Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Characteristics of Gas-Solid Two-Phase Flow in Axial and Swirling Flow Pneumatic Conveying
Characteristics of Gas-Solid Two-Phase Flow in Axial and Swirling Flow Pneumatic Conveying
Characteristics of Gas-Solid Two-Phase Flow in Axial and Swirling Flow Pneumatic Conveying
Karakteristike dvofaznog protoka plin-čvrsta tvar u pneumatskom prenošenju aksijalnim i vrtložnim protokom
Liu Songyong, Gao Kuidong, Cui Xinxia, Yang Daolong, Liu Xiaohui
Keywords: gas-solid two-phase flow, Lagrange particle tracking, pneumatic conveying, swirling flow
Karakteristike dvofaznog protoka plin-čvrsta tvar u pneumatskom prenošenju aksijalnim i vrtložnim protokom
Ključne riječi: dvofazni protok plin-čvrsta tvar, pneumatsko prenošenje, praćenje čestica po Lagrangeu, vrtložni protok
can exchange momentum and energy with the gas phase lift force, the Magnus lift force and other forces are small
[11]. in magnitude and can be neglected [14].
Fluid resistance:
2.1 Control equations for gas phase
3 ρmp
The control equations for the gas phase can be Fd = C d (v − v p ) v − v p , (6)
4 ρpdp
derived by assuming that the gas is incompressible and
the gas-solid flow is steady. Gas flow is calculated based
on the time-averaged Navier-Stokes equations in where ρp is the particle density, dp is the particle diameter
accordance with the k−ε turbulence model [12]. and Cd is the drag coefficient.
Continuity equation for gas phase: The simulated and experimental particles were non-
spherical, and thus, the correlation developed by Haider
∂ and Levenspiel [14], indicated by Eqs. (7) to Eq. (12),
( ρ vi ) = 0 . (1) was adopted:
∂xi
24 b2 b3 Resph
Momentum equation for gas phase: Cd = (1 + b1 Resph )+ , (7)
Resph b4 + Resph
∂ ∂p ∂τ ij
( ρ vi v j ) =
− + + ρ gi , (2) and
∂x j ∂xi ∂x j
2
where ρ is the gas density, v is the gas velocity, p is the b1 = e 2 ,3288−6 ,4581ϕ + 2 ,4486ϕ , (8)
gas pressure, τij is the stress tensor of an infinitesimal b2 = 0 ,0964 + 0 ,5565ϕ , (9)
body and g is the acceleration of gravity. 4 ,905 −13 ,8944ϕ +18 ,4222ϕ 2 −10 ,2599ϕ 3
The turbulent kinetic energy k and the rate of b3 = e , (10)
turbulent dissipation ε are obtained from the transport b4 = e 1,4681+12 ,2584ϕ − 20 ,7322ϕ 2 +15 ,8855ϕ 3
, (11)
Eqs. (3) and (4).
ρd p u p − u
Resph = , (12)
∂ ∂ µ t ∂k µ
( ρ ku
=i) ( µ + ) + Gk + Gb − ρε − YM + S k (3)
∂xi ∂x j σ k ∂x j
where φ is the shape factor and dp is the diameter of a
and sphere with the same volume as the actual particle [13].
The recovery factor of particle-wall collision was
∂ ∂ µ ∂ε ε ε2
obtained by Forder’s recovery factor equations [15]. The
( ρεui ) = ( µ + t ) + C1ε (Gk + C3ε Gb ) − C2 ε ρ + Sε , (4) equations were established by the collision test of sand
∂xi ∂x j σ ε ∂x j k k
and alloy steel which included the normal recovery factor
en and the tangential recovery factor er. The two factors
where C1ε, C2ε, Cμ, σk and σε are the model constants (the are expressed by impact angle θ.
default values are as follows: C1ε=1,44; C2ε=1,92,
Cμ=0,09; σk=1,0; σε=1,3), μt is the turbulent viscosity, Gk
is the generation of turbulence kinetic energy due to the en = 0 ,988 − 0 ,78θ + 0 ,19θ 2 − 0,024θ 3 + 0,027θ 4 , (13)
mean velocity gradients, Gb is the generation of 2 3
er = 1 − 0 ,78θ + 0 ,84θ − 0,021θ + 0,028θ − 0,022θ . (14) 4 5
where mp is the particle mass, vp is the particle velocity, The FLUENT software program was used to simulate
Fd is the particle drag force, Fg is the force of gravity axial and swirling flow pneumatic conveying based on a
acting on the particle and Fx represents other forces acting mathematical model. For axial flow, the length of the
on the particle, including the Saffman lift force due to axial flow pipe was set to 10 m and the diameter to 70
fluid shearing motion and the Magnus lift force due to mm. The meshes of the axial flow pipe shown in Fig. 1a
particle rotation. Compared to the drag force and Saffman were composed of hexahedral elements. For swirling
flow, a swirling flow generator was added in the middle could be installed in the conveying pipeline. The diameter
of the axial flow pipe, which was called the swirling flow of the main pipe was 70 mm, and that of the assistant pipe
pipe. The length of the swirling flow pipe was set to 10 m. was 20 mm. The meshes of the swirling flow pipe were
The structure of the swirling flow pipe is shown in Fig. composed of hexahedral elements. The meshes were
1b. The swirling flow generator was composed of two refined in the swirling flow generator.
assistant pipes and one main pipe. The assistant pipes For the axial and swirling flow, the x-axis direction
were positioned around the main pipe, and the space angle was the pipeline axis and the y-axis direction was the
between the assistant pipes and the main pipe was α. The vertical direction. The acceleration of gravity was along
assistant pipes did not occupy space in the pipelines and the –y direction.
1 - Swirling flow generator, 2 - Axial flow pipe, 1-1 - Swirling flow assistant pipe, 1-2 - Swirling flow main pipe
(b) Structure of swirling flow pipe
Figure 1 Physical model of swirling flow pipe
Table 1 Boundary condition air, which was incompressible because the gas velocity
Boundary Type Parameter was small (Ma < 0,2). The gas density was 1,225 kg/s,
Velocity and the dynamic viscosity was 1,8×10−5 m2/s.
Axial flow pipe inlet 40 m/s
inlet The strength of the swirling flow in the pneumatic
Swirling flow pipe Velocity
20 m/s, 25 m/s, 30 m/s conveying was measured by the swirling intensity [5, 16],
inlet inlet
Swirling flow Velocity 122,5 m/s, 91,25 m/s,
which was calculated using Eq. (15).
Assistant pipe inlet inlet 61,25 m/s
Pressure
Axial flow pipe outlet 0,101325 MPa (1 atm)
outlet
Swirling flow pipe Pressure S=
∫ ρu v 2 + w2 y 2 + z 2 dA
, (15)
0,101325 MPa (1 atm)
outlet outlet R ∫ ρu 2 dA
Wall No slip Roughness=0,05 mm
Table 2 Parameters of particle injection where u, v and w denote the gas velocity along the x-, y-
Parameters Value and z-directions, respectively; y and z are the values of y-
Particle density (ρp) 2800 kg/m3 and z-coordinates, and R is the pipe radius.
Particle size (dp) 10 mm The surface integral function was used to calculate
Particle shape Sphere the swirling number in the FLUENT software program.
Particle shape factor (k) 1 For the swirling flow pipe, the different gas velocities at
Particle velocity (vp) 0 m/s the pipe inlet and assistant pipe inlet combined to produce
Particle mass flow rate (fp) 1,5 kg/s different swirling intensities. The method of gas-solid
two-phase coupling was used to analyse the simulation
Combining with the pneumatic conveying result and the particle distribution in pneumatic
experiments, the boundary conditions were set as shown conveying.
in Tab. 1. The gas velocity of the axial flow pipe inlet was
40 m/s, and the gas mass flow rate was 0,188 kg/s. The 4 Result analysis of numerical simulation
gas velocities at the swirling flow pipe inlet were 20 m/s, 4.1 Particles tracking
25 m/s and 30 m/s. The gas velocities at the swirling flow
assistant pipe inlet were 122,5 m/s, 91,25 m/s and 61,25 Particle tracking was performed by the method of
m/s. The collision recovery factor of the pipe wall was gas-solid tow-phase coupling, as shown in Fig. 2. The
calculated using Eq. (13) and Eq. (14). The roughness of pipe was scaled along the x-axis by a scale factor 0,05.
the wall was 0,05 mm. The spherical particles were Parts of the particle trajectories are shown in Fig. 2.
injected uniformly from the axial flow pipe inlet and As shown in Fig. 2a, the particles in axial flow
swirling flow pipe inlet; the parameters of the injected mainly subsided to the bottom of the pipelines, and the
particles are shown in Tab. 2. The transport medium was
rebound height of particle-wall collisions decreased high particle velocity. As indicated in Fig. 2d, the swirling
gradually. As shown in Fig. 2b, the particle trajectories in intensity increased to 0,55 and the particle trajectory
swirling flow were different from those in axial flow at presented spiralling motion, similar to that shown in Fig.
S=0,34 and vz=20 m/s. When the particles entered the 2b, but the spiral motion of particles shown in Fig. 2b was
swirling flow generator (the middle position x=5 m), the more intense than that shown in Fig. 2d.
rebound height of particle-wall collisions increased again The particle trajectory in swirling flow showed
and the particle trajectory presented spiralling motion. "jumps" and was different from that in axial flow in the
This result indicated that the swirling flow caused the first half of the swirling flow pipe (x<5 m). This
particles to subside to the bottom of the pipelines and re- behaviour was due to the secondary flow produced with
enter flow, but the spiralling motion of the particles the decrease in gas velocity. The secondary flow, which
decreased gradually with the gas-solid flow downstream. altered the particle trajectories, is shown in Fig. 3 and
Compared with that shown in Fig. 2b, the effect of the features two swirling flows. The maximum flow velocity
swirling flow shown in Fig. 2c was reduced due to the was approximately 13 % of the axial flow velocity.
is the local average particle velocity, ρs is the local The particle concentration distribution at different
average particle concentration, vp av is the global average swirling intensities is shown in Fig. 5. The value S=0
particle velocity and ρs0 is the global average particle indicates axial flow. As shown in Fig. 5a, the velocity at
concentration [5, 6]. the swirling flow pipe inlet was 30 m/s (vz=30 m/s) and
the velocity at the swirling flow assistant pipe inlet was
61,25 m/s (vf=61,25 m/s). Fig. 5a indicates that the
swirling flow improved the particle distribution, with
particles moving to the top of the pipeline. The particle
distribution improved gradually with swirling intensity. A
comparison of Fig. 5a and Fig. 5b reveals that the gas
velocity decreased to 20 m/s at the swirling flow pipe
inlet and increased to 122,5 m/s at the swirling flow
assistant pipe inlet. The swirling intensity increased, but
the total gas consumption remained unchanged. The
particle distribution shown in Fig. 5b is different from
that shown in Fig. 5a. There were fewer particles in the
(a) Axial flow pipe va=40 m/s, x=6 m middle of pipeline, and the number of particles increased
gradually close to the wall. As shown in Fig. 5c, the
swirling intensity was 0,34 (S=0,34) and the gas velocities
were different. The minimum particle concentration
occurred at y=0. Due to the velocity at the swirling flow
pipe inlet, the particle distribution was deflected in the
counter clockwise direction and the particle concentration
increased at the bottom of the pipeline. This behaviour
was observed because the axial velocity of the particles
entering the swirling flow increased with the velocity at
the swirling flow pipe inlet, and the spiral motion of the
particles was also enhanced.
(a) vz=30 m/s, vf=61,25 m/s (b) vz=20 m/s, vf=122,5 m/s (c) S=0,34
Figure 5 Particle concentration distribution at x=6 m for different swirling intensities
The particle distributions along different cross- pipeline increased with particle concentration, which
section are shown in Fig. 6. As shown in Fig. 6a, the meant that the swirling intensity was decaying. Fig. 6b
number of particles that subsided to the bottom of the shows that the particle distribution along different cross-
sections was similar to that shown in Fig. 5b, but there are the swirling assistant pipe inlet. The decay of the swirling
no signs that the swirling intensity decayed, intensity is expressed by Eq. (19).
demonstrating that the greater the swirling intensity was,
the longer the effective distance of swirling flow was. S (l ) = 0 ,87e −10 ,8l + 0,24e −1,65l
− 4 ,4l
4.3 Swirling flow S (l ) = 0 ,27e + 0,08e −0 ,74l . (19)
−16 ,9l
S (l ) = 0 ,22e + 0,13e −1,4l
The swirling flow could weaken the particle
subsidence. The gas velocities in axial and swirling flow
at x=6 m are shown in Fig. 7. In axial flow pneumatic In the same swirling intensity, the swirling intensity
conveying, gas flow occurred mainly at the top of the pipe decreased to 0,039 when the velocity of swirling flow
due to the subsidence of particles to the bottom of the pipe inlet was 25 m/s after a distance of 1 m, while when
pipeline. In swirling flow pneumatic conveying, the gas the velocity was 30 m/s, the intensity decreased to 0,032,
velocity was symmetric about the centre of the axis. which proved that the larger the velocity of swirling flow
According to Fig. 6a, the swirling intensity decayed with pipe inlet was, the faster the decay of swirling intensity
particle conveying. The exponential decay of the swirling was.
intensity is shown in Fig. 8, where l is the distance from
The axial change in particle velocity in the pipeline is particle velocity in spiraling flow and that in axial flow.
shown in Fig. 11, where S=0 indicates axial flow. The The particle velocity in swirling flow was higher than that
change in particle velocity showed the same tendency, in axial flow. The specific value increased firstly then
and the particles were in accelerated motion at x<5 m. decreased with swirling intensity. The maximum value
The higher the velocity at the swirling flow pipe inlet was acquired in S=0,25 ÷ 0,35 and the maximum value
was, the greater the acceleration of the particles became. was 1,74. That meant in the same gas consumption, the
The particles accelerated again at x>5 m, and the particle particle velocity in swirling flow was 74 % higher than
velocity in swirling flow was higher than that in axial that in axial flow, which reduced the particle subsidence
flow. At the same swirling intensity, the higher the and the risk of blockage effectively and improved the
velocity at the swirling flow pipe inlet was, the higher the transmission capacity of pneumatic conveying.
velocity of the particles became. The difference was
mainly caused by the different acceleration of the
particles in the first half pipeline. At the same velocity at
swirling flow pipe inlet, the particle at S=0,34 was faster
than that at S=0,55 due to the high swirling intensity
(S=0,74) and the severe particle-wall collisions, which
made the particles accelerate more slowly.
5 Pressure losses
1 - Hopper, 2 - Rotary feeder, 3 - Computer, 4 - Data acquisition instrument, 5 - Signal amplifier, 6 - Gas source,
7 - Control valve, 8 - Injector, 9 - Conveying pipeline, 10 - Pressure transducer, 11 - Container
Figure 14 Pneumatic conveying test bench
5.2 Pressure loss of axial flow pneumatic conveying The particle mass flow rates were 1,5 kg/s; 1,9 kg/s
and 2,4 kg/s. The results obtained for the three flow rates
The experiments concerning the measurement of showed the same tendency: the pressure loss in AFPC
particle and gas velocities at different mass flow rates decreased first and then increased with gas velocity when
were performed to determine the pressure loss in AFPC; the gas velocity ranged from 20 to 45 m/s, which meant
the results are shown in Fig. 15. that there was an optimal gas velocity in AFPC that
Authors’ addresses