Chemical Engineering Science 98 (2013) 203–211

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Chemical Engineering Science

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ces

Experimental study of the bubble size distribution in a pseudo-2D

bubble column
Y.M. Lau, K. Thiruvalluvan Sujatha, M. Gaeini, N.G. Deen n, J.A.M. Kuipers
Multiphase Reactors Group, Department of Chemical Engineering and Chemistry, Eindhoven University of Technology, P.O. Box 513, 5600MB Eindhoven,
The Netherlands

H I G H L I G H T S G R A P H I C A L A B S T R A C T

Bubble size distribution is measured

in a pseudo 2D bubble column with
a developed DIA technique.

Gas hold-up calculated with the
obtained DIA data agrees well with
the gas hold-up calculated with the
liquid expansion height.

In our case, the shape of the BSD
depends mainly on the superficial
gas velocity and is less sensitive to
the initial liquid height.

The evolution of the shape of the
BSD for different superficial gas
velocities can be followed.

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This work presents an experimental study of the bubble size distribution of a bubbly flow using digital
Received 20 December 2012 image analysis (DIA). In order to facilitate the image measurement technique a pseudo-2D bubble
Received in revised form column is chosen for the experiments. To obtain well-defined inlet conditions a gas sparger, consisting of
8 May 2013
20 needles, is used. By employing DIA, the bubble size distribution (BSD) has been measured for a range
Accepted 14 May 2013
of superficial gas velocities. The resulting BSD's are expressed in terms of a probability density function
Available online 22 May 2013
(PDF). For low superficial gas velocities of 5 and 10 mm/s the PDF has a unimodal shape, while for higher
Keywords: superficial gas velocities of 15 and 20 mm/s the PDF has a bimodal shape. The effects of coalescence and
Digital image analysis break-up of bubbles are visible by evaluating the changes of the resulting BSDs for increasing superficial
Gas–liquid flow
gas velocity. A comparison of gas hold-ups is made between the calculated BSD and the liquid expansion
Bubble columns
height. This comparison shows how well the BSD obtained with DIA describes the actual gas hold-up in
Bubble size distribution
Gas hold-up the column.
& 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

n
Corresponding author. Tel.: +31 40 247 3681; fax: +31 40 247 5833.
E-mail address: N.G.Deen@tue.nl (N.G. Deen).

0009-2509/$ - see front matter & 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2013.05.024
204 Y.M. Lau et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 98 (2013) 203–211
1. Introduction
Gas–liquid bubble column reactors are widely used in many
industrial applications, e.g. Fischer–Tropsch process for hydrocar-
bon synthesis, hydrogenation of unsaturated oil, coal liquefaction,
fermentation and waste water treatment. One of the important
factors in the design of mass transfer in such reactors is the gas–
liquid interfacial area, which depends on the bubble size distribu-
tion (BSD). In general, the gas–liquid interfacial area is a function
of geometrical configuration, operating parameters, physical and
chemical properties of both phases. To optimize bubble column
processes, it is essential to know the BSD in the particular system
at different operating conditions. However it is very difficult to
measure the BSD in an industrial bubble column. Therefore,
different types of laboratory-scale bubble columns have been
employed to study the bubble size. Bröder and Sommerfeld
(2007) measured bubble sizes in a lab-scale 3D column with an
average gas volume fraction between 0.5% and 5.0% and a mean
bubble diameter ranging between 2 and 4 mm. Mena et al. (2005)
measured the bubble size distribution in a mass transfer system in
a lab-scale 3D column at a low superficial gas velocity of 2.8 mm/s.
Majumder et al. (2006) reported the bubble size in a modified
bubble column reactor at superficial liquid velocities of 70.7–
141.4 mm/s and superficial gas velocities of 1.7–13.58 mm/s.
Schäfer et al. (2002) discussed the influence of operating condi-
tions and physical properties of the gas and liquid phases on the
initial and stable bubble sizes in a bubble column reactor operat-
ing in the homogeneous regime. Other than these mentioned
studies, there are many more (Polli et al., 2002; Mandal et al.,
2005; Wongsuchoto et al., 2003; Montante et al., 2008; Diaz et al.,
2008; Bordel et al., 2006; Lage and Esposito, 1999, etc.). Most of
these experimental studies on the bubble size distribution are
performed using digital image analysis (DIA) for low void fraction
bubbly flow or only near-wall measurements for high void fraction
bubbly flow. DIA is a non-intrusive technique, which can measure
irregular-shaped bubbles accurately with a wide range of bubble
sizes (Honkanen et al., 2005). Non-intrusive techniques are pre-
ferred above intrusive ones, as these do not disturb the flow.
Recognizing individual bubbles from digital images is tedious. This
is because even at low void fraction ð∼1%Þ a large number of
bubbles is overlapping (40%) (Lecuona et al., 2000; Rodriguez-
Rodriguez et al., 2003). The objective of this work is to investigate
the BSD in a pseudo-2D bubble column with the use of DIA. The
image analysis incorporates the watershed transformation
byMeyer (1994) to separate overlapping bubbles. Measurements
are performed for bubbly flows up to the limit where bubble
detection is no longer possible due to the high void fraction.
The main subject of this work is to investigate the effect of the
superficial gas velocity and the evolution of the BSD along the
height of the column.
2. Experimental set-up and technique
2.1. Pseudo-2D bubble column
Bubble size distributions are measured in a pseudo-2D bubble
column. Air and distilled water are used as the gas and the liquid
phase respectively. A schematic representation of the column and
its measurement zones are illustrated in Fig. 1. The measurement
zones are maintained for different initial liquid heights (H0). The
column is made of glass with dimensions of 0.20  0.03  1.0 m
(W  D  H). It is equipped with a needle sparger, which is used to
obtain well-defined inlet conditions at the gas distributor. The
sparger consists of a row of 20 needles and is aligned in the center
of the bottom-plate of the column. The needles have an inner
diameter of 1 mm and an outer diameter of 1.3 mm. The needles
extend 10 mm above the bottom plate and are spaced with a
centre-to-centre distance of 10 mm. The gas flow rate is controlled
with mass flow controllers. For the BSD measurements, series of
5000 images with a frequency of 50 Hz is obtained using a high-
speed CMOS camera (Lavision, HighSpeedStar 3 G). The focal
length of the lens is 50 mm. The camera is positioned at a distance
of 1.50 m in front of the pseudo-2D column and the column is
illuminated from the back. The acquired images are gray scale
images with a resolution of 1024  1024 pixels, yielding a spatial
resolution of 0.18 mm. The field of depth is 0.14 m, which is larger
than the column depth.
2.2. Digital image analysis
The bubble properties that can be obtained from an image are
the projected area and shape. Subsequently, from these quantities
the centroids and equivalent diameter can be calculated. To
acquire these values, a number of operations are performed upon
the images (see overview in Fig. 2). Starting with the obtained
image, the background is removed using local area thresholding,
where the image is divided in blocks, each of which is indepen-
dently thresholded by employing the Otsu (1979) filter. Subse-
quently, a global threshold is applied to create a binary image,
separating the bubbles from the background. To this end, an
appropriate global threshold value is chosen from the histogram
of the image gray scales. After these filters have been applied, the
detected objects are divided into solitary bubbles and overlapping/
clustering bubbles on the basis of the roundness. The roundness is
determined as
S
Ro ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð1Þ
4πA
with S the surface perimeter and A the area. The applied criteria to
distinguish isolated single bubbles is Ro o 1∼1:5, which is deter-
mined by trial and error on an initial set of images. The resulting
two images are segmented independently and subsequently com-
bined to yield an overall image with solitary and separated
overlapping/clustering bubbles. The image with the solitary bub-
bles is segmented by labeling the solitary areas, and the image
with the overlapping/clustering bubbles is segmented using a
watershed transform by Meyer (1994). Finally, the area of pixels
of each bubble object of both images is counted and converted
from pixel to metric values using the magnification of the image.
From the measured area, the equivalent diameter is calculated as
follows:
rffiffiffiffiffiffi
4A
de ¼ ð2Þ
π
This image measurement technique is described in detail in the
paper of Lau et al. (2013). Examples of the detected bubbles in the
pseudo-2D bubble column are shown in Fig. 3. Note that the
smallest bubble diameter that can be detected in the images is
equal to 0.9 mm, which corresponds with 5 pixels. The measured
BSD's are expressed in the form of a number-based probability
density function (PDF).
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Visual description
Measurements are performed for different initial liquid heights
(0.5, 0.6 and 0.7 m) with superficial gas velocities ranging from
5 to 30 mm/s for an air–water system. The measurement zones
(top, middle and bottom) are shown in Fig. 1. Samples of the
 Y.M. Lau et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 98 (2013) 203–211 205

Fig. 1. Schematic overview of the pseudo-2D bubble column set-up with the measurement windows (top, bottom and middle).

Fig. 2. Image processing sequences to determine the bubble size distribution.

Fig. 3. Example images of detected bubbles at various superficial gas velocities ranging from 5 mm/s to 25 mm/s: (a) vsup ¼ 5 mm/s. (b) vsup ¼ 15 mm/s. (c) vsup ¼ 25 mm/s.
206 Y.M. Lau et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 98 (2013) 203–211

obtained camera images with an initial liquid height of 0.6 m
are shown in Figs. 4 and 5. These are merely snapshots of the
measured time series and cannot visually illustrate the bubbly
flow dynamics. By visual analysis of the time series, the following
is observed. At low superficial gas velocity of 5 mm/s (see Fig. 4(a),
(d) and (g)), the bubbles appear to be similar in size at the
different regions of the column. The bubbles rise very slowly
upward in a homogeneous fashion. For a superficial gas velocity of
10 mm/s (see Fig. 4(b), (e) and (h)), coalescence and break-up of
bubbles start to play a role. This results in a wider BSD than the
BSD observed with a superficial gas velocity of 5 mm/s. Occasion-
ally, there are some regions where the bubbles rise faster. For a
superficial gas velocity of 15 mm/s (see Fig. 4(c), (f) and (i)), a
bubble plume becomes more evident and bubbles rise faster in the
column. A plume is a dynamic region within the bubble column,
where the bubbles rise with a higher velocity. Bubbles in this
dynamic region are larger due to coalescence of bubbles. The
smaller bubbles accumulate close to the side walls and are dragged
down by the down-flow of the liquid. A wide bubble size
distribution in the column is obtained and small vortical structures
are formed close to the side wall regions. At 20 mm/s (see Fig. 5(a),
(d) and (g)), two bubble regions (plumes) with high bubble rise
velocity are observed and down-flow of smaller bubbles at the
side walls is clearly visible. Some small vortices also occur at the
region between the plumes. At even higher superficial gas velocities
of 25 mm/s (see Fig. 5(b), (e) and (h)) and 30 mm/s (see Fig. 5(c),
(f) and (i)), a large number of small bubbles is formed due to intense
bubble break-up. The bubbly flow is very chaotic, which makes visual
observation very difficult.
3.2. Bubble velocities
Bubble velocity measurements have been performed via bubble
image velocimetry (Deen, 2001) for the superficial gas velocity
range from 5 to 30 mm/s with an initial liquid height H0 ¼0.6 m.
Series of 5000 image pairs of the entire column with a frequency
of 50 Hz is obtained for bubble velocity calculations. The average
vertical bubble velocities across the width of the pseudo-2D

Fig. 4. High-speed camera images of the bubbly flow for the different measurement zones (top, middle and bottom) in the pseudo-2D bubble column for superficial gas
velocities ranging from 5 to 15 mm/s and an initial liquid height of H0 ¼ 0.6 m: (a) Top, vsup ¼ 5 mm/s. (b) Top, vsup ¼ 10 mm/s. (c) Top, vsup ¼ 15 mm/s. (d) Middle, vsup ¼
5 mm/s. (e) Middle, vsup ¼ 10 mm/s. (f) Middle, vsup ¼ 15 mm/s. (g) Bottom, vsup ¼ 5 mm/s. (h) Bottom, vsup ¼ 10 mm/s. (i) Bottom, vsup ¼ 15 mm/s.
 Y.M. Lau et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 98 (2013) 203–211 207

Fig. 5. High-speed camera images of the bubbly flow for the different measurement zones (top, middle and bottom) in the pseudo-2D bubble column for superficial gas
velocities ranging from 20 to 30 mm=s and an initial liquid height of H0 ¼0.6 m: (a) Top, vsup ¼ 20 mm/s. (b) Top, vsup ¼ 25 mm/s. (c) Top, vsup ¼ 30 mm/s. (d) Middle, vsup ¼
20 mm/s. (e) Middle, vsup ¼ 25 mm/s. (f) Middle, vsup ¼ 30 mm/s. (g) Bottom, vsup ¼ 20 mm/s. (h) Bottom, vsup ¼ 25 mm/s. (i) Bottom, vsup ¼ 30 mm/s.

bubble column at heights of 0.15, 0.30 and 0.45 m are given in
Fig. 6. This figure shows for a low superficial gas velocity of 5 mm/s
an uniform up-flow of the rising bubbles. By increasing the
superficial gas velocity, bubble down-flow regions near the side
walls and a bubble up-flow region in the centre across the width of
the bubble column are developed.
Here, V window is defined as the volume of the measurement zone
minus the border volumes, where bubbles crossing/touching the
borders are not taken into account in the detection algorithm
(borderkill). With a length of the mean bubble diameter db from
each side of the height H and width W of the measurement zone
and the depth D, V window (see Fig. 7) is calculated as follows:

V window ¼ ðW−2db Þ  ðH−2db Þ  D ð4Þ

3.3. Integral gas hold-up For the actual gas hold-up (αH
g)
in the bubble column, the
expansion of the liquid height in the column is used
To illustrate how well the BSD obtained with DIA describes the
actual gas hold-up in the column, the integral gas hold-up is H f −H 0
αH
g ¼ ð5Þ
calculated on basis of the measured bubble sizes and is compared Hf
with the integral gas hold-up calculated using the liquid expansion where Hf is the height of aerated liquid.
height. Using the measured bubble sizes, the gas hold-up (αBSDg ) is Fig. 8 shows the comparison of the gas hold-up determined by
calculated as follows from the DIA data: DIA/BSD and liquid height expansion. On increasing the superficial
π  gas velocity, the gas hold-up in the column increases. Increase of
3
∑Ni¼1 d
BSD
αg ¼ 6 i ð3Þ the initial liquid height in the column has no significant effect on
V window the gas hold-up. At low superficial gas velocity of 5 mm/s, αBSD g
208 Y.M. Lau et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 98 (2013) 203–211

Fig. 6. Average vertical bubble velocities across the width of the pseudo-2D bubble column at 0.15, 0.30 and 0.45 m column heights for an initial liquid height of H0 ¼ 0.6 m
and different superficial gas velocities: (a) H ¼ 0.15 m. (b) H ¼ 0.30 m. (c) H ¼ 0.45 m.

Fig. 7. Schematic representation of V window for the calculation of the gas hold-up.

seems to be larger than αH

g.
This is because of the V window for which number of bubbles crossing/touching the borders. This results in
too much border volumes are subtracted. In comparison with an underestimation of the actual liquid volume, which in turn
higher superficial gas velocities, for 5 mm/s there are only a small results in an overpredicted integral gas hold-up. In spite of the
 Y.M. Lau et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 98 (2013) 203–211 209

Fig. 8. Effect of the superficial gas velocity on the gas hold-up with different initial liquid heights. (a) H0 ¼0.5 m. (b) H0 ¼0.6 m. (c) H0 ¼ 0.7 m.

Fig. 9. Bubble size distribution for the superficial gas velocities of 5 and 10 mm/s with initial liquid heights (H0) of 0.5, 0.6 and 0.7 m. (a) H0 ¼ 0.5 m, vsup ¼ 5 mm/s.
(b) H0 ¼ 0.6 m, vsup ¼5 mm/s. (c) H0 ¼0.7 m, vsup ¼ 5 mm/s. (d) H0 ¼0.5 m, vsup ¼10 mm/s. (e) H0 ¼ 0.6 m, vsup ¼10 mm/s. (f) H0 ¼ 0.7 m, vsup ¼ 10 mm/s.

imaging errors (noise and oversegmentation) introduced by the
images, DIA/BSD is reasonably accurate at lower superficial gas
velocities up till 20 mm/s, but at higher velocities the error
becomes very large. At high superficial gas velocities, the presence
of undetected small bubbles as shown in Fig. 5 will contribute
largely to the gas hold-up error. Therefore the BSD's obtained at
superficial gas velocities exceeding 20 mm/s are omitted in
this work.
3.4. Bubble size distribution
The PDF's of the bubble size distribution for different initial
liquid heights are illustrated in Figs. 9 and 10. It can be seen that
for all three initial liquid heights the trends are the same and the
initial size distribution at the bottom region of the column prevails
at the upper regions. It appears that there exists an equilibrium
between bubble coalescence and break-up along the height of the
column, and that this equilibrium is solely determined by the gas
superficial gas velocity and independent of the initial liquid height.
To illustrate the effect of the superficial gas velocity on the BSD,
the PDF of the middle region of the column is plotted in Fig. 11 for
an initial liquid height of H0 ¼0.6 m. Other initial heights show
similar trends and are not shown here. At a low superficial gas
velocity of 5 mm/s, the bubbles enter the bottom section of the
column with a mean diameter of approximately 4 mm, which is
retained throughout the higher sections (see Fig. 9(a)). For higher
initial liquid heights (see Fig. 9(b) and (c)), the height of the peak
in the PDF becomes sharper with the height of the measurement
zones. The differences can be explained by the location of the top
measurement zone, as for an initial liquid height of 0.5 m, the gas–
liquid mixture only fills half of the measurement section, causing
exit effects on the PDF, while for the other liquid heights the free
surface area of the water is well above in the top section. This
deviation is observed for all measured superficial gas velocities.
Similar trends are observed for a superficial gas velocity of 10 mm/s
for all three initial liquid heights (see Fig. 9(d)–(f)), but with a wider
bubble size distribution and a single peak at 5 mm. Coalescence and
break-up of bubbles are starting to play a role and it seems that its
210 Y.M. Lau et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 98 (2013) 203–211

Fig. 10. Bubble size distribution for the superficial gas velocities of 10 and 20 mm/s with initial liquid heights (H0) of 0.5, 0.6 and 0.7 m. (a) H0 ¼0.5 m, vsup ¼15 mm/s.
(b) H0 ¼ 0.6 m, vsup ¼15 mm/s. (c) H0 ¼ 0.7 m, vsup ¼ 15 mm/s. (d) H0 ¼ 0.5 m, vsup ¼20 mm/s. (e) H0 ¼0.6 m, vsup ¼ 20 mm/s. (f) H0 ¼ 0.7 m, vsup ¼ 20 mm/s.

Fig. 11. Evolution of the bubble size distribution for increasing superficial gas velocity with an initial liquid height (H0) of 0.6 m.

Table 1
The mean, standard deviation and d32 of the detected bubbles for different initial liquid heights and superficial gas velocities.

vsup Ć(mm/s) H0 ¼0.5 m H0 ¼ 0.6 m H0 ¼ 0.7 m

μ 7 s (mm) d32 (mm) μ 7 s (mm) d32 (mm) μ7 s (mm) d32 (mm)

5 3.88 7 0.79 4.22 3.88 7 0.80 4.23 3.90 7 0.80 4.25

10 4.46 7 1.37 5.36 4.45 7 1.38 5.37 4.46 7 1.34 5.33
15 4.577 1.99 6.50 4.55 7 1.97 6.46 4.56 7 1.94 6.41
20 4.45 7 2.35 7.37 4.417 2.32 7.28 4.43 7 2.28 7.20

equilibrium is almost reached in the bottom section, since the shape bubble size distribution is observed with a small peak at 2.5 mm
does not change much throughout the middle and top sections. At a and a large peak at 5 mm. In the bottom section, the PDF is a non-
superficial gas velocity of 15 mm/s (see Fig. 10(a)–(c)) a bimodal bimodal wide distribution, developing into a bimodal distribution
 Y.M. Lau et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 98 (2013) 203–211
in the middle and top sections due to coalescence. Increasing the
superficial gas velocity to 20 mm/s leads to similar effects, but also
to more break-up (small peak at approximately 5 mm and a large
peak at 2.5 mm). At 15 and 20 mm/s, the equilibrium between
coalescence and break-up is not obtained in the bottom section, but
still develops throughout the column. From these reported BSD's, it
seems that the initial liquid heights of 0.5, 0.6 and 0.7 m have
almost no effect on the resulting BSD's.
The calculated number mean bubble diameter μ, the standard
deviation s and the Sauter mean diameter d32 are listed in Table 1.
It shows that with the increase of superficial gas velocity, μ
increases up till a superficial gas velocity of 20 mm/s, while s
and d32 both keep increasing.
4. Conclusions
In this work a novel digital image analysis (DIA) technique is
used to measure bubble size distributions (BSD's) in a pseudo-2D
bubble column. From the resulting BSD's, it can be seen that the
initial bubble size distribution created at the bottom of the column
prevails throughout the height of the column. It appears that
quickly an equilibrium is reached between the coalescence and
break-up. The effect of break-up increases, as the superficial gas
velocity is increased. The superficial gas velocity has a major effect
on the hydrodynamics and henceforth on the bubble size distribu-
tion within the bubble column. The initial liquid height in the
bubble column during the experiments has little influence on the
bubble size distribution. Increasing the hold-up in the column
makes it difficult to determine the bubble size due to increased
bubble overlap in the images. The hold-up in the column mea-
sured by the DIA is lower than determined by liquid expansion.
This is because 2D images are used to extract 3D bubble shape
information, whereas the actual bubble shape could be different.
For velocities more than 20 mm/s, small bubbles contribute largely
to the gas hold-up, whereas the gas hold-up from DIA is deter-
mined only using the large bubbles.
Nomenclature
A area (m2)
αg integral gas hold-up via the liquid expansion height (-)
BSD bubble size distribution
D depth of the column (m)
DIA digital image analysis
d diameter (m)
d32 Sauter mean diameter (m)
de equivalent diameter (m)
db mean bubble diameter (m)
H height of the column (m)
H0 initial liquid height (m)
Hf final liquid height (m)
i index
211
N number of bubbles (-)
PDF probability density function
Ro roundness (-)
S surface perimeter (m)
V window volume of the measurement window (m3)
vsup superficial gas velocity (m/s)
W width of the column (m)
Acknowledgments
This project is part of the Industrial Partnership Program
“Fundamentals of Heterogeneous Bubbly Flow”, which is funded
by FOM, AkzoNobel, DSM, Shell and TataSteel.
References
Bordel, S., Mato, R., Villaverde, S., 2006. Modeling of the evolution with length of
bubble size distributions in bubble columns. Chem. Eng. Sci. 61, 3663–3673.
Bröder, D., Sommerfeld, M., 2007. Planar shadow image velocimetry for the
analysis of the hydrodynamics in bubbly flow. Meas. Sci. Technol. 18,
2513–2528.
Diaz, M.E., Iranzo, A., Cuadra, D., Barbero, R., Montes, F.J., Galan, M.A., 2008.
Numerical simulation of the gas–liquid flow in a laboratory scale bubble
column. Influence of bubble size distribution and non-drag forces. Chem. Eng.
J. 139, 363–379.
Deen, N.G., 2001. An experimental and computational study of fluid dynamics in
gas–liquid chemical reactors. Ph.D. Thesis, Aalborg University Esbjerg.
Honkanen, M., Saarenrinne, P., Stoor, T., Niinimäki, J., 2005. Recognition of highly
overlapping ellipse-like bubble images. Meas. Sci. Technol. 16, 1760–1770.
Lage, P.L.C., Esposito, R.O., 1999. Experimental determination of bubble size
distribution in bubble columns: prediction of mean bubble diameter and gas
hold-up. Powder Technol. 101, 142–150.
Lau, Y.M., Deen, N.G. & Kuipers, J.A.M. (2013). Development of an image measure-
ment technique for size distribution in dense bubbly flows. Chem. Eng. Sci, 94,
20–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2013.02.043.
Lecuona, A., Sosa, P.A., Rodriguez, P.A., Zequeira, R.I., 2000. Volumetric character-
ization of dispersed two-phase flows by digital image analysis. Meas. Sci.
Technol. 11, 1152–1161.
Majumder, S.K., Kundu, G., Mukherjee, D., 2006. Bubble size distribution and gas–
liquid interfacial area in a modified down flow bubble column. Chem. Eng. J.
122, 1–10.
Mandal, A., Kundu, G., Mukherjee, D., 2005. A comparative study of gas hold-up,
bubble size distribution and interfacial area in a down flow bubble column.
Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 83, 423–428.
Mena, P.C., Pons, M.N., Teixeira, J.A., Rocha, F.A., 2005. Using image analysis in the
study of multiphase gas absorption. Chem. Eng. Sci. 60, 5144–5150.
Meyer, F., July 1994. Topographic distance and watershed lines. Signal Process. 38,
113–125.
Montante, G., Horn, D., Paglianti, A., 2008. Gas–liquid flow and bubble size
distribution in stirred tanks. Chem. Eng. Sci. 63 (April (8)), 2107–2118.
Otsu, N., 1979. A threshold selection method from gray-level histograms. IEEE
Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 9 (1), 62–66.
Polli, M., Stanislao, M., Bagatin, R., Abu Bakr, E., 2002. Bubble size distribution in the
sparger region of bubble columns. Chem. Eng. Sci. 57, 197–205.
Rodriguez-Rodriguez, J., Martinez-Bazan, C.L., Montanes, J., 2003. A novel particle
tracking and break-up detection algorithm: application to the turbulent
breakup of bubbles. Meas. Sci. Technol. 14, 1328–1340.
Schäfer, R., Merten, C., Eigenberger, G., 2002. Bubble size distributions in a bubble
column reactor under industrial conditions. Exp. Thermal Fluid Sci. 26,
595–604.
Wongsuchoto, P., Charinpanitkul, T., Pavasant, P., 2003. Bubble size distribution and
gas–liquid mass transfer in airlift contactors. Chem. Eng. J. 92, 81–90.