Advanced Powder Technology 29 (2018) 2822–2834

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Advanced Powder Technology

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

Original Research Paper

Prediction of hopper discharge rate using combined discrete element

method and artificial neural network
Raj Kumar a, Chetan M. Patel a,⇑, Arun K. Jana a, Srikanth R. Gopireddy b
a
Department of Chemical Engineering, Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology, Surat, Gujarat 395007, India
b
Daiichi-Sankyo Europe GmbH, Pharmaceutical Development, Luitpoldstrasse 1, 85276 Pfaffenhofen, Germany

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: An Artificial Neural Network (ANN) was developed to predict the mass discharge rate from conical hop-
Received 22 April 2018 pers. By employing Discrete Element Method (DEM), numerically simulated flow rate data from different
Received in revised form 28 July 2018 internal angles (20°–80°) hoppers were used to train the model. Multi-component particle systems (bin-
Accepted 6 August 2018
ary and ternary) were simulated and mass discharge rate was estimated by varying different parameters
Available online 17 August 2018
such as hopper internal angle, bulk density, mean diameter, coefficient of friction (particle-particle and
particle-wall) and coefficient of restitution (particle-particle and particle-wall). The training of ANN
Keywords:
was accomplished by feed forward back propagation algorithm. For validation of ANN model, the authors
Discrete element method
Artificial neural network
carried out 22 experimental tests on different mixtures (having different mean diameter) of spherical
Discharge rate glass beads from different angle conical hoppers (60° and 80°). It was found that mass discharge rate pre-
Rose and Tanaka equation dicted by the developed neural network model is in a good agreement with the experimental discharge
rate. Percentage error predicted by ANN model was less than ±13%. Furthermore, the developed ANN
model was also compared with existing correlations and showed a good agreement.
Ó 2018 The Society of Powder Technology Japan. Published by Elsevier B.V. and The Society of Powder
Technology Japan. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction where, m_ is the discharge rate, C is a discharge rate constant having

The accurate prediction of mass discharge rate of granular
material has been a subject of intense research over the past dec-
ade. Behavior of the multi-component system of particles in the
different internal angle hoppers is a vital issue for numerous indus-
trial applications such as pharmaceutical, agricultural, chemical,
powder processing, etc. [1]. The granular flow prediction has been
extensively studied by many researchers in the past [2–10]. Major
emphasis in all these studies has been on understanding the key
parameters, which ultimately decide the mass discharge rate. The
studied parameters include mean diameter and bulk density of
granular mixture [2], hopper shape [3] hopper outlet diameter
[5], fill height etc. In all of these studies, dependence of discharge
rate with different parameters was analyzed based on experiments
and dimensional analysis. Based on dimensional analysis, Beverloo
et al. [2] presented the following equation:
pffiffiffi
_ ¼ C q g ðD  k:dÞ2:5
m
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: cmp@ched.svnit.ac.in (C.M. Patel).
value 0.58 for most of the materials, q is the bulk density, D is the
outlet diameter of hopper, k is a shape factor having value 1.5 for
spherical particles and d is the particle diameter. This equation
was found to give a good estimate of mass discharge rate for cylin-
drical hopper assembly having circular outlet. The effect of hopper
angle on discharge rate was not captured by the Beverloo correla-
tion. However, the multiplicative correction factor ðtanhtanvÞ0:35
introduced by Rose and Tanaka [3] can be applied to Beverloo cor-
relation to study the effect of hopper angle on discharge rate as
shown below:
pffiffiffi
_ ¼ Cq gðD  k:dÞ2:5 Fcorr
m
(
1; tanh tanv > 1
where; Fcorr ¼
ðtanh tanvÞ0:35 ; tanh tanv < 1
In the above equation, h is hopper angle from vertical and v is
the angle from the horizontal of the stagnant-flowing boundary.
In the absence of reliable information regarding v, a value of 45°
is recommended. But the dependence of wall friction, particles size
distribution, bulk density etc. on discharge rate constant C in
Beverloo correlation has generated a fair amount of debate in the
last decade or so [5,6,9,11]. Mankoc et al. [9] modified the Beverloo

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apt.2018.08.002
0921-8831/Ó 2018 The Society of Powder Technology Japan. Published by Elsevier B.V. and The Society of Powder Technology Japan. All rights reserved.
 R. Kumar et al. / Advanced Powder Technology 29 (2018) 2822–2834
correlation including an exponential form of the flowing density as
a function of the outlet size instead of bulk density. Janda et al. [10]
studied the flow of a monodisperse stainless steel spheres through
an orifice placed at the bottom of a two-dimensional silo. By mea-
suring the volume fraction and the velocity profile at the outlet, an
analytic expression for the mass flow rate was developed which
reproduces the experimental results. Despite the above mentioned
studies, the two empirical coefficients (C and k) which are used in
Beverloo equation are determined experimentally for different
kind of granular material along with hopper properties. Other
aspects of problem are the difficulties in performing these experi-
ments in different type and angle hoppers.
With the advancement of computational methods and
resources, considerable efforts have been put into understanding
the discharge process out of various types of hoppers numerically
and the results are validated experimentally. The use of simulation
tools to understand the physics behind granular flow is playing a
crucial role to insure better product quality. In this category, Dis-
crete Element Method (DEM) has rapidly become a computational
paradigm of prime interest of research community in the field of
particle technology [12]. The Discrete Element Method (DEM) is
fast-developing numerical technique, posing significant impact
on particle technology sector [13–18]. It has proved to be a great
computation tool after its introduction by Cundall and Strack
[19]. Application of Discrete Element Method (DEM) in several sec-
tors including powder processing is getting a wide space because
of its positive response in prediction of powder flow out of storage
container [20–24]. Hohner et al. [25] studied the mechanical inter-
actions of particles with varying sphericity and aspect ratio in a
rectangular hopper using experimental and DEM simulations. Peng
et al. [26] studied the different flow regions in flat bottomed cylin-
drical hoppers in terms of velocity and voidage distributions of
particles via DEM simulation. Anand et al. [20] employed DEM to
calculate the discharge rate from rectangular/wedge-shaped hop-
per. They studied the dependency of hopper geometry, coefficient
of friction (particle-particle and particle-wall) and fill height on
discharge rate. They suggested that particle-particle friction cannot
be ignored in determining the discharge rate. In this context, DEM
can be useful candidate in predicting discharge rate by capturing
material and hopper wall properties (friction, restitution etc) for
hopper discharge process under investigation. However, this DEM
methodology is limited by the related computational costs
required to run test simulations. So in order to avoid repetitive
DEM simulations, DEM can be used as a benchmark to train Artifi-
cial Neural Network (ANN) model for prediction of mass discharge
rate. The applicability of Artificial Neural Network (ANN) is
increased in recent years by providing solution to non-linear and
complex problems [27–30]. Benvenuti et al. [29] presented identi-
fication method for DEM simulation parameters with the help of
ANN. They applied this parameter identification method to study
angle of repose. By doing so, they were able to reduce required
DEM test simulations and resulted in low computational cost.
ANN has been accepted as a robust and realistic method to pin-
point the complex correlations between the input and output
parameters, but the application of ANN in prediction of mass dis-
charge rate during hopper discharge is still in its infancy.
Thus motivation of present study to reduce the experimental
and computational cost in the mass discharge rate prediction of
granular material flowing out from different hoppers. In the pre-
sent study, the combined effect of (1) bulk density, (2) particle
mean diameter of mixtures, (3) hopper angle, (4) particle-particle
and (5) particle-wall coefficient of friction, (6) particle-particle
and (7) particle-wall coefficient of restitution on mass discharge
rate are investigated. Firstly, DEM simulations were performed to
calculate discharge rate by changing the above mentioned seven
parameters. Based on these simulations, input and output data
2823
was generated. Secondly, the generated DEM data was used for
training the ANN model with the objective to develop a neural net-
work that considers the material and hopper properties in predict-
ing the discharge rate from hoppers. Finally, using the developed
ANN model validation studies are performed by comparing the
results with that of ANN model, experiments and DEM simulations.
With this study it is possible to provide a first estimate of the dis-
charge rate out of a given hopper within the tuned range.
2. Numerical simulation methodology
This section presents the details about numerical simulations
along with the mathematical approach, geometrical configuration
as well as material properties considered in simulations.
2.1. Discrete element method
DEM is based on the use of an explicit numerical method where
the trajectory and forces of each and every particle in the system
are captured through suitable contact law and Newton’s equation
of motion. Fig. 1 shows the geometrical representation of two par-
ticles in contact.
The particles are allowed to overlap and the amount of overlap
(d) along with the normal (vn) and tangential (vt) relative velocities
(at the contact point) determine the collisional forces via a contact
force law. The contact forces are commonly decomposed into nor-
mal (Fn) and tangential forces (Ft). In general, contact forces during
the simulation are determined from the particle displacement that
is expressed as the particle overlap using an appropriate contact
force model. Cundall and Strack [19] first formulated their force
model through the use of a spring, dash-pot and slider configura-
tion. A typical assembly of this configuration is shown in Fig. 2.
In this type of models the spring mimics the elasticity beha-
viour of contacting particles and damper is used to mimic the dis-
sipation (damping) caused by the contact of two particles. So the
net force is simply given by the sum of these two forces. The model
assumes that elastic interparticle contact forces are linearly depen-
dent on the particle overlap. For contact to occur, distance r
between two particles of radii (Ri) and (Rj) is less than their contact
distance d = Ri + Rj. There exists no force between the particles
when r > d. Depending on the characteristics of the model, the cor-
relation between the forces and particle overlap varies. In general
force balance equation for interacting particles is given by:
Fij ¼ Fnij þ Ftij
where Fnij and Ftij is normal and tangential force acting between
particles (i, j) respectively and is given by equations as:
Fnij ¼ Kn d3=2
n ;
Ft ij ¼ Kt dt ;
In the above equations, Kn and Kt are normal and tangential
stiffness and dn and dt are the normal and cumulative shear dis-
placement. The magnitude of dt is truncated as necessary to satisfy
a local Coulomb yield criterion Ftij = l Fnij, where l is the particle-
particle friction coefficient. Therefore, the contact surfaces are trea-
ted as sticking when Ftij < l Fnij, and as slipping when the Coulomb
yield criterion is satisfied. Zhu et al. [31] has elucidated the detailed
theory behind the DEM in his literature review, while the details of
different models can be found elsewhere [32,33]. The current study
aims at prediction of discharge rate under different material and sys-
tem attributes by using well-developed model of DEM. In this work
all the simulations were performed using the open source DEM soft-
ware LIGGGHTS [34,35]. In the present study LIGGGHTS version 3.5.0
is used. The implementation of all the models along with their vali-
2824 R. Kumar et al. / Advanced Powder Technology 29 (2018) 2822–2834

Fig. 1. Geometrically representation of two particles in contact.

Fig. 2. Basic contact model between two particles.

dation within LIGGGHTS is given by [35]. The contact model based
on Hertz’s law is used to compute the forces between the interacting
particles in all simulations.
2.2. Computational setup and material properties
The hoppers under investigation in present study are of a coni-
cal hopper having different internal angle. A schematic of the hop-
per is shown in Fig. 3.
The construction of all geometries were done using Gmsh [36],
and later imported to LIGGGHTS environment in .stl format as
walls to study discharge process. Table 1 gives the detailed dimen-
sions of all hoppers used in the simulations. In order to mitigate
the effect of hopper outlet, outlet diameter of all hoppers was kept
constant (equal to 1 cm, see Table 1).
All the numerical simulations performed in the present study,
correspond to binary and ternary mixtures having different mean
particle diameter. The preparations of mixtures were done by
changing the particles proportion systematically so as to achieve
100% mixture mass (Table 2).
Corresponding to particular mixture, bulk density and mean
diameter was calculated. The range of these mixture variables
along with material and hopper properties are listed in Table 3.
In all simulations, first the particles were filled with the random
mixed fill method into selected hopper. The fill heights in all sim-
ulation cases were much above the critical fill height such that it
has no effect on flow rate [11]. After the complete settlement of
particles inside the hopper, lid of hopper was opened. The mass
discharge rate was calculated by recording the time for complete
discharge of material from the hopper. In this way, different
 R. Kumar et al. / Advanced Powder Technology 29 (2018) 2822–2834
Fig. 3. Computational setup of hoppers used in simulations.
numerical simulations were performed to predict the discharge
rate by variation of the mixture and material conditions (Tables
2 and 3). The parameters such as coefficient of friction i.e.
particle-particle (lpp) and particle-wall (lpw), coefficient of restitu-
tion i.e. particle-particle (epp) and particle-wall (epw) were varied
to investigate their influence on discharge rate. The numerical sim-
ulations were performed to study the effect of bulk density, hopper
internal angle, mean mixture diameter, coefficient of friction (lpp
and lpw), and restitution coefficient (epp and epw) on discharge
rate. In order to have clear understanding towards the impact of
each and every parameter on the discharge rate, 96 simulation
runs were performed. Hence, the mass discharge rate data of differ-
ent simulation conditions having different input parameters were
obtained and used for training the Artificial Neural Network (see
Section 4.1).
3. Artificial Neural Network (ANN) modeling
Artificial neural networks is a robust computational tool mod-
eled as information processing representation of biological sys-
tems [27]. They are usually presented by interconnected
‘‘neurons” that can compute values from inputs by processing
through the network. A typical neuron can receive one or more
input signals and give an output signal which purely depends upon
the processing function of neuron. The network architecture com-
prises of series of layers of neurons which are connected with each
other [37]. It mainly consists of three layers: the input layer, the
hidden layer, and the output layer. Each layer is connected to the
other layer by the neurons. The information from one layer to
another layer is transferred by these neurons. In this way, informa-
tion is reached to output layer. The basic mechanism of ANN is
Table 1
Detailed dimensions of hoppers used in simulations.
Internal angle of hopper (h) 20°
Diameter of cylindrical part (cm) 5.48
Height of cylindrical part (cm) 4 3.95
Height of conical part (cm) 13.2
Outlet diameter (cm) 1 1
2825
based on the following four major assumptions [38], (1) inputs
handling by processing elements (neurons), (2) inputs are passed
to adjacent layers through neurons connections, (3) each neuron
connection has an associated weight, and the transmitted input
from each neuron is simply the product of respective input and
its weight, and (4) transmitted input pass through an activation
or transfer function of neuron in order to determine its output
information.
Fig. 4 shows a typical neuron structure where each input (x)
coming from other neurons are multiplied by their respective
weights (wi, 1  i  n), and then summed up with a bias vector
(b). This summed input (s) or information is passed through an
activation function (f) to get the output (a) of particular neuron
[39]. Given an vector X, the neural network can map it to another
vector, a via:
a ¼ f ðW:X þ bÞ
The mean squared error (MSE), i.e. the difference between the
network output vector and the known target vector, is computed
and back-propagated through ANN to modify the weights for the
entire network, a process referred to as training. In this category,
back-propagation training algorithm is the most popular one
[40]. The accuracy (or competence) and generalization of ANN
model completely depends upon amount and quality of training
data [41]. The total number of data sets to train the model com-
pletely depends upon complexity of the input/output relationship
and amount of noise in the data. Furthermore, with relatively small
amounts of training data ANN model may over-fit the data result-
ing in less generalization accuracy. Many authors [42,43] sug-
gested Design of Experiments (DoE) method to determine the
parameter combinations for problem definition.
Before the network training, it is often useful to scale the inputs
and targets data so that they fall in the range [1, 1] by using the
following equation:
y ¼ ðymax - ymin Þ  ðx - xmin Þ=ðxmax - xmin Þ þ ymin ;
where, Xmin and Xmax are minimum and a maximum of data set. In
some circumstances, the dimension of input data is large and highly
correlated (redundant). In such situations, Principal component
analysis (PCA) is an effective way to reduce the dimension of input
matrix [44]. It allows recognition of relationship between variables,
hence lower the dimensionality of the data set. The PCA can be used
to effectively remove those components that contribute minimal to
the variation in the data set. Such treatment is highly desirable,
when the number of factors affecting the output is unusually high.
However, in the present study number of factors are seven, which is
manageable and the study intend to capture the effects of all the
seven factors on the mass discharge rate in the present work.
Many commercial ANN software are available in market and in
this particular study, Matlab R2014a software has been used.
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Neural network model fitting
Development of ANN model for the prediction of flow rate from
conical hoppers is presented in this section. The seven inputs to
40° 60° 80°
5.48 5.48 5.48
2.56 3.30
6.65 4.38 3.17
1 1
2826 R. Kumar et al. / Advanced Powder Technology 29 (2018) 2822–2834

Table 2
Detail of mixture preparation for training the ANN model.

Mixtures Glass beads diameter (mm) Mass percentage (%)

(d1) (d2) (d3) (md1) (md2) (md3)
1 0.4 – 2 10 – 90
2 0.4 – 2 20 – 80
3 0.4 – 2 30 – 70
4 0.4 – 2 40 – 60
5 0.4 1.5 2 10 45 45
6 0.4 1.5 2 20 40 40
7 0.4 1.5 2 30 35 35
8 0.4 1.5 2 40 30 30
9 0.78 – 1.85 10 – 90
10 0.78 – 1.85 20 – 80
11 0.78 – 1.85 30 – 70
12 0.78 – 1.85 40 – 60
13 0.78 1.35 1.85 10 45 45
14 0.78 1.35 1.85 20 40 40
15 0.78 1.35 1.85 30 35 35
16 0.78 1.35 1.85 40 30 30
17 1 – 2 10 – 90
18 1 – 2 20 – 80
19 1 – 2 30 – 70
20 1 – 2 40 – 60
21 1 1.5 2 10 45 45
22 1 1.5 2 20 40 40
23 1 1.5 2 30 35 35
24 1 1.5 2 40 30 30

Table 3 A total of 96 input-output data sets were generated based on

Seven Input variables used in simulations. DEM simulations (as described in Section 2). The assignment of
Variables Range training, validation and test data were random but fixed during
Bulk density (kg/m3) 1486–1930
the trial of selecting the best ANN architecture. Out of 96 input-
Mean diameter (mm) 0.74–1.81 output data sets, 70% of data sets were used for training, 15% of
Hopper angle (h) 20°–80° data sets were used for testing and the remaining 15% of data sets
Coefficient of friction (–) Particle-particle contact (lpp) 0.2–0.9 for cross validation of the selected network. In the present work,
Particle-wall contact (lpw) 0.5–0.94
training of the ANN model was done using TRAINLM function. This
Coefficient of restitution (–) Particle-particle contact (epp) 0.6–0.94
Particle-wall contact (epw) 0.6–0.9 function uses back propagation algorithm scheme which updates
weights and bias values according to Levenberg-Marquardt (LM)
optimization algorithm. The available data sets were trained,
tested and validated by changing neural network architecture such
as number of hidden layers, number of neurons in each layers, type
network for prediction of mass discharge rate were bulk density,
of activation function in hidden and output layers etc. The optimal
internal angle of hopper, mean diameter, coefficient of friction
ANN structure was attained based on minimum value of MSE of the
(lpp and lpw) and coefficient of restitution (epp and epw). The com-
training, testing, and cross validation data set. Table 4 presents dif-
plete scheme for ANN model is shown in Fig. 5.
ferent ANN model architecture tested during model fitting, in

Fig. 4. A typical structure of neuron.

 R. Kumar et al. / Advanced Powder Technology 29 (2018) 2822–2834 2827

Fig. 5. Artificial Neural Network (ANN) Scheme for discharge rate prediction.

Table 4
Comparison of different ANN architecture by changing number of neurons (5–11) at hidden with LM algorithm in terms of MSE.

ANN structure Training error Validation error Testing error Hidden activation Output activation
7-5-1 0.00026 1.69639 0.66325 tansig Purelin
7-5-1 0.00011 0.00658 0.14794 tansig Tansig
7-6-1 0.00021 0.00866 0.13974 tansig Tansig
7-6-1 0.00014 0.00662 0.01412 tansig Purelin
7-6-1 0.00024 0.00192 0.05400 tansig Purelin
7-7-1 0.00064 0.00059 0.00900 tansig Purelin
7-9-1 0.00002 0.67861 0.66243 tansig Purelin
7-10-1 0.00003 0.45664 0.96393 tansig Purelin
7-11-1 0.00001 0.03588 0.81895 tansig Purelin
7-11-1 0.00000 0.01135 0.22406 tansig Tansig
7-10-1 0.00001 0.02148 0.25281 tansig Tansig
7-9-1 0.00002 0.13604 0.18231 tansig Tansig
7-8-1 0.00002 0.00539 0.13562 tansig Tansig
7-7-1 0.07397 0.18383 0.22020 tansig Tansig
7-7-1 0.00004 0.00499 0.10403 logsig Tansig
7-7-1 0.00004 0.07518 0.02739 logsig Purelin
7-8-1 0.00012 1.90393 0.73625 logsig Purelin

terms of training, validation and testing errors with change in the
hidden neurons (5–11) and different activation function in hidden
and output layers. It can be suggested from Table 4 that the mini-
mum MSE for all data sets (training, validation and testing) were
attained using 7 numbers of neurons at hidden layer having a tan-
gent sigmoid activation function (tansig) at input and a linear acti-
vation function (purelin) at output layer. Thus, the best trained
network is 7-7-1 as highlighted in the the Table 4, which is used
to predict the the discharge rate.
Fig. 6 shows that training, validation, testing and all data perfor-
mance of the selected ANN model.
Almost in all cases, the coefficient of determination to the linear
fit (R2) was close to 1 during the training, validation and testing of
network. Hence the selected neural network was capable of pro-
viding a good correlation between targets and predicted mass dis-
charge rate. These acceptable fitting values indicate the accuracy of
selected ANN model. The matrices of the weights and biases of the
tuned ANN model have been presented in Table 5.
To investigate the learning ability of present ANN model with
DEM simulations, three extra DEM simulations (having log normal
distribution with varying width) were carried out. The mean diam-
eter of considered distribution was within the tuned range of pre-
sent ANN model. It is interestingly to note that this particle size
distribution was completely different from the ones used to train
the model. Fig. 7 depicts the considered particle size distribution
by mass having different distribution width.
Table 6 shows the comparison between predicted mass dis-
charge by ANN model and DEM simulations. Clearly, the developed
ANN model is able to capture the microscopic behaviour of granu-
lar materials tracked by DEM simulations.
2828 R. Kumar et al. / Advanced Powder Technology 29 (2018) 2822–2834

Fig. 6. Scatter plot between ANN predicted flow rate and target flow rate (a) for training, (b) for validation, (c) for testing, and (d) all data.

Table 5
Weight and bias coefficients of the selected ANN model.

Hidden layer Output layer

Weights (wij)* and biases Weights (wij)** and
biases
Hopper angle Mean diameter Bulk density lpp lpw epp epw biases MDR bias
1.7743 0.9571 1.5235 0.1493 0.8098 1.4838 0.3289 2.1311 1.8228 0.4895
2.6535 0.85561 1.5168 0.3140 1.0661 1.0602 2.6049 3.6924 1.6822
0.1751 0.7615 2.0570 1.6401 0.1174 0.8008 1.1185 1.7689 0.1735
4.4041 1.4808 0.14267 0.6431 1.6869 0.69626 0.4943 1.103 0.3043
1.7668 2.0529 1.759 1.6575 1.8267 0.66235 1.2962 0.5058 0.1924
0.0087 1.5604 3.9900 1.1971 0.7514 2.0364 0.4683 0.2605 0.0648
1.1371 0.4693 0.0235 0.6838 0.1949 0.1647 0.0316 0.3497 0.6073
*
Weight connection from the input layer to hidden layer.
**
Weight connection from the hidden layer to output layer.

These results are fascinating one since the cumbersome DEM
simulations can be avoided by such a combined approach and thus
saving the time to run the simulation each time. Furthermore, the
tuned ANN model can also serve as a good standalone tool for pre-
diction of mass discharge rate.
4.2. Experimental validation of fitted neural network model
In order to test the validity of trained Neural Network, 22 exper-
iments were performed using spherical glass beads particles. The
size of particles used in the experiment was 0.78 ± 0.05 (fines),
1.35 ± 0.06 (medium) and 1.85 ± 0.03 (coarse). The letters f, m
and c denotes the three size particles used in experiment in Table 7.
The particle size measurements were done by using Nikon ECLIPSE
E100 microscope. The mixtures with different fines mass fraction
were prepared by increasing fines amount by 10% successively,
where by coarse or medium size particles proportion was adjusted
accordingly to achieve 100% mixture mass. Starting with binary
mixture, which consists of coarse (1.85 ± 0.03) and fines
(0.78 ± 0.05) particles as described above, was prepared by varying
the fines amount by 10%, i.e. first binary mixture consisted of 40%
fines and 60% coarse particles by mass (see Table 7). Similarly other
mixtures were prepared as tabulated in the Table 7. Similarly, the
ternary mixtures were prepared by increasing fines mass percent-
age by 10% from one mixture to other whereas remaining propor-
tion is filled with equal mass percentage of coarse and medium size
particles. For example, for ternary mixture 1, the fines mass per-
centage was 40% whereas coarse and medium size particles mass
 R. Kumar et al. / Advanced Powder Technology 29 (2018) 2822–2834 2829

drical diameter is 2.5 times the outlet diameter [45] and the outlet
diameter is larger than 6 times the diameter of the particles [5].
The outlet diameter is same for both the hoppers and is equal to
1 cm. The outlet of these hoppers were designed in such manner
that outlet can be closed while the material is filled, and can be
easily opened for discharging without disturbing the hopper and
the filled material. In all the experiments, the same amount of sam-
ple (100 g) was weighed and carefully filled into the hopper by
closing the hopper outlet. No tapping of material was done before
discharge. Once desired amount was filled into the selected hop-
per, the discharge rate measurement was performed by removing
the outlet lid slowly and then recording the time for complete
material discharge using a stopwatch. This procedure was repeated
at least five times for the selected hopper and selected material/
mixture and mean discharge rate as well as relative standard devi-
ation (RSD) were calculated. To reduce the influence of electro-
static charge during filling and discharging, static energy
Fig. 7. Particle size distribution by mass for considered distribution with varying discharge gun (Milty Zerostat 3 Anti-Static Gun, China) was used.
width. This device emits positive and negative ions to effectively neutral-
ize static charge that may be built up on surface (geometry or par-
Table 6
ticles). Table 7 shows the experimental and ANN predicted
Comparison of DEM simulations with ANN model for unseen particle size discharge rate (g/s) along with percentage (%) error for different
distribution. mixtures.
Mixture DEM (g/s) ANN model (g/s) Error between
It can be seen from Table 7 that most of the predicted discharge
DEM and ANN (%) rates were very close to the experiment discharge rates. It was also
found out that the percentage error in discharge rate prediction
a 25.20 24.42 3.10
b 25.93 25.69 0.93 was less than ±13% considering all experimental results. Although,
c 27.04 27.00 0.14 mono size particles were not used for training purpose, still ANN
model is predicting the discharge rate within permissible error.
These results confirmed validity of the selected ANN model for pre-
diction of discharge rate in different internal angle hoppers within
% were adjusted to 30% individually. The details about all the
the tuned range.
experimental mixtures are presented in Table 7. An acrylic mate-
rial based, three dimensional hoppers, having conical shape at bot-
tom with internal angle (h) of 60° and 80° were used for 4.3. Comparison of ANN model with the literature correlations
experimental purpose. The experimental hoppers with dimensions
are shown in Fig. 8. A comparative study between ANN model, DEM and literature
The experimental hoppers follow general guidelines to obtain correlations to calculate discharge rate is presented in this section.
uniform and reproducible mass discharge rate i.e. the upper cylin- These correlations are explained in Section 1.

Table 7
Comparison of experiment and ANN predicted value of discharge rate.

Mixture type Glass beads Mass percentage (%) Hopper angle Experiment (g/s) RSD (%) ANN predicted (g/s) % Error (ANN Vs experiments)
diameter (mm)
(d1) (d2) (d3) (md1) (md2) (md3)
Mono f – – 100 – – 60 24.51 0.92 28.18 13.02
– m – – 100 – 60 21.16 0.95 22.75 6.99
– – c – 100 60 19.25 0.80 18.85 2.12
f – – 100 – – 80 21.67 0.95 23.65 8.37
– m – – 100 – 80 18.53 0.51 18.64 0.59
– – c – 100 80 16.43 0.71 16.84 2.43
Binary f – c 40 – 60 60 23.05 0.91 24.72 6.76
f – c 30 – 70 60 22.34 1.10 23.51 4.98
f – c 20 – 80 60 21.42 0.99 22.47 4.67
f – c 10 – 90 60 20.53 1.41 20.84 1.49
f – c 40 – 60 80 19.79 1.58 21.58 8.29
f – c 30 – 70 80 19.14 0.86 19.77 3.19
f – c 20 – 80 80 18.29 0.84 19.00 3.74
f – c 10 – 90 80 17.62 0.78 17.96 1.89
Ternary f m c 40 30 30 60 23.31 0.90 25.58 8.87
f m c 30 35 35 60 22.73 0.37 24.57 7.49
f m c 20 40 40 60 22.07 0.68 23.76 7.11
f m c 10 45 45 60 21.31 1.14 22.68 6.04
f m c 40 30 30 80 20.49 0.50 21.58 5.05
f m c 30 35 35 80 19.94 0.75 21.00 5.05
f m c 20 40 40 80 19.17 0.82 19.76 2.99
f m c 10 45 45 80 18.52 0.85 19.09 2.99

f = 0.78 ± 0.05, m = 1.35 ± 0.06, c = 1.85 ± 0.03.

2830 R. Kumar et al. / Advanced Powder Technology 29 (2018) 2822–2834

Fig. 8. Schematic of the experimental hoppers having different internal angle.

4.3.1. Mass discharge rate of mono size particles
To find the applicability of ANN model, mono-disperse glass
bead were discharged from 60° and 80° hoppers. Fig. 9a and b
shows the comparison of calculated discharge rate between exper-
imental, DEM, ANN model and Rose and Tanaka (RT) empirical cor-
relation as a function of particle diameter (mm) in 60° and 80°
hopper respectively.
First of all, ANN model captured the material interaction calcu-
lated by DEM simulations quite well despite the fact that mono
size particles system were not used during training of ANN model.
The discharge rate tends to decrease with increasing particle size
for both types of hoppers, which is in agreement with the previous
results [46]. RT correlation provides a good estimation of mass dis-
charge rate in both angle hoppers at small mean diameter mono-
size particles. The under prediction of RT correlation at bigger
diameter may be due to the constant value of discharge rate con-
stant, C for all size particles which is function of hopper half angle,
internal friction angle, wall friction, etc. [11]. On other hand, ANN
model over predicted the mass discharge rate compared to the
experimental results and this over prediction kept on decreasing
as the diameter of particles kept on increasing.
4.3.2. Mass discharge rate of binary and ternary mixtures
Fig. 10a shows the comparison of calculated discharge rate
between experimental, DEM, ANN model and Rose and Tanaka
(RT) empirical correlation as a function of mean diameter (mm)
in 60° hopper.
As the mean diameter of granular mixture was increased, the
flow rate tends to decrease and this behavior was very well cap-
tured by DEM, ANN model and RT correlation along with experi-
ments. But for 60° hopper (Fig. 10a), ANN model over estimated
experimental discharge rate and this over prediction begin to
decline with increase in mean diameter. The data used to train
ANN model was obtained by simulation results where indetermi-
nate particles systems are considered as ideal spherical particles
[47]. Furthermore, the geometrical variations were common in
glass beads and resulted in discrepancy between experiments
and model. On the other hand, Rose and Tanaka (RT) correlation
showed a good agreement with experiments at small mean mix-
ture diameter. The deviation of calculated discharge rate by RT cor-
relation with experiments kept on increasing as the mean mixture
diameter was increased above 1.2 mm. Due to change in particle
distribution, there is significantly change in friction properties

Fig. 9. Comparison of mass discharge rate between experiment, DEM, ANN model and Rose and Tanaka (RT) relation, for monosize diameter (mm) in: (a) 60° hopper, (b) 80°
hopper.
 R. Kumar et al. / Advanced Powder Technology 29 (2018) 2822–2834 2831

Fig. 10. Comparison of mass discharge rate between experiment, DEM, ANN model and Rose and Tanaka (RT) relation, for different mean diameter (mm) in: (a) 60° hopper,
(b) 80° hopper.

between the particles and found to maximum for mixtures having

more number of large particles. This remarkable deviation from the
experiments at large mean diameter particle size above 1.2 mm
may be attributed due to use of constant value of discharge coeffi-
cient, C in Beverloo equation, which accounts for friction effects
between particles and hopper wall. The effect of change in internal
angle on flow rate prediction by ANN model and RT correlation was
also investigated (Fig. 10b). As is seen in Fig. 10b the prediction of
discharge rate in 80° hopper by ANN model and Rose and Tanaka
correlation had improvement when compared with experimental
results. The prediction of flow rate by ANN model in 80° hopper
was less than +9% error as compared to experimental discharge
rate irrespective of mean diameter of the particles. But, the devia-
tion of experimental discharge rate from the RT correlation was
found high at large mean mixture diameter (above 1.3 mm).
Whereas, the prediction by ANN model in 80° hopper showed
improvement for almost entire range of mean diameter of parti-
cles. Hence combined prediction by DEM and ANN in prediction
of mass discharge rate can work satisfactory within the tuned
range. However, the applicability of this model can be enhanced
Fig. 11. Sensitivity analysis of input variable in coded forms.
by presenting a large problem space.

4.4. Sensitivity analysis

The mass discharge out of hopper is affected by different vari-
ables including hopper geometry, operational conditions and
material properties. Understanding the underlying physics about
the essential variables or parameters on mass discharge rate is a
cumbersome task. A comprehensive sensitivity analysis of ANN
model was carried out in this section to find out most significant
parameters. This method finds out the sensitivity of output for a
given input parameters by keeping all others parameters at con-
stant mid value. The sensitivity analysis was performed for all
seven input parameters which were used for training the ANN
model. Fig. 11 shows the ANN sensitivity analysis using perturb
method as explained in literature [43]. Each curve in Fig. 11 repre-
sents change of mass discharge rate with change in the particular
input variable. The influence of input variable was determined by
measuring the slope of response (mass discharge rate) within the
specified range. Higher the slope (which indicates rate of change
of mass flow rate with change in input variable) higher is the effect
of that input variable on the mass discharge rate.
It is clearly seen from Fig. 11 that hopper internal angle (slope -
2.46) has the highest effect on mass discharge rate. This result is
consistent with past experimental and numerical studies [20] on
hopper discharge processes. This behaviour might be due to shift-
ing of flow mode from mass flow to funnel flow. In order to visual-
ize the flow mode generated by the change in hopper internal
angle, different colors were assigned to divide the hopper into dif-
ferent colored layers. Fig. 12a and b shows the flow mode compar-
ison in two extreme hoppers (h = 20° and 80°).
Different snapshots of discharge process for both the hoppers
were taken at three discrete time interval: 1 sec, 2 sec and 3 sec.
Fig. 12a shows the flow mode for 20° hopper, where almost all
the material discharged in mass flow fashion. On the other hand,
by changing the internal angle of hopper from 20° to 80°, there
was a shift from mass flow to funnel flow due to formation of inter-
nal flow channel along the hopper height (Fig. 12b). This change in
flow mode resulted in decrease in mass discharge rate as the inter-
nal angle was increased from 20° to 80°. A quantitative analysis to
identify the flow profile was also performed using Mass Flow Index
(MFI). This coefficient is nothing else but the ratio of the average
velocity of the particles at the wall by the average velocity of the
particles in the centerline.
vwall
MFI ¼
vcenterline
2832 R. Kumar et al. / Advanced Powder Technology 29 (2018) 2822–2834
Fig. 12. Flow mode comparison for different internal angle hoppers: (a) 20° and (b) 80°.
A velocity ratio of MFI  0.3 can serve as a transition point
between mass and funnel flow in conical hoppers, as shown by
Johanson and Jenike [48]. Thus a MFI > 0.3 indicates mass flow
behavior, reverse if MFI < 0.3 the bulk solid discharges as by funnel
flow. Refer to [23], to understand the detail procedure of calculat-
ing MFI. In Fig. 13, the MFI value is plotted over time.
For both 60° and 80° hopper a similar trend can be observed.
Right after the half discharge MFI starts to decrease which is much
more predominant for 80° hopper. This is due to channel formation
as seen in Fig. 12. Whereas the 20° and 40° hoppers are over the
whole time period significantly above a MFI of 0.3. This compar-
ison shows clearly that with reducing the internal angle of hopper
the tendency to mass flow increases.
The second most significant parameter affecting the mass dis-
charge rate was mean particle diameter of mixture having slope
1.33. The mixture mean diameter plays a significant role in pre-
dicting discharge behaviour from hoppers [7]. The increase in
mean diameter of mixture resulted in decrease in mass discharge
rate, which is expected due to decrease in ratio of outlet diameter
to mean diameter of the mixture. Basically small mean diameter
mixtures comprised of more number of fines and tend to increase
Fig. 13. Comparison of the Mass Flow Index of different internal angle hoppers.
the flowing density during discharge [49]. The third highest effect
was observed for bulk density with slope 1.20. As seen in Fig. 11,
there exists an inflection point after which the mass discharge rate
increases drastically. This behaviour is due to different diameter
ratio particles system used to train the model (Table 2). For the
large particle size ratio, high bulk density was observed due to
increase in number of fines particles in the mixture. The increase
in bulk density of mixture resulted in increase mass discharge rate
as per Beverloo equation as mass discharge rate is positively
related to the bulk density [2]. Furthermore, the tendency of parti-
cles to percolate through large voids formed due to large particle
size ratio is also responsible for such increased flow rate [15].
The fourth highest effect was observed for coefficient of friction
(lpp) with slope 1.03. At low friction coefficients, the maximum
discharge rate was observed. But with the increase in friction coef-
ficient (lpp) mass discharge rate decrease drastically. Anand et al.
[20] in their numerical investigation also observed such behaviour
and concluded that particle-particle friction was the key factor to
affect mass discharge rate compared to particle-wall. On the other
hand, the mass discharge rate was significantly increased by
changing particle-wall restitution coefficient (slope of 0.85). This
increase was approximately more for higher particle-wall restitu-
tion coefficient. The authors studied the effect of restitution coeffi-
cient on flow rate by taking identical value for particle-particle and
particle-wall restitution coefficient and reported negligible effects
of restitution coefficient on mass discharge rate. But the present
study was performed at different particle-particle and particle-
wall restitution coefficient and showed considerable effects on dis-
charge rate. The slopes of the linear fitting of remaining variable
were 0.26 (particle-wall friction coefficient (lpw)) and 0.26
(particle-particle restitution coefficient (epp)), which were quite
low as compared to the variables discussed above. Thus, hopper
internal angle, mean particle diameter, bulk density and coefficient
of friction (lpp) were found to be significantly affecting mass dis-
charge rate in the current study.
5. Conclusions
The present work has demonstrated that ANN can be success-
fully employed to predict mass discharge rate from conical hop-
 R. Kumar et al. / Advanced Powder Technology 29 (2018) 2822–2834
pers. The capability of ANN model to predict the mass discharge
rate was tested via comparing the results with experiments. The
present ANN model was capable of predicting the discharge rate
of multi-component particle system (binary and ternary mixtures)
from different angle (60° and 80°) conical hoppers within ±13%
error. Further, the accuracy of ANN model has been found to
increase with increase in the mean diameter of mixture. By per-
forming the sensitivity analysis, the impact of critical parameters
on mass discharge rate was also explored. Hopper internal angle
(h), mixture mean diameter, bulk density, coefficient of friction
(lpp) and coefficient of restitution (epw) played a significant effect
on mass discharge rate from hoppers and were consistent with the
previously reported results. We conclude that this DEM based ANN
model may be preferred as an alternative approach instead of con-
ventional dimensional analysis based methods for prediction of
discharge rate. The prediction of mass discharge rate can be
obtained quickly and accurately by ANN. While being promising,
the present approach for mass discharge rate prediction from con-
ical hoppers is by no means complete. The discharge process
depends upon several factors, but in present study only seven fac-
tors are considered. The dependencies of particle shape, filling
method, hopper shape are not included. The whole work is for
non-cohesive spherical particles system having no cohesion
between particles. The applicability and extension of present
model particularly with smaller real powder fractions is an open
area of research. These different factors will be carefully examined
in the future. In addition to mass discharge rate from conical hop-
pers, segregation behavior can also be predicted through this com-
bined DEM and ANN approach. The prediction of segregation under
different material and hopper geometries will also be undertaken
in future.
References
[1] D. Schulze, Powders and Bulk Solids - Behavior, Characterization, Storage and
Flow, Springer Science & Business Media, Heidelberg, 2008.
[2] W.A. Beverloo, H.A. Leniger, J. van de Velde, The flow of granular solids through
orifices, Chem. Eng. Sci. 15 (1961) 260–269, https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-
2509(61)85030-6.
[3] H. Rose, T. Tanaka, Rate of discharge of granular materials from bins and
hoppers, The Engineer 208 (1959) 465–469.
[4] J.C. Williams, The rate of discharge of coarse granular materials from conical
mass flow hoppers, Chem. Eng. Sci. 32 (1977) 247–255, https://doi.org/
10.1016/0009-2509(77)80202-9.
[5] R.M. Nedderman, U. Tüzün, S.B. Savage, G.T. Houlsby, The flow of granular
materials—I, Chem. Eng. Sci. 37 (1982) 1597–1609, https://doi.org/10.1016/
0009-2509(82)80029-8.
[6] P. Artega, U. Tüzün, Flow of binary mixtures of equal-density granules in
hoppers-size segregation, flowing density and discharge rates, Chem. Eng. Sci.
45 (1990) 205–223, https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2509(90)87093-8.
[7] S. Humby, U. Tuzun, A.B. Yu, Prediction of hopper discharge rates of binary
granular mixtures, Chem. Eng. Sci. 53 (1998) 483–494.
[8] J. Khanam, A. Nanda, Flow of granules through cylindrical hopper, Powder
Technol. 150 (2005) 30–35, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2004.11.016.
[9] C. Mankoc, A. Janda, R. Arévalo, J.M. Pastor, I. Zuriguel, A. Garcimartín, D. Maza,
The flow rate of granular materials through an orifice, Granular Matter 9
(2007) 407–414, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10035-007-0062-2.
[10] A. Janda, I. Zuriguel, D. Maza, Flow rate of particles through apertures obtained
from self-similar density and velocity profiles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 (2012) 1–5,
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett. 108.248001.
[11] Q.J. Zheng, B.S. Xia, R.H. Pan, A.B. Yu, Prediction of mass discharge rate in
conical hoppers using elastoplastic model, Powder Technol. 307 (2017) 63–72,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2016.11.037.
[12] H.P. Zhu, Z.Y. Zhou, R.Y. Yang, A.B. Yu, Discrete particle simulation of
particulate systems: A review of major applications and findings, Chem. Eng.
Sci. 63 (2008) 5728–5770, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2008.08.006.
[13] D. Höhner, S. Wirtz, V. Scherer, Experimental and numerical investigation on
the influence of particle shape and shape approximation on hopper discharge
using the discrete element method, Powder Technol. 235 (2012) 614–627,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2012.11.004.
[14] V. Vidyapati, S. Subramaniam, Granular flow in silo discharge: Discrete
element method simulations and model assessment, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 52
(2013) 13171–13182.
[15] D. Bertuola, S. Volpato, P. Canu, A.C. Santomaso, Prediction of segregation in
funnel and mass flow discharge, Chem. Eng. Sci. 150 (2016) 16–25, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ces.2016.04.054.
2833
[16] S. Mandal, D.V. Khakhar, A study of the rheology of planar granular flow of
dumbbells using discrete element method simulations, Phys. Fluids 28 (2016),
https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4963310.
[17] J. Wan, F. Wang, G. Yang, S. Zhang, M. Wang, P. Lin, L. Yang, The influence of
orifice shape on the flow rate: A DEM and experimental research in 3D hopper
granular flows, Powder Technol. (2018), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
powtec.2018.03.041.
[18] Y. Zhang, F. Jia, Y. Zeng, Y. Han, Y. Xiao, DEM study in the critical height of flow
mechanism transition in a conical silo, Powder Technol. 331 (2018) 98–106,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2018.03.024.
[19] P.A. Cundall, O.D.L. Strack, A discrete numerical model for granular
assemblies, Géotechnique 29 (1979) 47–65, https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.
1979.29.1.47.
[20] A. Anand, J.S. Curtis, C.R. Wassgren, B.C. Hancock, W.R. Ketterhagen, Predicting
discharge dynamics from a rectangular hopper using the discrete element
method (DEM), Chem. Eng. Sci. 63 (2008) 5821–5830, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ces.2009.09.001.
[21] W.R. Ketterhagen, J.S. Curtis, C.R. Wassgren, B.C. Hancock, Modeling granular
segregation in flow from quasi-three-dimensional, wedge-shaped hoppers,
Powder Technol. 179 (2008) 126–143, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
powtec.2007.06.023.
[22] W.R. Ketterhagen, J.S. Curtis, C.R. Wassgren, A. Kong, P.J. Narayan, B.C.
Hancock, Granular segregation in discharging cylindrical hoppers: A discrete
element and experimental study, Chem. Eng. Sci. 62 (2007) 6423–6439,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2007.07.052.
[23] W.R. Ketterhagen, J.S. Curtis, C.R. Wassgren, B.C. Hancock, Predicting the flow
mode from hoppers using the discrete element method, Powder Technol. 195
(2009) 1–10, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2009.05.002.
[24] Y. Zhao, S. Yang, L. Zhang, J.W. Chew, DEM study on the discharge
characteristics of lognormal particle size distributions from a conical hopper,
AIChE J. 64 (2017), https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.16026.
[25] D. Höhner, S. Wirtz, V. Scherer, A study on the influence of particle shape on
the mechanical interactions of granular media in a hopper using the Discrete
Element Method, Powder Technol. 278 (2015) 286–305, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.powtec.2015.02.046.
[26] L. Peng, J. Xu, Q. Zhu, H. Li, W. Ge, F. Chen, X. Ren, GPU-based discrete element
simulation on flow regions of flat bottomed cylindrical hopper, Powder
Technol. 304 (2016) 218–228, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2016.08.029.
[27] K. Kachrimanis, V. Karamyan, S. Malamataris, Artificial neural networks
(ANNs) and modeling of powder flow, Int. J. Pharm. 250 (2003) 13–23.
[28] M.A. Ariana, B. Vaferi, G. Karimi, Prediction of thermal conductivity of alumina
water-based nano fluids by artificial neural networks, 278 (2015) 1–10.
doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2015.03.005.
[29] L. Benvenuti, C. Kloss, S. Pirker, Identification of DEM simulation parameters
by Artificial Neural Networks and bulk experiments, Powder Technol. 291
(2016) 456–465, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2016.01.003.
[30] R.C. Chaurasia, S. Nikkam, Application of artificial neural network to study the
performance of multi-gravity separator (MGS) treating iron ore fines, Part. Sci.
Technol. 35 (2017) 93–102, https://doi.org/10.1080/02726351.2015.1131791.
[31] H.P. Zhu, Z.Y. Zhou, R.Y. Yang, A.B. Yu, Discrete particle simulation of
particulate systems: Theoretical developments, Chem. Eng. Sci. 62 (2007)
3378–3396, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2006.12.089.
[32] H.J. Herrmann, S. Luding, Modeling granular media on the computer,
Continuum Mech. Thermodyn. 10 (1998) 189–231, https://doi.org/10.1007/
s001610050089.
[33] W. Ketterhagen, M.T. Ende, B. Hancock, Process modeling in the
pharmaceutical industry using the discrete element method, J. Pharm. Sci.
98 (2009).
[34] C. Kloss, C. Goniva, LIGGGHTS-A new open source discrete element simulation
software, in: Proceeding of the Fifth International Conference on Discrete
Element Methods, London, UK, 2010, pp. 25–26.
[35] C. Kloss, C. Goniva, A. Hager, S. Amberger, S. Pirker, Models, algorithms and
validation for opensource DEM and CFD-DEM, Prog. Comput. Fluid Dyn., Int. J.
12 (2012) 140–152.
[36] C. Geuzaine, J.-F. Remacle, Gmsh: a three-dimensional finite element mesh
generator with built-in pre-and post-processing facilities, Int. J. Numer.
Methods Eng. 79 (11) (2009) 1309–1331, https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.2579.
[37] D.R. Baughman, Y.A. Liu, Neural Networks in Bioprocesing and Chemical
Engineering, first ed., Academic Press, New York, 1995.
[38] M.T. Hagan, H.B. Demuth, M.H. Beale, Neural Neural Network Design, second
ed., PWS, Boston, 1996.
[39] H. Demuth, M. Beale, Neuron model and network architectures neuron, in:
Neural Network Toolbox for Use with MATLAB, User’s Guide, 2006, pp. 1–32,
doi:10.1016/j.neunet.2005.10.002.
[40] L.H. Tsoukalas, R.E. Uhrig, Fuzzy and Neural Network Approaches in
Engineering, first ed., Wiley, New York, 1997.
[41] P. Cunningham, J. Carney, S. Jacob, Stability problems with artificial neural
networks and the ensemble solution, Artif. Intell. Med. 20 (2000) 217–225,
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0933-3657(00)00065-8.
[42] W.L. Oberkampf, C.J. Roy, Verification and Validation in Scientific Computing,
Cambridge University Press, 2010.
[43] K.M. Desai, S.A. Survase, P.S. Saudagar, S.S. Lele, R.S. Singhal, Comparison of
artificial neural network (ANN) and response surface methodology (RSM) in
fermentation media optimization: Case study of fermentative production of
scleroglucan, Biochem. Eng. J. 41 (2008) 266–273, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
bej.2008.05.009.
2834 R. Kumar et al. / Advanced Powder Technology 29 (2018) 2822–2834

[44] S. Wold, K. Esbensen, P. Geladi, Principal component analysis, Chemom. Intell.
Lab. Syst. 2 (1986) 37–52.
[45] R.L. Brown, J.C. Richards, Profile of flow of granules through apertures, Trans.
Inst. Chem. Eng. 38 (1960) 243–250.
[46] H.P. Kurz, G. Münz, The influence of particle size distribution on the flow
properties of limestone powders, Powder Technol. 11 (1975) 37–40, https://
doi.org/10.1016/0032-5910(75)80020-9.
[47] M.L. Bernhardt, G. Biscontin, C. O‫׳‬Sullivan, Experimental validation study of 3D
direct simple shear DEM simulations, Soils Found. 56 (2016) 336–347, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2016.04.002.
[48] J.R. Johanson, Stress and velocity fields in the gravity flow of bulk solids, J.
Appl. Mech. 31 (1964) 499–506, https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3629668.
[49] R.P. Dias, A. Teixeira, M.G. Mota, A.I. Yelshin, Particulate binary mixtures:
dependence of packing porosity on particle size ratio, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 43
(2004) 7912–7919.