| Literature DB >> 34720381 |
Amitosh Dash1, Willian Hogendoorn1, Christian Poelma1.
Abstract
ABSTRACT: We discuss empirical techniques to extract quantitative particle volume fraction profiles in particle-laden flows using an ultrasound transducer. A key step involves probing several uniform suspensions with varying bulk volume fractions from which two key volume fraction dependent calibration parameters are identified: the peak backscatter amplitude (acoustic energy backscattered by the initial layer of the suspension) and the amplitude attenuation rate (rate at which the acoustic energy decays with depth owing to scattering losses). These properties can then be used to reconstruct spatially varying particle volume fraction profiles. Such an empirical approach allows circumventing detailed theoretical models which characterize the interaction between ultrasound and suspensions, which are not universally applicable. We assess the reconstruction techniques via synthetic volume fraction profiles and a known particle-laden suspension immobilized in a gel. While qualitative trends can be easily picked up, the following factors compromise the quantitative accuracy: (1) initial reconstruction errors made in the near-wall regions can propagate and grow along the reconstruction direction, (2) multiple scattering can create artefacts which may affect the reconstruction, and (3) the accuracy of the reconstruction is very sensitive to the goodness of the calibration. Despite these issues, application of the technique to particle-laden pipe flows shows the presence of a core with reduced particle volume fractions in laminar flows, whose prominence reduces as the flow becomes turbulent. This observation is associated with inertia-induced radial migration of particles away from the pipe axis and is observed in flows with bulk volume fractions as high as 0.08. Even transitional flows with low levels of intermittency are not devoid of this depleted core. In conclusion, ultrasonic particle volume fraction profiling can play a key complementary role to ultrasound-based velocimetry in studying the internal features of particle-laden flows.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34720381 PMCID: PMC8550456 DOI: 10.1007/s00348-020-03132-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Exp Fluids ISSN: 0723-4864 Impact factor: 2.480
Fig. 1Example of a gelatin model to illustrate the core concept of ultrasound based concentration profiling. Multiple horizontal segments are present, either with or without particles arrested in their position. An ultrasonic image is overlaid
Fig. 2Backscatter amplitude and characterizing a uniform suspension. (Top left) Backscattered signals (post-beamformed RF data) recorded by the transducer in multiple frames. (Bottom left) Derivation of the backscatter amplitude profile. (Right) A simplified schematic of the backscatter amplitude (now in dB) with a linear fit (solid red straight line between walls) through it. This linear fit returns the peak backscatter amplitude (y-intercept) and the attenuation rate (slope) corresponding to the uniform suspension being characterized
Fig. 3Effect of particle loading on backscatter amplitude. For a fixed insonification (yellow arrows pointing away from transducer), increasing the particle volume fraction in a uniform suspension increases the peak backscatter amplitude (green arrows pointing towards transducer in top panel and green circle in bottom, ) as the number of scattering interfaces are increased. However, the amount of scattering in the non-backscatter direction increases, leading to a quicker attenuation (groups of three red arrows originating from a node in top panel and solid red straight line in bottom, ) of the backscatter amplitude
Fig. 4Sample calibration data obtained in a pipe flow with a uniform suspension. Characterization in decibels, but in arbitrary units for inset. Inset in log-log axes for peak backscatter amplitude and semi-log axes for amplitude attenuation rate. Diamonds represent the peak backscatter amplitude and circles represent the amplitude attenuation rate
Fig. 5The stepwise reconstruction process for obtaining the particle volume fraction profile. (Left) Estimation of volume fraction in first bin: use to estimate (steps 1-3) which can then be used to find (step 4) that will be used in the compensation step (step 5). (Right) Estimation of volume fraction in second bin: estimate ; use to estimate which can then be used to find . In the next step (not shown), estimate , use to estimate and so forth
Fig. 6The dual-frequency reconstruction process for obtaining the particle volume fraction profile. (Top left) The backscatter amplitude signal measured at the two frequencies. (Top right) Calibration curves for the two frequencies. (Bottom) Reconstruction of the volume fractions using Eq. 4. The solid and the dashed lines correspond to measurements at the two frequencies
Coefficients for curve fits used in synthetic signal generation. See Eq. 2 for the curve fitting characteristic equations
| Frequency | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 MHz | 65.12 | 0.1313 | 129.3 | − 3.677 |
| 10 MHz | 64.70 | 0.1328 | 141.1 | − 2.971 |
Fig. 7Performance of the two inversion techniques are judged by means of synthetic signals. Panels on the left show the reconstructions while those on the right show the corresponding mean absolute errors of the reconstructions with respect to the true volume fractions. (Top) Profiles mimicking inertial migration of particles. (Bottom) Profiles mimicking transport of heavy particles
A summary comparing the two reconstruction techniques. Comparison based on synthetic signals
| Characteristic | Stepwise | Dual-frequency |
|---|---|---|
| System of equations | Implicit | Explicit |
| Handles noise well? | For low noise levels | If |
| Handles wall artefacts? | Initial error occurs which grows in the reconstruction direction | Robust |
| ‘Instantaneous’ concentration profiles | Possible with appropriate hardware | Requires multiple transducers |
Fig. 8Evidence for the presence of multiple scattering. (Top left) Schematic of the gelatin based model. Particles are present only in segment B. (Bottom left) Simplified schematic of single and multiple scattering of sound propagating in a medium with a speed of sound . (Right) Overlaid on the B-mode image is the profile of particle distribution. Shown also are the entire ensemble of raw RF signals as well as the backscatter amplitude. The backscatter amplitude signal can be further divided into the ‘backscattered’ signal (segment B) and ‘multiply scattered’ signal (segment C). The bottom wall of the gelatin model is located at an axial depth of about 3.6 cm
Fig. 9Characterization of the multiply scattered signal. (Left) Schematic for the behaviour of the backscatter amplitude profile as a function of the number of particles in a system corresponding to the schematic shown in Fig. 8. (Right) Characteristics of the backscatter amplitude profile () as a function of volume fraction () and thickness (d) of the particle-laden segment B
Fig. 10Reconstruction of a step particle volume fraction profile. (Left) Calibration curves for the gelatin models, based on segment B. The larger symbols represent the characteristics of the case on which we apply stepwise reconstruction. (Right) Application of the stepwise reconstruction process to the phantom (segments B and C). For the reconstruction with the above calibration, the following can be noticed: 1—Accurate reconstruction; 2—Error due to undercompensation; 3—Error due to multiple scattering; 4—Detection of container bottom
Fig. 11Characteristics of the empirical fits for particle-laden pipe flow. (Left) Coefficient of determination for linear fits to the backscatter amplitude profile. The values in the inset are the coefficients of determination for the fits to the peak backscatter amplitude and the amplitude attenuation rate. (Right) Calibration curves—power law for the the peak backscatter amplitude and first-order polynomial for the amplitude attenuation rate. Individual markers represent the individual 128 piezoelectric elements and the lines are based on the mean value
Fig. 12Comparison of time-averaged B-mode intensity images and reconstructed particle volume fraction profiles from the calibration. Two cases are considered, both for —a laminar (Re = 1500) and a turbulent one (Re = 5288)
Fig. 13Compilation of reconstructed time-averaged particle volume fraction profiles for flows with bulk particle volume fractions of 0.01, 0.03 and 0.08. Missing markers indicate that estimated volume fraction is outside the range . For , results based on particle counting are also shown (dotted line with crosses)
Overview of studies targeting ultrasonic particle volume fraction profiling in particle-laden flows. Six clusters have been made primarily on basis of the features of the technique
| Work(s) | Technique | Experiments |
|---|---|---|
| (I) | ||
|
Thorne and Hanes ( | • Technique developed and refined over a span of decades | • Technique is typically used for mass concentrations of 1-10 kg/m3 which corresponds to |
| • Meticulous inclusion of acoustical scattering theory into methodology | • Technique constrained to fixed combination of particles and ultrasound transducer | |
| (II) | ||
|
Admiraal and García ( | • Semi-empirical approach (needs calibration) | • Primarily applied to settling suspensions and pipe flows of heavy particles suspended in a liquid medium |
| • Theoretical formulations adapted from cluster I extended to arbitrary suspensions | • Domain sizes ranging from | |
| • Technique typically applied for | ||
| (III) | ||
|
Furlan et al. ( | • Calibration parameters obtained in uniform suspensions | • Experiments in pipe (2.5 cm) and Taylor-Couette geometry (0.2 cm) |
| • Non-uniform suspensions studied with help of calibration | • Uniform suspensions, | |
| • Account for attenuation | • Non-uniform suspensions, | |
| (IV) | ||
|
Zou et al. ( | • Directly correlate (power spectral density of) backscattered echo intensity to local volume fraction | • Domain sizes varying from |
| • Do not account for attenuation | • Maximum volume fractions studied between | |
| • Calibration can be done in uniform suspensions | ||
| (V) | ||
| Chemloul et al. ( | • Identify individual particles | • Typically applicable to dilute suspensions |
| • No calibration needed | ||
| (VI) | ||
|
Gunning et al. ( | • Traverse pair perpendicular to direction of wave propagation (non-intrusive) | • Usually applied to extremely slowly sedimenting/creaming flows (over days) |
| • Alternatively, install several pairs | • Volume fractions as high as | |
|
Warsito et al. ( | • Traverse pair through the flow in direction of wave propagation (intrusive) | • Often in context of three-phase flows • Domain sizes |
|
Warsito et al. ( | • Several pairs used (non-intrusive) | • In context of three-phase flows |
| • Computed Tomography algorithms used for reconstructing 2-D profiles | • Domain sizes | |