Subscriber access provided by Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati

Thermodynamics, Transport, and Fluid Mechanics

Derivation and validation of a new porous media
resistance formula based on the tube-sphere model
Chen zhaodong, Zheng Kuncan, Wang xiao, Han fuling, Guan chong, and Bu juanjuan
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.iecr.0c02197 • Publication Date (Web): 31 Aug 2020
Downloaded from pubs.acs.org on September 13, 2020

Just Accepted

“Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted
online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical
Society provides “Just Accepted” as a service to the research community to expedite the dissemination
of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in
full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully
peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are citable by the
Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore,
the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After
a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web
site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes
to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and
ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or
consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.

is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W.,

Washington, DC 20036
Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society.
However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works
produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the
course of their duties.
Page 1 of 21 Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research

1
2
3
4
5
Derivation and validation of a new porous
6
7 media resistance formula based on the
8
9
10
tube-sphere model
11 Chen Zhaodong1)2) Zheng Kuncan1)2) * Wang Xiao1) Han Fuling1) Guan Chong1)
12
Bu Juanjuan1)
13
14 1) (School of Energy and Environment, Inner Mongolia University of Science and
15 Technology, Baotou 014010, China)
16 2) (Inner Mongolia key laboratory of efficient and clean combustion. Baotou 014010, China)
17
18 Abstract: Porous media plays a vital role in daily life and industrial production, but
19
20 its flow resistance calculation is always a difficult and hot spot. In this paper, a
21
22 tube-sphere combination model is established based on the actual porous media
23
24 structure and flow characteristics. The model considers the flow resistance of porous
25
26
media as the superposition of tube flow viscous resistance, the resistance of flowing
27 around a small ball and through the variable diameter of channel. From this, a new
28
29 resistance equation without any empirical constant is derived. Based on 35 sets of
30
31 experimental data collected from literature, this paper compares and verifies the
32
33 derived formula, classical Ergun equation and Carman equation under small Reynolds
34
35 number. The experimental parameters include: particle size range:0.0375mm-56.8mm;
36
37
porosity range:0.32-0.882; Reynolds number range: 0.006-10730. It is found that in
38 most cases, the derived formula has better adaptability than Ergun equation, and is
39
40 equivalent to the prediction accuracy of Carman formula in Darcy regime. However,
41
42 for the pre-Darcy regime with smaller Reynolds number, the experimental data itself
43
44 are quite different, and the calculation results of the three formulas are quite different
45
46 from the experimental value. The maximum error of Ergun equation is 49%, that of
47
48
Kozeny-Carman equation is 39%, and that of derivation equation is 37%, indicating
49 that the region may have completely different resistance mechanisms.
50
51
52
1 Introduction
53
54
55 * Project supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No1. 51764046 ； Grant No2.
56 51866013), ,Inner Mongolia University teaching reform fund (Gran No. 0302051601),Natural Science Foundation
57 of Inner Mongolia (Grant No.2018MS05035 ) .
58 *Corresponding author. E-mail: zhengkunchan@126.com
59 Tel.: +86-18947252801fax: +86-0472-5951567
60

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

 Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research Page 2 of 21

1
2
3
4 Porous media is ubiquitous in nature, such as galaxies, mountains, river beds,
5
6 gravel, bricks, etc1. It can be said that porous media make up our nature. The related
7
8 theory of porous media is also widely used in industry, such as oil and gas
9
10 exploitation, research on thermal insulation materials, etc2. However, porous media
11
12
has a complex and random internal structure, and the flow is highly non-linear.
13
14
Therefore, the flow resistance of porous media has always been a hot and difficult
15
research point. In 1856, Darcy conducted sand percolation experiments in Dijon,
16
17
France, and proposed the world-renowned Darcy's law, which laid the foundation for
18
19 porous media percolation theory. Later, a large number of experiments and
20
21 engineering data showed that Darcy's law is in good agreement with the experimental
22
23 data at low Reynolds number(Re<1-10). When the flow was further accelerated,
24
25 Forchheimer considered the influence of inertial force and proposed a corresponding
26
27 correction model to further expand the scope of application3. In 1952, Ergun created a
28
29 semi-empirical Ergun equation based on previous thinking and a large amount of
30
31 experimental data by combining with a hydraulic radius model. Ergun regarded the
32
33 resistance of porous media flow as the sum of viscous resistance and inertial
34
35 resistance like in tube flow:
36 P (1   )  1 
 a 3 2 u s  b 3 u s2 (1)
37 L  dp  dp
38
39 Where P / L is the unit pressure drop, Pa/m; a and b is the empirical constant; ε is the
40
41 porosity; dp is the average particle diameter, m; μ is the dynamic viscosity, Pa.s; us is
42
the superficial velocity, m/s.Ergun obtained a = 150, b = 1.75 from some
43
44 experimental data. Introduce two coefficients A and B as:
45
 3d p2
46 A (2)
1501   
2
47
48
49 B  1.75
1   
50  3d p (3)
51
52 A and B are respectively the permeability and inertial factor. However, the problem
53
is that a, b, A and B in Ergun's equation are not unique, and vary with different porous
54
55 media. Therefore, many researchers have obtained different results as shown in Table
56
57 1 through lots of experiments. However, the results in table 1, except for Ergun
58
59 equation, are lack of more extensive data test, and their applicability need to be
60

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 3 of 21 Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research

1
2
3
4 further determined. Therefore, the coefficient determined by Ergun is still used for
5
6 comparative analysis in this paper.
7
8
Table 1 Different a,b,A,B in the Ergun equation.
9
Researcher Forchheimer flow Turbulent flow Experimental parameters
10
Fluid:carbon dioxide﹑nitrogen﹑methane
11
12 A
 3d p2
B  1.75
1    ﹑hydrogen﹑water
Ergun4(1952) 1501   
2
 3d p
Porous media:sphere﹑sand、powdered
13 coke
Rep:1-2000
14
Fluid:water
15 d 3p 10.44
Ward5(1964) A B Porous media:Gravel﹑stone﹑coal﹑
16 360 dp activated carbon
17  3 d p2 B  0.6
1    Fluid:water﹑air
18 Irmay6(1964) A  3d p
1801   
2 Porous media:sand﹑gravel
19
Fluid:carbon dioxide﹑nitrogen﹑methane
20
﹑hydrogen﹑water
21
22 Macdonald7(1979) A
 3d p2
B  1.8
1    0.456mm-31.8mm 的

1801   
Porous media:sphere﹑sand﹑powdered
23
2
 3d p coke
24 Tortuosity:0.36-0.92
25 Fluid:water
26 Kececioglu8(1994) a  180, b  9.4(3  Re p  20) a  342, b  2.95(30  Re p ) Porous media:3﹑6mm sphere
27
A
 3 d p2
B  2. 4
1    Fluid:water﹑air
28 Kovac9(1981) 1441   
2
 dp
3 Porous media:Gravel﹑soil﹑sand
29
Fluid:water
30  3 d p2
Fand10(1990)
A
dp B  1.57
1   （
 1 2 d Porous media:2﹑3﹑4mm sphere
31 2141   （1 
2 2
）2 ） Tortuosity:0.3571-0.6168
3 D（1 - ）  3d p 3 D（1 - ） Rep:0.68-869
32
33 Fluid:water
A
 3.7 d p2
B2
1    Porous media:Gravel﹑soil
34 Kadlec11(1996) 2551     3d p Tortuosity:0.33-0.41
35 Rep:108-7900
36
37 Wang Y B et Fluid:air
a  411s  145, b  2.8s  0.00698 Porous media:coke
38 al.12(2003) Tortuosity:0.494-0.525
39 Fluid:water
40 Porous media:2﹑3﹑5﹑8mm sphere
41 Li Z P et al.13(2009) a  160, b  1.35 a  193, b  1.22 Tortuosity:0.366-0.408
Rep:3-4274
42
Fluid:water
43
 
Porous media:sand﹑broken quartz
44 XiaYang14(2017) A  4.46 10  4  6.93 10  4 d   2 0.076
p
B  1.26 10  3.37 10 d
5 4 2.49
p Tortuosity:0.3519-0.4506
45 Rep:0.005-299
46
47 In recent years, with the fractal theory started to use in porous media, Yu and Wu15
48
regarded porous media as small balls of equal diameter stacked in a row, thus
49
50 obtained different resistance equations by respectively using traditional and fractal
51
52 theory. The biggest advantage of Yu and Wu's model is simple structure and easy to
53
54 understand, but its disadvantage is that it is too simple to use most of the porous
55
56 media, and the structure is quite different from the actual porous media. Recently,
57
58 Zheng kuncan16,17 and Wang Tong thought that the small sphere cross stacking is
59
more suitable for the actual porous media. On this basis, the corresponding resistance
60

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

 Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research Page 4 of 21

1
2
3
4 equations are also derived from the traditional theory and the fractal theory. Zheng
5
6 and Wang's model is consistent with that of most porous media, but there is
7
8
disturbance phenomenon between the spheres, so the formula should contain
9 interference coefficient. This has caused trouble to the use of the formula. And the
10
11 problem with these equations is that they require more extensive data testing.
12
13 2. Establishment of tube-sphere model
14
15
16 At present, the flow model of porous media mainly includes two types: one is
17
18
that the researchers regard the complex channel inside the porous media as a curved
19 capillary tube, which is tube flow model3, other is that the flow inside the porous
20
21 media is regarded as the periodic flow around different spheres, which is called the
22
23 model of flowing around15. However, neither the tube flow model nor the flowing
24
25 around model can accurately reflect the pressure drop changes in porous media and
26
27 need to be corrected by empirical constants, but these empirical constants have no
28
29
clear physical meaning18.
30 Since 1952, Ergun equation has been widely used in the resistance calculation of
31
32 porous media19. Ergun equation considers the viscous resistance and inertial
33
34 resistance in porous media which are similar to tube flow, and fits two empirical
35
36 constants of unknown physical meaning based on experimental data. Because the
37
38 internal structure of porous media is complex, the pore size is constantly changing,
39
40
and the internal channel is crooked, the internal flow of porous media is always
41 randomly divided and converged 20, the constants of Ergun equation is not universal.
42
43 Analyzing the flow of porous media, there is indeed a flow similar to tube flow in the
44
45 mainstream direction. However, because the porous media itself can be seen as the
46
47 accumulation of different particles, the flow will continuously bypass particles of
48
49 different sizes, resulting in constant flow separation and aggregation, as well as
50
51
random diameter changing tube flow. Therefore, viscous resistance and inertial
52 resistance cannot be simply solved by the form of tube flow and constant correction.
53
54 The viscous resistance is not only from the tube flow, but also from the flow around.
55
56 The inertial resistance is mainly caused by the constant change of the channel
57
58 diameter particles, and the influence of some shunting and confluence is also partly
59
60 considered here. Here, the resistance caused by shunt and confluence is regarded as

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 5 of 21 Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research

1
2
3
4 the flow around resistance. Therefore, the total flow resistance of porous media can be
5
6 regarded as the sum of the viscous resistance like in the tube, the shape resistance
7
8
caused by the diameter change, the diversion and the confluence, and the resistance
9 from the flow around the particles. This is main idea of the tube-sphere model we
10
11 built. Its assumptions are as follows:
12
13 (1) In Fig. 1, the porous medium is regarded as a large number of small balls with an
14
15 average diameter dp, in which Fig. 1(a) is sequential accumulation and Fig. 1(b) is in
16
17 staggered arrangement. Whether it is sequential accumulation or staggered
18
19
accumulation or even other accumulation methods of porous media can be simplified
20 into the structure shown in Fig. 2. The small spheres are evenly distributed in the
21
22 parallel tube bundle along the mainstream. The equivalent diameter of the tube is dc,
23
24 m; The average flow velocity in the tube is u, which is defined the real velocity of
25
26 flow through the gap between the tube and the sphere;
27
28
29
30
31
32 Mainstream Mainstream
33
Direction Direction
34
35
36
37
38
39
40 (a). sequential accumulation (b). staggered arrangement
41
Fig. 1. Porous media model
42
43
44
Mainstream
45 dp M
46 Direction dc
ainstr
47
eam
48
49 d
50 irecti
l
Fig. 2. Tube-sphere unit
51 on
52 (2) Taking the porous media periodic structure (as shown in Fig.1, the area surrounded
53
54 by red dotted line ) as the characteristic unit of the porous media named tube-sphere
55
56 unit (as shown in Fig. 2). In Fig. 2, let the length of the main flow direction of the
57
58 tube-sphere unit to be l, the diameter of the small sphere is still dp, and the equivalent
59
diameter of the tube is still dc. The actual length of the flow path inside the porous
60

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

 Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research Page 6 of 21

1
2
3
4 media is lt = τl, assuming lt= dc.
5
6 (3) The flow resistance through the tube-sphere unit includes the viscous resistance
7
8
along the tube, the resistance of flowing around the sphere, and the inertial resistance
9 caused by entering and exiting the gap between the sphere and the tube wall. The
10
11 three types of resistance is calculated separately in sections 2.1 to 2.3 below.
12
13 2.1Viscous resistance of tube flow
14
15 According to the theory of hydrodynamics, the viscous resistance along the tube
16 in the tube-sphere unit is calculated by Darcy formula21 as equation (4).
17
18 lt u 2
p1  
19 dc 2 (4)
20
21 Where dc is the equivalent diameter of the tube, m; lt is the actual length of the flow
22
path (lt= τl), m; τ is the tortuosity; u is the average velocity of the tube flow, m/s; λ is
23
24 the viscous resistance coefficient, that is, the resistance coefficient in laminar flow
25
26 state, which is only related to the Reynolds number, and can be expressed as:
27 64 (5)
28 
Re
29 Re is the Reynolds number in the tube flow model, which can be expressed as:
30
ud c
31 Re  (6)
32 
33 Taking equation (6) into equation (5), the frictional resistance coefficient can be
34 expressed as:
35 64 
 (7)
36 ud c
37 Most of the internal channels of porous media are non-circular tubes. For non-circular
38
39 tubes, the equivalent diameter can be calculated according to the hydraulic radius. The
40
41 equivalent diameter of non-circular tubes is 4 times the hydraulic radius, as shown in
42
43 equation (8):
44 d c  4 Rh (8)
45 According to the original Carman22, the hydraulic radius in porous media can also be
46
47 expressed as: d p
48 Rh  (9)
49 61   
50
Where φ is the shape coefficient, φ is approximately 1 when the particle is
51 circular, and φ<1 when the particle shape is irregular. For convenience of calculation,
52
53 let φ=1. Then the equivalent diameter can be expressed as
54 d p 2d p
55 dc  4   (10)
56 61    31   
57 Taking equation (7) into equation (4), the viscous resistance loss can be changed to
58 64  lt u 2 32 lt u (11)
59 p1  
60 ud c d c 2 d c2

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 7 of 21 Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research

1
2
3
4 Taking equation (10) into equation (11) gives
32 lt u 72 lt 1    u
2
5
p1   (12)
6 d c2  2 d p2
7
8 In porous media, the average velocity and superficial velocity satisfy:
u
9 u s (13)
10 
11 lt is the length of the real flow path inside the porous media23. lt divided by l is τ.
12 l
 t (14)
13 l
14 τ is tortuosity, which indicates the degree of curvature of the real flow path in the
15
16 porous media. The tortuosity is very complicated. Different porous media structures
17 and flow characteristics determine its size. Many calculation formulas have different
18
19 degrees of difference. Therefore, the tortuosity is still a thorny issue in the study of
20 the resistance of porous media. Therefore, the error of tortuosity directly determines
21
22 the error of resistance calculation, and its calculation and selection need to be careful.
23
24
This article selects the currently widely used Yu formula24, which was the result of
25 theoretical research and has been applied by many researchers in recent year, such as
26
27 Yu Boming et al. cited in Advances in Water Resources, Zheng Kuncan et al. cited in the
28 International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Behzad Ghanbarian et al. cited in Soil
29
30 Science Society of America Journal and Liang Hao et al. cited in Journal of Power Sources.
31 1 1
32 (  1) 2 
1 1 1  4
33   [1  1   1   ] (15)
34 2 2 1 1 
35 Taking equation (13) and equation (14) into equation (12) to get
72 l 1    u s
36 2
37 p1  (16)
38  3d p2
39 The frictional viscous resistance per unit length is
p1 72  1    u s
40 2
(17)
41 
42 l  3d p2
43 2.2Local resistance caused by tube diameter change
44
45
46 In the tube-sphere model, because the channel diameter changes greatly when the
47
fluid passes through the gap between the tube and the small sphere, the process
48
49 pressure drop can be regarded as the sum of the local resistance loss caused by the
50
51 sudden expansion of the tube and the sudden contraction of the tube.
52
53 From the theory of local resistance loss in hydrodynamics, it is known that the
54
55 local resistance coefficient in sudden contraction is
56  A 
57
 1  0.51  1   0.51    (18)
58  A2 
59
Where A1 is the cross-sectional area of the tube minus the projection area of the
60 sphere, A2 is the cross-sectional area of the tube, and ε is the porosity, which is

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

 Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research Page 8 of 21

1
2
3
4
assumed
5
6 A1
7  (19)
A2
8
9 Local resistance coefficient of sudden expansion is
10 2
 A 
11  2  1  1   1 -  2 (20)
12  A2 
13 The total local drag coefficient is
14 3 5
15    1   2  1   2  0.51         2 (21)
16 2 2
17 The local resistance loss is
18 u 2  3 5 2
u 2
p2         (22)
19 2 2 2  2
20
21
Where u is the average velocity of the fluid passing through section A1, which is also
22 defined as the average velocity in the pipe by the tube ball model, and the average
23
24 velocity can still be expressed by the superficial velocity to get the equation(23)
25 u 2  3 5  u
2
26 p2         2  s2 (23)
27 2 2 2  2
28 Because the model assumes lt = τl, the local resistance loss per unit length is
 3 1    2
29
p2  3 5 (24)
30     2  us
 4 d p
3
31 l 2 2
32 2.3Resistance of flowing around the sphere
33
34 In tube-sphere model, the flow resistance around a small sphere is calculated
35
36 according to Hydrodynamics, as equation (25)
37 u 2
F3  Cd A (25)
38 2
39 Where F3 denotes the resistance of flowing around the sphere; Cd denotes the
40
41 dimensionless coefficient of resistance; A denotes the projection area of the sphere on
42
43 the plane vertical to the coming flow. So the pressure drop can be expressed as
44 F3 u 2
45 p3   Cd (26)
46
A 2
Because the model assumes that lt = τl, the pressure drop per unit length is
47
48 p3 u 2
49
 Cd (27)
lt 2d c
50
From equation(10), (13) and (14), then equation (27) can be converted into
31    2
51
p3
52  Cd us (28)
53 l 4 3 d p
54 For the determination of the resistance coefficient Cd, different researchers have
55
56 given different methods. This paper uses equation (29) to calculate25.
57 7.94
58  Re   Re   Re 
2.6  0.411 5 
0.25 6 
59
Cd 
24
  5.0    2.63  10    10 
60 Re 1.52 8.00
 Re  (29)
 Re   Re  1  6 
1   1  5 
 5.0   2.63  10   10 
8

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 9 of 21 Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research

1
2
3
4
5 Where Re is the particle Reynolds number, it is expressed as equation (30).
6 u s d p (30)
7 Re p 
8

9 2.4 Total resistance loss in porous media
10
11
According to the basic theory of hydrodynamics, the tube flow resistance loss ,
12 the resistance loss from the change of diameter and the resistance loss of flowing
13
14 around the sphere have been derived in sections 2.2 to 2.3. So the total resistance loss
15
16 per unit length of porous media is
17
p 721      31    2 31    2
2
18 3 5
 u s      2  u s  Cd u s (31)
19 l  dp
3 2
2 2  4 d p
3
4 3 d p
20
21 3.Verification and application scope analysis on equation(31)
22
23 In order to verify the rationality and applicable scope of the tube-sphere model
24
25 and the equation (31), a total 35 sets of experimental data from seven papers are
26
27 selected for verification. In addition, the widely used Ergun equation and
28
Kozeny-Carman equation (suitable for small Reynolds number, as equation 32,
29
30 hereinafter referred to as Carman equation) are selected for comparative analysis. The
31
32 analysis shows that the equation(31) is closer to the experimental data than the Ergun
33
34 equation, and agrees to the Carman equation at small Reynolds numbers.
35
36 P 180  (1   ) 2
 us (32)
37 L d p2 3
38 3.1 Pre-Darcy regime
39
40
41 The Pre-Darcy regime is a porous media flow region where the Reynolds number
42
is much less than 1 in recent years. The law of this regime is different from that of
43
44 Darcy regime, and there is no relatively consistent understanding. Fig.3 compares the
45
46 equation(31) and the Ergun equation with experimental data14 in the Reynolds number
47
48 range of 0.006-0.011. The sand and gravel(the average particle size dp= 0.0375mm) is
49
50 used as the porous media(porosity ε = 0.3519) in the experiment.
51
52 It can be seen from the Fig. 3 that when the Reynolds number is very small, the
53
errors of the three equations and the experimental values are large, and the slope of
54
55 the equations is small. The error between the Ergun equation and the experiment is
56
57 very large and reaches a maximum of 49%. The maximum error of the Carman
58
59 equation is 39%, the maximum error of the equation(31) and experiment is 37%.
60

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

 Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research Page 10 of 21

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22 Fig. 3. Comparison of pressure drops in the Pre-Darcy regime(Rep:0.006-0.01)
23
24 Therefore, the research on the flow mechanism of Pre-Darcy regime is still in the
25
26 exploratory stage, and the experimental data of different research groups are also
27
28 different from each other, so there is no formula that can be consistent with it at
29
30
present. The comparison in this paper once again shows that there must be a new law
31 of porous media flow in Pre-Darcy regime.
32
33 3.2 Darcy regime and Near Darcy regime
34
35 The pressure drop and velocity are linear in Darcy region, and the Reynolds
36
37 number range is around 1. Fig. 426 compares Darcy's experimental data with
38
39 equation(31), Ergun equation, and Carman equation. After considering the
40
41
experimental conditions at that time, this paper only quotes Darcy's first set of
42 experimental data. Experimental parameters: average particle diameter dp = 0.2mm,
43
44 porosity ε = 0.38. When the particle Reynolds number increases from 0.1 to 1, the
45
46 equations except Ergun equation are in good agreement with the experimental data,
47
48 and the relationship between pressure drop and velocity is linear. Among them, the
49
50 error of the Carman equation is 12%, the maximum error of the derived equation is
51
52
13%, and the maximum error of the Ergun equation is 25%.
53 Fig. 527 compares equation (31), Carman equation and Ergun equation with
54
55 experiment data in Reynolds number range of 0.99-25.9. It is found that equation (31)
56
57 is the closest to experimental data. The relationship between pressure drop and
58
59 velocity has deviated from linear region. Compared with the experimental data, the
60

10

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 11 of 21 Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research

1
2
3
4 maximum error of the Ergun equation is 35%, the maximum error of the Carman
5
6 equation is 48%, and the maximum error of equation (31) is 16%. Experimental
7
8
parameters:dp= 3.5mm, porosity ε= 0.3696.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 Fig.4. Comparison of pressure drops in Darcy regime(Rep:0.1-1) Fig.5. Comparison of pressure drops between
25
Darcy regime and near Darcy regime（Rep:0.99-25.9）
26
27 3.3 Nonlinear region（Rep>17）
28
29 In Fig. 6, the experimental data28 with a Reynolds number range of 17-459 is
30
31 compared and verified with equation (31) and the Ergun equation.
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47 Fig. 6 ε=0.35 pressure drop comparison（Rep:17-459) Fig. 7 ε=0.39 pressure drop comparison（Rep:84-103）
48
49
Experiment parameters: average particle diameter dp = 8.7mm, porosity ε = 0.35. It is
50 found that the two equations are in good agreement with the experimental data. The
51
52 maximum error of Ergun equation is 20%, and the maximum error of equation (31) is
53
54 13%. However, the average error of Ergun equation is 10%, and equation (31) is 11%.
55
56 Fig. 7 and Fig. 829quote the experiment data of dp=3mm, ε=0.39 and dp=8mm,
57
58 ε=0.408, respectively in the range of Reynolds number 84-1003 and 988-4274. It can
59
60
be seen from the figure that the calculation results of equation (31) are very consistent

11

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

 Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research Page 12 of 21

1
2
3
4 with the experiment value and better than the Ergun equation, and the average error of
5
6 equation (31) is only 1.6% and 3.8%.
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Fig. 8 ε=0.408 pressure drop comparison(Rep:988-4274) Fig. 9 ε= 0.4 pressure drop comparison(Rep:3589-10730)
23
24 Fig. 928 cites experimental data with a Reynolds number range of 3589-10730,
25
26 average particle diameter dp = 56.8mm, and porosity ε = 0.4. The comparison of
27
28 equation (31) with the Ergun equation shows that the maximum error of the Ergun
29
30 equation is 19 % and that of equation (31) is 20%. However, with the increase of
31
particle Reynolds number, the error of Ergun equation is also increasing, while the
32
33 error of equation(31) is decreasing.
34
35 It can be seen that when the Reynolds number is greater than 17, both equation
36
37 (31) and Ergun equation can predict the experimental data well. The pressure drop in
38
39 this region has a nonlinear square relationship with the velocity.
40
41 3.4 Further verification of the applicability of equation (31)
42
43 In order to use more experimental data to test the applicable range and accuracy
44
45 of equation (31), we change equation (31) into dimensionless equation (33) to
46
47
facilitate comparing a great deal of data together.
48 p  3d p2 Re p (33)
49 G （1.5 - 2.5   2  Cd）
 72  0.75
50
l 1    u s
2
1 
51 The above-mentioned 7 groups of data and the other 28 groups of data are also
52
53 dimensionless and plotted in Fig. 10 respectively. Experimental parameters: Reynolds
54
55
number range 0.006-10730; porosity range 0.32-0.882; experimental media includes
56 sand, ball bed; flowing media includes water and air. From Fig. 10, it can be seen that
57
58 the calculated value of equation (33) are in good agreement with 35 groups of
59
60 experimental data, indicating that equation (33) has good applicability.

12

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 13 of 21 Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23 Fig. 10. Comparison of 35 sets of experimental data sets
24 Error calculation: when the range of dimensionless Reynolds number is 0-500,
25
26 the average error is 21.2%; when the range of dimensionless Reynolds number is
27
28 500-1000, the average error is 9.4%; when the range of dimensionless Reynolds
29
30 number is 1000-2000, the average error is 18.1%; when it is greater than 2000, the
31
32 average error is 17.7%. However, it can be seen that when the dimensionless
33
34
Reynolds number is less than 36, the individual data is abnormally large, and this
35 corresponds to the Pre-Darcy regime. This regime’s laws have not been uniformly
36
37 recognized, so further research is needed.
38
39 4. Detailed comparative analysis of Ergun equation and equation
40
41
42 (31)
43
44 4.1.Comparison of viscous terms between Ergen equation and equation 31
45
46
Most researchers believe that in order to highlight the contribution of the viscous
47 term to the total resistance under the small Reynolds number, it is reasonable to use
48
49 the analog Carman equation to change the coefficient of the viscous term of the Ergun
50
51 equation to 180. The coefficient a of Ergun equation in Fig. 4 and Fig. 5 is changed
52
53 into 180, and the items of the two formulas are split and compared. Because the data
54
55 in Fig. 3 belong to the Pre-Darcy region where the resistance mechanism is not yet
56
57
clear, they will not be compared here.
58 Observing Fig. 11 and Fig. 12, it is found that the viscous term of the Ergun
59
60

13

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

 Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research Page 14 of 21

1
2
3
4 equation is significantly lower than the experimental value, indicating that the
5
6 viscosity term of the Ergun equation is insufficiently considered at low Reynolds, the
7
8
coefficient of Ergun equation 150 needs to be increased. When the coefficient is
9 changed from 150 to 180, the viscous term of Ergun equation is exactly Carman
10
11 equation, and the error between calculated value and experimental value is obviously
12
13 reduced.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30 Fig. 11 Comparison of each part (Based on the experimental data of Fig. 4) Fig. 12 Comparison of each part
31
(Based on the experimental data of Fig. 5)
32
33 The results show that both the pressure drop in the tube flow and the pressure
34
35 drop of flowing around in equation 31 are less than those in the viscous term of Ergun
36
37 equation, but the sum of the two terms is in good agreement with the experimental
38
39 data, which also proves that the analysis of porous media flow in the second part of
40
41 this paper is in line with the reality. However, the inertial term formula of the Ergun
42
43
equation and the variable resistance formula of equation 31 are very small. Below the
44 Reynolds number 1, it is almost close to 0. In the interval of 1 to 30, the Ergun inertial
45
46 term increases significantly faster than the variable diameter resistance of equation 31.
47
48 It can be seen that the error of Ergun equation at low Reynolds number mainly
49
50 depends on the viscous term formula. Under this condition, it is reasonable to modify
51
52 the coefficient.
53 4.2.Comparing the inertial terms of the Ergen equation and equation 31
54
55 Fig. 7, Fig. 8 and Fig. 9 show that when the Reynolds number continues to
56
57 increase, the prediction of pressure drop by Ergun equation is relatively large, which
58
indicates that Ergun's inertia term coefficient may exaggerate the contribution of
59
60

14

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 15 of 21 Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research

1
2
3
4 inertial term to total resistance under some conditions. In order to clearly see the
5
6 contribution of inertial resistance, the data in Fig. 7-Fig. 9 are split and compared with
7
8
Ergun equation and equation 31.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 Fig. 13 Comparison of each part (Based on the experimental data of Fig. 7) Fig. 14 Comparison of each part
25 (Based on the experimental data of Fig. 8 )
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42 Fig. 15 Comparison of each part (Based on the experimental data of Fig. 9)
43
44
For the three sets of data for large Reynolds numbers, Fig. 13-Fig. 15, as the
45 Reynolds number increases, the viscous term of Ergun and the viscous term of
46
47 equation 31 both tend to 0, and the inertial term of Ergun increases rapidly. After the
48
49 Reynolds number is greater than 800, the inertial term is already greater than the
50
51 experimental value, and the inertial term becomes larger and larger as the Reynolds
52
53 number increases. This shows that the inertia term of Ergun equation is over
54
55
considered at high Reynolds number, and the existing coefficient of 1.75 needs to be
56 reduced in practical application.
57
58 The variable diameter inertia term and the flow-around inertial inertia term of
59
60 equation 31 also increase as the Reynolds number increases, but the increased speed

15

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

 Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research Page 16 of 21

1
2
3
4 and value are smaller than Ergun's inertia term, but the sum of the variable-diameter
5
6 inertia term and the flow around inertia term is close to the experimental value.
7
8 5.Conclusions
9
10
11 (1) Based on the porous media tube-sphere model proposed in this paper, and using
12
13
the continuous medium theory, the equation for calculating the resistance without any
14 experience constant is derived:
15
16
p 721      31    2 31    2
2
3 5
17  u s      2  u s  Cd us
18 l  dp
3 2
2 2  4 d p
3
4 3 d p
19
20 This equation is a function of porosity, tortuosity, fluid density, fluid viscosity,
21
22 and average particle diameter, and its predicted value agrees well with 35 sets of
23
24
experimental data. Experimental parameters include: particle diameter range
25 0.0375mm-56.8mm; porosity range 0.32-0.882; Reynolds number range 0.006-10730.
26
27 Because the equation(31) is based on the theory of continuum media theory, the
28
29 equation(31) can only be applied to porous media with continuous media flow in
30
31 practical applications, and the pore size of the porous media needs to be micrometer
32
33 and above. It is no longer applicable to the porous medium in the nanometer pore size
34
35
range.
36 (2) A reasonable tube-sphere model is proposed. The resistance in the model includes
37
38 the viscous resistance of the tube flow, the flow resistance around a small sphere, and
39
40 the variable diameter resistance in the tube. The model and related assumptions are
41
42 verified by 35 sets of data.
43
44 (3) The equation(31) is also compared with the Ergun equation at the same time.
45
46
The Ergun equation gives a better prediction at low Reynolds number values in Fig. 9
47 and the whole range of Fig. 6. However, it can be seen that most results are better than
48
49 the Ergun equation. In addition, the comparison also shows that our equation and
50
51 Carman equation both agree well with the experiment data when 0.011<Re<10, but
52
53 our equation is better when Re>10.
54
55 (4) The analysis in the article shows that there is no consistent law between the
56
57
pressure drop and velocity in the Pre-Darcy regime. The experimental data of
58 different group of researchers is quite different, and the prediction errors of all
59
60 equations are quite large, so further experiment and theory research is needed for

16

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 17 of 21 Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research

1
2
3
4 Pre-Darcy regime.
5
6 (5) It is found that the viscosity term of Ergun equation is not considered enough at
7
8
small Reynolds number, and the empirical coefficient of equation 150 needs to be
9 increased. At high Reynolds number, the inertia term is over considered, and the
10
11 empirical coefficient of equation 1.5 needs to be reduced.
12
13 (6) At low Reynolds number, it is found that the viscous of our tube ball model comes
14
15 from the tube flow and the flow around. At high Reynolds number, the inertia comes
16
17 from the variable diameter flow and the flow around. The sum of the two parts can
18
19
better reflect the resistance contribution of each region of porous media.
20 5. Acknowledgement
21
22 This research was funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant
23 No1.51764046,Grant No2.51768054,Grant No3.51866013),Inner Mongolia University teaching
24 reform fund (Gran No. 0302051601) and Natural Science Foundation of Inner Mongolia
25
(Grant No.2018MS05035 ).
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
.
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

17

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

 Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research Page 18 of 21

1
2
3
4 Reference
5
6
7
(1) Zheng, K. C.; Wen, Z. Overview of Frontier Fields-Research Progress of Forced
8 Convection Heat Transfer in Porous Media. Act. Phys. 2012, 61, 532-542．
9
10 (2) Nihad, Dukhan.; Mustafa, Ozdemir. Flow Regimes in Packed Beds of Spheres
11
12 from Pre-Darcy to Turbulent. Springer. Science. Business. Media. Dordrecht. 2014,
13
14 14, 143.
15
16 (3) Bear, J. Dynamics of Fluids in Porous Media; China Construction Industry Press:
17
18
Beijing, 1983.
19 (4) Ergun, S. Fluid flow through packed columns. Chemical. Engineering. Progress.
20
21 1952, 48, 89-94.
22
23 (5) Ward, J. Turbulent flow in porous media. J. Hydraul. Div. 1964, 90, 10-12.
24
25 (6) S, Irmay. Theoretical model of flow through porous media.Transf. Water. Porous.
26
27 Media. 1965, 29, 36-43.
28
29
(7) Macdonald, I. F.; Elsayed, M.S.; K. Mow. Flow through porous media-the Ergun
30 equation revisited. Ind. Eng. Chem. 1979, 18, 199-208.
31
32 (8) I. Kececioglu,; Y. Jiang,; Flow through porous media of packed spheres saturated
33
34 with water. J. Fluids. Eng. 1994, 116, 164-170.
35
36 (9) Kovacs, G. Seepage Hydraulics; Elsevier Scientifific Publishing Company:
37
38 Amsterdam, 1981.
39
40
(10) Fand, R. M.; Thinakaran, R.; The influence of the wall on flow through pipes
41 packed with spheres. J. Fluids. Eng. 1990, 112, 84-88.
42
43 (11) Kadlec, R. H.; Wallace, S.; Treatment Wetlands; CRC Press: Boca Raton, USA,
44
45 2008.
46
47 (12) Wang, Y. B.; Liu, H. F.; Feng, Y. H. Study in pressure drop in CDQ chamber.
48
49 Fuel. Chem. Proc. 2003, 34, 236-238.
50
51
(13) Li, Z. P.; Sun, Z. N.; Liao, Y. H. The research on the resistance characteristics of
52 microsphere packed bed porous media in non-Darcy regime. Applied. Science and
53
54 Technology. 2009, 36, 61-64.
55
56 (14) Xin, Y.; Tianhong, Y. Experimental Investigation of Flow Domain Division in
57
58 Beds Packed with Different Sized Particles. Energys. 2017, 25, 17-18.
59
60

18

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 19 of 21 Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research

1
2
3
4 (15) Wu, J. S. Analysis of resistance for flow through porous media. Huazhong
5
6 University of Science and Technology. 2006, 10-30.
7
8
(16) Tong, W.; Kun, C. Z. Experimental study and theoretical analysis of fluid
9 resistance in porous media of glass spheres. Chin. Phys. B. 2017, 26, 701-705.
10
11 (17) Zheng, K. C.; Wang, T. Fractal analysis of flow resistance in random porous
12
13 media based on the staggered pore-throat model. International Journal of Heat and
14
15 Mass Transfer. 2017, 115, 225-231.
16
17 (18) Yu, B. M. Transport physics of fractal porous media; Science Press: Beijing,
18
19
2014.
20 (19) Mohammad, Bagher, Salahi,; Mohammad, Sedghi, Asl,; Mansour, Parvizi.
21
22 Nonlinear Flow through a Packed-Column Experiment. J. Hydrol. Eng. 2015, 20, 4-5.
23
24 (20) Yu, B. M.; J. H. Li,; Some fractal characters of porous media. Fractals complex
25
26 Geomet. Patterns Scaling Nat. Soc. 2011, 09, 365-372.
27
28 (21) Bear. Dynamics of Fluids in Porous Media; China Architecture &Building Press:
29
30
Beijing, 1983.
31 (22) P. C. Carman, Fluid flow through granular beds. Transac. Inst. Chem. Eng. Lond.
32
33 1937, 15, 150-166.
34
35 (23) Dullien, F. A. L. Porous Media, Fluid Transport and Pore Structure; Academic
36
37 Press: Ontario, 1979.
38
39 (24) Yu, B. M.; Li, J. H. A geometry model for tortuosity of flow path in porous
40
41
media. Chinese Physics Letters. 2004, 21, 1569-1571.
42 (25) Faith, A.; Morrison. Data Correlation for Drag Coefficient for Sphere.
43
44 Department of Chemical Engineering. 2016, 56, 23-24.
45
46 (26) H. P. G.; DArcy. Les Fontaines Publiques de la Villede Dijon; Victor Dalmont:
47
48 Paris, 1856.
49
50 (27) Kundu, P.; Kumar, V.; Mishra, I. M . Experimental and numerical investigation
51
52
of fluid flow hydrodynamics in porous media: Characterization of Darcy and
53 non-Darcy flow regimes. Powder Technology. 2016, 303, 278-291.
54
55 (28) Mohammad, S. A.; Hassan, R.; Reza, S. Non-Darcy Flow of Water Through a
56
57 Packed Column Test. Springer-Verlag. 2014, 101, 219-221.
58
59 (29) Li, Z. P.; Sun, Z. N. Study on Unidirectional Fluid Flow Characteristics in a
60

19

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

 Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research Page 20 of 21

1
2
3
4 Pellet Bed Porous Media Channel. Engineering Science and Technology. 2011, S1,
5
6 125-130.
7
8
(30) Charles, A.; Wentz, J. R. Pressure Drops in the Flow of Gases Through and
9 Particles Distended Beds of Spherical Packed. A. 1. Ch. E. Journal. 1963, 9(1), 82-83.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

20

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 21 of 21 Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
40
41