Cover Image

Simulations of different power intensity inputs towards pressure, velocity & cavitation in ultrasonic bath reactor

Various ways exist to describe power intensity in ultrasonic system, causing complications in reporting and benchmarking. This paper attempts to compare computational fluid dynamic (CFD) simulations of ultrasonic bath running at 60 W 40 kHz using different power intensity (also known as sound intens...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Mat-Shayuti, M.S., Tuan Ya, T.M.Y.S., Abdullah, M.Z., Md Yusop, N., Kamarrudin, N., Myo Thant, M.M., Che Daud, M.F.
Format: Article
Published: Elsevier B.V. 2020
Online Access:https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85087053448&doi=10.1016%2fj.sajce.2020.06.002&partnerID=40&md5=43c06302616c3c61c51d08bbd3d74643
http://eprints.utp.edu.my/29919/
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id my.utp.eprints.29919
record_format eprints
spelling my.utp.eprints.299192022-03-25T03:14:32Z Simulations of different power intensity inputs towards pressure, velocity & cavitation in ultrasonic bath reactor Mat-Shayuti, M.S. Tuan Ya, T.M.Y.S. Abdullah, M.Z. Md Yusop, N. Kamarrudin, N. Myo Thant, M.M. Che Daud, M.F. Various ways exist to describe power intensity in ultrasonic system, causing complications in reporting and benchmarking. This paper attempts to compare computational fluid dynamic (CFD) simulations of ultrasonic bath running at 60 W 40 kHz using different power intensity (also known as sound intensity) inputs viz rated power, calorimetric power and particle velocity. Applying Schnerr and Sauer model based on Rayleigh-Plesset equation, an abrupt streaming flow was observed during the transient period. After steady ultrasonic cycle was reached, the simulation using rated power input recorded the highest and widest ranges of total pressure (-51.1 to 308 kPa), fluid particles velocity (7.22 to 11.5 m/s) and cavitation mass transfer (-821 to 925 kg/m3). The sound amplitude around 200 kPa in the rated power intensity generated the greatest cavitation effects, while particle velocity having 23 kPa sound amplitude failed to produce any cavitation bubbles. The difference lay in the tendency of liquid molecules to vaporize (and vice versa) during sound wave oscillation. Verification with experimental data implied the rated power feed produced the closest similarity among the three inputs. © 2020 The Author(s) Elsevier B.V. 2020 Article NonPeerReviewed https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85087053448&doi=10.1016%2fj.sajce.2020.06.002&partnerID=40&md5=43c06302616c3c61c51d08bbd3d74643 Mat-Shayuti, M.S. and Tuan Ya, T.M.Y.S. and Abdullah, M.Z. and Md Yusop, N. and Kamarrudin, N. and Myo Thant, M.M. and Che Daud, M.F. (2020) Simulations of different power intensity inputs towards pressure, velocity & cavitation in ultrasonic bath reactor. South African Journal of Chemical Engineering, 34 . pp. 57-62. http://eprints.utp.edu.my/29919/
institution Universiti Teknologi Petronas
building UTP Resource Centre
collection Institutional Repository
continent Asia
country Malaysia
content_provider Universiti Teknologi Petronas
content_source UTP Institutional Repository
url_provider http://eprints.utp.edu.my/
description Various ways exist to describe power intensity in ultrasonic system, causing complications in reporting and benchmarking. This paper attempts to compare computational fluid dynamic (CFD) simulations of ultrasonic bath running at 60 W 40 kHz using different power intensity (also known as sound intensity) inputs viz rated power, calorimetric power and particle velocity. Applying Schnerr and Sauer model based on Rayleigh-Plesset equation, an abrupt streaming flow was observed during the transient period. After steady ultrasonic cycle was reached, the simulation using rated power input recorded the highest and widest ranges of total pressure (-51.1 to 308 kPa), fluid particles velocity (7.22 to 11.5 m/s) and cavitation mass transfer (-821 to 925 kg/m3). The sound amplitude around 200 kPa in the rated power intensity generated the greatest cavitation effects, while particle velocity having 23 kPa sound amplitude failed to produce any cavitation bubbles. The difference lay in the tendency of liquid molecules to vaporize (and vice versa) during sound wave oscillation. Verification with experimental data implied the rated power feed produced the closest similarity among the three inputs. © 2020 The Author(s)
format Article
author Mat-Shayuti, M.S.
Tuan Ya, T.M.Y.S.
Abdullah, M.Z.
Md Yusop, N.
Kamarrudin, N.
Myo Thant, M.M.
Che Daud, M.F.
spellingShingle Mat-Shayuti, M.S.
Tuan Ya, T.M.Y.S.
Abdullah, M.Z.
Md Yusop, N.
Kamarrudin, N.
Myo Thant, M.M.
Che Daud, M.F.
Simulations of different power intensity inputs towards pressure, velocity & cavitation in ultrasonic bath reactor
author_facet Mat-Shayuti, M.S.
Tuan Ya, T.M.Y.S.
Abdullah, M.Z.
Md Yusop, N.
Kamarrudin, N.
Myo Thant, M.M.
Che Daud, M.F.
author_sort Mat-Shayuti, M.S.
title Simulations of different power intensity inputs towards pressure, velocity & cavitation in ultrasonic bath reactor
title_short Simulations of different power intensity inputs towards pressure, velocity & cavitation in ultrasonic bath reactor
title_full Simulations of different power intensity inputs towards pressure, velocity & cavitation in ultrasonic bath reactor
title_fullStr Simulations of different power intensity inputs towards pressure, velocity & cavitation in ultrasonic bath reactor
title_full_unstemmed Simulations of different power intensity inputs towards pressure, velocity & cavitation in ultrasonic bath reactor
title_sort simulations of different power intensity inputs towards pressure, velocity & cavitation in ultrasonic bath reactor
publisher Elsevier B.V.
publishDate 2020
url https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85087053448&doi=10.1016%2fj.sajce.2020.06.002&partnerID=40&md5=43c06302616c3c61c51d08bbd3d74643
http://eprints.utp.edu.my/29919/
_version_ 1738657034051518464
score 13.211869

Similar Items