Influence of Frictional Stress Models on Simulation Results of High-Pressure Dense-Phase Pneumatic Conveying in Horizontal Pipe
Source abstract
Abstract
Based on the two-fluid model, a three-zone drag model was developed, and the kinetic theory of granular flows and the Schneiderbauer solids wall boundary model were modified to establish a new three-dimensional (3D) unsteady mathematical model for high-pressure dense-phase pneumatic conveying in horizontal pipe. With this mathematical model, the influence of the three frictional stress models, namely Dartevelle frictional stress model, Srivastava and Sundaresan frictional stress model, and the modified Berzi frictional stress model, on the simulation result was explored. The simulation results showed that the three frictional stress models accurately predicted the pressure drop and its variations with supplementary gas in the horizontal pipe, with relative errors ranging from −4.91% to +7.60%. Moreover, the predicted solids volume fraction distribution in the cross-section of the horizontal pipe using these frictional stress models exhibited good agreement with the electrical capacitance tomography (ECT) images. Notably, the influence of the three frictional stress models on the simulation results was predominantly observed in the transition region and deposited region. In the deposited region, stronger frictional stress resulting in lower solids volume fraction and a higher pressure drop in the horizontal pipe were observed. Among the three frictional stress models, the simulation results with the modified Berzi frictional stress model aligned better with the experimental data. Therefore, the modified Berzi frictional stress model is deemed more suitable for simulating high-pressure dense-phase pneumatic conveying in horizontal pipe.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Granular flow and fluidized beds · Mineral Processing and Grinding · Drilling and Well Engineering
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
School of Energy, School of Petroleum and Nature Gas Engineering, Changzhou University, Changzhou 213164, China
Key Laboratory of Energy Thermal Conversion, Control of Ministry of Education, Southeast University, Nanjing 210096, China
Dantu District Science and Technology Bureau of Zhenjiang, Zhenjiang 212100, China
References (48)
Show source-provided references
1. Effect of moisture content on dense-phase pneumatic conveying of pulverized lignite under high pressure10.1016/j.powtec.2015.10.026 ↗
2. A review of pneumatic conveying status, advances and projections10.1016/j.powtec.2018.04.012 ↗
3. Pilot-Scale Experimental Study on Phase Diagrams of Pressurized Pneumatic Conveying with Pulverized Coal10.1021/acs.energyfuels.7b01752 ↗
4. Numerical simulation of dense-phase pneumatic transport of powder in horizontal pipes
5. Conveying characteristics and resistance characteristics in dense phase pneumatic conveying of rice husk and blendings of rice husk and coal at high pressure10.1016/j.powtec.2012.02.014 ↗
6. Computational investigation of particle flow characteristics in pressurised dense phase pneumatic conveying systems10.1016/j.powtec.2018.01.078 ↗
7. Flow patterns classification of dense-phase pneumatic conveying of pulverized coal in the industrial vertical pipeline10.1016/j.apt.2019.03.005 ↗
8. Conveying mechanisms of dense-phase pneumatic conveying of pulverized lignite in horizontal pipe under high pressure10.1016/j.powtec.2020.01.010 ↗
9. An investigation into pressure drop through bends in pneumatic conveying systems10.1080/02726351.2019.1676348 ↗
10. Experimental and modeling study of gas flow characteristics in the compressible powder bed during gas pressurization10.1016/j.ces.2023.118445 ↗
11. A review of CFD modelling studies on pneumatic conveying and challenges in modelling offshore drill cuttings transport10.1016/j.powtec.2016.10.026 ↗
12. CFD-DEM modelling and simulation of pneumatic conveying: A review10.1016/j.powtec.2019.02.011 ↗
13. Effect of particle size distribution on hydrodynamics of pneumatic conveying system based on CPFD simulation10.1016/j.apt.2021.05.010 ↗
14. Numerical study of slug characteristics for coarse particle dense phase pneumatic conveying10.1016/j.powtec.2021.07.024 ↗
15. MP-PIC simulation of dilute-phase pneumatic conveying in a horizontal pipe10.1016/j.powtec.2022.117894 ↗
16. CFD-DEM simulation of pneumatic conveying in a horizontal pipe10.1016/j.powtec.2020.06.054 ↗
17. Application of the MP-PIC method for predicting pneumatic conveying characteristics of dilute phase flows10.1016/j.powtec.2017.01.048 ↗
18. Application of CPFD method in the simulation of vertical dense phase pneumatic conveying of pulverized coal10.1016/j.powtec.2019.08.102 ↗
19. CFD simulation of dilute-phase pneumatic conveying of powders10.1016/j.powtec.2019.03.031 ↗
20. A Possible Scaling-up Technique for Dense Phase Pneumatic Conveying10.1080/02726350590922198 ↗
21. Three-dimensional Simulation of Gas/Solid Flow in Spout-fluid Beds with Kinetic Theory of Granular Flow10.1016/S1004-9541(06)60123-7 ↗
22. Numerical study on pressure prediction and its main influence factors in pneumatic conveyors10.1016/j.ces.2010.09.010 ↗
23. CFD simulation methodology for gas-solid flow in bypass pneumatic conveying—A review10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2017.05.063 ↗
24. Slow and intermediate flow of a frictional bulk powder in the Couette geometry10.1016/S0032-5910(02)00315-7 ↗
25. Dartevelle, S. (2004). Numerical modeling of geophysical granular flows: 1. A comprehensive approach to granular rheologies and geophysical multiphase flows. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst., 5.10.1029/2003GC000636 ↗
26. A three-dimensional continuum model incorporating static and kinetic effects for granular flows with applications to collapse of a two-dimensional granular column10.1063/1.4935626 ↗
27. Rheological properties of dense granular flows10.1016/j.crhy.2014.12.001 ↗
28. Frictional–collisional constitutive relations for granular materials, with application to plane shearing10.1017/S0022112087000570 ↗
29. Frictional–collisional equations of motion for participate flows and their application to chutes10.1017/S0022112090001380 ↗
30. Instability in the evolution equations describing incompressible granular flow10.1016/0022-0396(87)90038-6 ↗
31. Investigation of proper modeling of very dense granular flows in the recirculation system of CFBs10.1016/j.partic.2012.09.001 ↗
32. High-resolution 3-D full-loop simulation of a CFB carbonator cold model10.1016/j.ces.2012.12.007 ↗
33. Analysis of a frictional–kinetic model for gas–particle flow10.1016/S0032-5910(02)00132-8 ↗
34. Analyses of slow high-concentration flows of granular materials10.1017/S0022112098002936 ↗
35. The Mechanics of Soils—An Introduction to Critical State Soil Mechanics10.1016/0013-7952(81)90034-X ↗
36. A generalized continuum theory for granular materials10.1016/0020-7462(82)90034-8 ↗
37. Numerical simulation on dense phase pneumatic conveying of pulverized coal in horizontal pipe at high pressure10.1016/j.ces.2009.12.025 ↗
38. Syamlal, M., Rogers, W., and O’Brien, T.J. (1993). National Technical Information Service, USDOE.
39. Gas–solid flow behaviour prediction for sand in bypass pneumatic conveying with conventional frictional-kinetic model10.1016/j.apm.2016.06.034 ↗
40. Hydrodynamics of binary fluidization in a riser: CFD simulation using two granular temperatures10.1016/S0009-2509(03)00238-0 ↗
41. Simulation and experimental validation of a freely bubbling bed of FCC catalyst10.1016/S0032-5910(02)00294-2 ↗
42. Mechanics of Fluidization
43. Gidaspow, D., Bezburuah, R., and Ding, J. (1991). Engineering, USDOE.
44. Kinetic theories for granular flow: Inelastic particles in Couette flow and slightly inelastic particles in a general flowfield10.1017/S0022112084000586 ↗
45. Bridging the rheology of granular flows in three regimes10.1103/PhysRevE.85.021305 ↗
46. Constitutive relations for steady, dense granular flows10.1103/PhysRevE.84.031301 ↗
47. Non-steady state boundary conditions for collisional granular flows at flat frictional moving walls10.1016/j.ijmultiphaseflow.2012.03.006 ↗
48. A comparison for different wall-boundary conditions for kinetic theory based two-fluid models10.1016/j.ijmultiphaseflow.2014.12.008 ↗