Under different liquid viscosity conditions, the dynamic evolution of slag foaming always evolved in turn along Partial Foaming I→Entire Foaming→Partial Foaming II, simultaneously the foam structure gradually transformed from the spherical foam to non-spherical foam with the increase of superficial gas velocity. However, their critical superficial gas velocity between the various types of slag foaming decreased.Then, What’s the different? Compared the dynamic evolution, the pseudo-decaying phenomenon was observed, resulting in a subsequent decline of the liquid level with time following its a maximum value despite injecting gas constantly. As the liquid viscosity increased, the "Foam pseudo-decay" phenomenon exacerbated due to escalating number of accumulated bubbles of initial period with the prolongation of residence time. In my view, it just like the aging population, at this situation Most bubbles are about to burst. Another effect of viscosity is on the structure of the foam.
Under different liquid viscosity conditions, the dynamic evolution of slag foaming always evolved in turn along Partial Foaming I→Entire Foaming→Partial Foaming II, simultaneously the foam structure gradually transformed from the spherical foam to non-spherical foam with the increase of superficial gas velocity. However, their critical superficial gas velocity between the various types of slag foaming decreased.Then, What’s the different? Compared the dynamic evolution, the pseudo-decaying phenomenon was observed, resulting in a subsequent decline of the liquid level with time following its a maximum value despite injecting gas constantly. As the liquid viscosity increased, the "Foam pseudo-decay" phenomenon exacerbated due to escalating number of accumulated bubbles of initial period with the prolongation of residence time. In my view, it just like the aging population, at this situation Most bubbles are about to burst. Another effect of viscosity is on the structure of the foam.<br>
正在翻译中..