe flow,” Master Thesis, Tokai University, Japan, 2016.

[5] Q. Li, C. Zhang, L. Yang, Y. Chen, Z. Wang, Z. Yin, “Hydrodynamic cavitation: A promising technology for industrial-scale synthesis of nanomaterials,” Frontiers in Chemistry, vol. 1, pp. 259–271, 2020.

[6] H. H. Sang, X. Y. Jiao, S. F. Wang, W. H. Guo, M. K. Salahou, K. H. Liu, “Effects of micro-nano bubble aerated irrigation and nitrogen fertilizer level on tillering, nitrogen uptake and utilization of early rice,” Plant, Soil and Environment, vol. 64, no. 7, pp. 297–302, 2018.

[7] K. C. S. Liew, H. H. Lau, C. W. Oon, R. R. Praveena, M. H. Ng, H. L. Lam, “Porous venturi-orifice microbubble generator for oxygen dissolution in water,” Processes, vol. 8, no. 10, pp. 1–15, 2020.

[8] J. Hanotu, H. C. H. Bandulasena, W. B. Zimmerman, “Aerator design for microbubble generation,” Chemical Engineering Research and Design, vol. 123, pp. 367–376, 2017.

[9] P. Arumugam, “Understanding the fundamental mechanisms of a dynamic micro-bubble generator for water processing and cleaning applications,” Master Thesis, Engineering University of Toronto, Canada, 2015.

[10] W. Budhijanto, D. Darlianto, Y. S. Pradana, M. Hartono, “Application of micro bubble generator as low cost and high efficient aerator for sustainable fresh water fish farming,” in Proceedings of the AIP Conference: International Conference on Green Energy and Applications, vol. 1840, pp. 1–6, 2017.

[11] C. H. Lee, H. Choi, D. W. Jerng, D. E. Kim, S. Wongwises, H. S. Ahn, “Experimental investigation of microbubble generation in the venturi nozzle,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 136, pp. 1127–1138, 2019.

[12] D. A. Wilson, K. Pun, P. B. Ganesan, F. Hamad, “Geometrical optimization of a venturi-type microbubble generator using CFD simulation and experimental measurements,” Designs, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1–18, 2021.

[13] L. Zhao, L. Sun, Z. Mo, J. Tang, L. Hu, J. Bao, “Effects of the divergent angle on bubble transportation in a rectangular Venturi channel and its performance in producing fine bubbles,” International Journal of Multiphase Flow, vol. 114, pp. 192–206, 2019.

[14] A. Gordiychuk, M. Svanera, S. Benini, P. Poesio, “Size distribution and Sauter mean diameter of microbubbles for a Venturi type bubble generator,” Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science, vol. 70, pp. 51–60, 2016.

[15] A. Fujiwara, K. Okamoto, K. Hashiguchi, J. Peixinho, S. Takagi, Y. Matsumoto, “Bubble breakup phenomena in a Venturi tube,” in Proceedings of the 5th Joint ASME/JSME Fluids Engineering Summer Conference (FEDSM2007), vol. 1, pp. 553–560, 2007.

[16] X. Wang, Y. Zhang, L. Wang, C. Liu, Q. Feng, J. Huang, “Bubble breakup in a swirl-venturi microbubble generator,” Chemical Engineering Journal, vol. 403, pp. 126397–126410, 2020.

[17] L. Zhao, L. Sun, Z. Mo, J. Tang, L. Hu, J. Bao, “A visualized study of the motion of individual bubbles in a venturi-type bubble generator,” Progress in Nuclear Energy, vol. 97, pp. 74–89, 2017.

[18] L. Zhao, L. Sun, Z. Mo, J. Tang, L. Hu, J. Bao, “An investigation on bubble motion in liquid flowing through a rectangular Venturi channel,” Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science, vol. 97, pp. 48–58, 2018.

[19] J. Huang, L. Sun, Z. Mo, Y. Feng, J. Bao, J. Tang, “Experimental investigation on the effect of throat size on bubble transportation and breakup in small Venturi channels,” International Journal of Multiphase Flow, vol. 142, pp. 103737–103752, 2021.

[20] K. Sakamatapan, M. Mesgarpour, O. Mahian, H. S. Ahn, S. Wongwises, “Experimental investigation of the microbubble generation using a venturi-type bubble generator,” Case Studies in Thermal Engineering, vol. 27, pp. 101238–101251, 2021.

[21] M. Li, A. Bussonnière, M. Bronson, Z. Xu, Q. Liu, “Study of Venturi tube geometry on the hydrodynamic cavitation for the generation of microbubbles,” Minerals Engineering, vol. 132, pp. 268–274, 2019.

[22] G. Ding, J. Chen, Z. Li, X. Cai, Y. Ji, “An investigation on the bubbly flow of a Venturi channel based on the population balance model,” Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, vol. 100, no. 7, pp. 1652–1664, 2022.

[23] N. Niellambare, H. H. Mohamad, A. A. Erny, H. J. Nasrul, “Investigation on the effect of Venturi geometry variation on microbubble generation,” in Proceedings of the AIP Conference: 3rd International Conference on Mechanical Engineering Research (ICMER 2022), vol. 2610, pp. 1–8, 2022.

[24] M. Sadatomi, A. Kawahara, K. Kano, A. Ohtomo, “Performance of a new micro-bubble generator with a spherical body in a flowing water tube,” Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 615–623, 2005.

[25] N. Suwartha, D. Syamzida, C. R. Priadi, S. S. Moersidik, F. Ali, “Effect of size variation on microbubble mass transfer coefficient in flotation and aeration processes,” Heliyon, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. e03748–e03760, 2020.

[26] S. Y. Jeon, J. Y. Yoon, C. M. Jang, “Bubble size and bubble concentration of a microbubble pump to operating conditions,” Energies, vol. 11, no. 7, pp. 1–14, 2018.

[27] C. A. Sennoga, E. Kanbar, A. Bouakaz, “An ImageJ plugin for the sizing and counting of microbubbles,” in Proceedings of the IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium (IUS 2015), pp. 1–4, 2015.

[28] J. Huang, L. Sun, Z. Mo, J. Tang, L. Hu, J. Bao, “An investigation on the performance of a micro-scale Venturi bubble generator,” Chemical Engineering Journal, vol. 386, pp. 120980–120995, 2020.

[29] L. Sun, Z. Mo, J. Tang, L. Hu, J. Bao, Y. Feng, “Characteristics and mechanism of bubble breakup in a bubble generator developed for a small TMSR,” Annals of Nuclear Energy, vol. 109, pp. 69–81, 2017.