scholarly journals Investigation of drag models for the two fluid simulation of Geldart group A powders

2016 ◽  
Vol 304 ◽  
pp. 41-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
X. Lu ◽  
D.J. Holland
Particuology ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 38 ◽  
pp. 165-173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Atta Ullah ◽  
Iqra Jamil ◽  
Adnan Hamid ◽  
Kun Hong

Author(s):  
Tian Tian ◽  
Zhengrui Jia ◽  
Shujun Geng ◽  
Xiaoxing Liu

AbstractIn this work the influences of solid viscosity and the way to scale-down traditional drag models on the predicted hydrodynamics of Geldart A particles in a lab-scale gas-solid bubbling fluidized bed are investigated. To evaluate the effects of drag models, the modified Gibilaro et al. drag model (constant correction factor) and the EMMS drag model (non-constant correction factor) are tested. And the influences of solid viscosity are assessed by considering the empirical model proposed by Gidaspow et al. (1997, Turbulence, Viscosity and Numerical Simulation of FCC Particles in CFB. Fluidization and Fluid-particle Systems, AIChE Annual Meeting, Los Angeles, 58–62) and the models based on kinetic theory of granular flow (KTGF) with or without frictional stress. The resulting hydrodynamics by incorporating the different combinations of the drag model and solid viscosity model into two-fluid model (TFM) simulations are compared with the experimental data of Zhu et al. (2008, Detailed Measurements of Flow Structure inside a Dense Gas-Solids Fluidized Bed.”Powder Technological180:339–349). The simulation results show that the predicted hydrodynamics closely depends on the setting of solid viscosity. When solid viscosity is calculated from the empirical model of Gidaspow et al., both drag models can reasonably predict the radial solid concentration profiles and particle velocity profiles. When the KTGF viscosity model without frictional stress is adopted, the EMMS drag model significantly over-estimates the bed expansion, whereas the modified Gibilaro et al. drag model can still give acceptable radial solid concentration profiles but over-estimate particle upwards and downwards velocity. When KTGF viscosity model with frictional stress is chosen, both drag models predict the occurrence of slugging. At this time, the particle velocity profiles predicted by EMMS drag model are still in well agreement with the experimental data, but the bed expansion is under-estimated.


Author(s):  
Gregor Petkovšek ◽  
Mohamed Ahmed Ali Mohamed Hassan ◽  
Darren Lumbroso ◽  
Marta Roca Collell

2015 ◽  
Vol 286 ◽  
pp. 257-268 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmadreza Abbasi Baharanchi ◽  
Seckin Gokaltun ◽  
George Dulikravich

Energy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 216 ◽  
pp. 119257
Author(s):  
Zihong Xia ◽  
Jisheng Long ◽  
Shuai Yan ◽  
Li Bai ◽  
Hailiang Du ◽  
...  

Fluids ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Palermo

By means of the formation of vortices in the nonlinear phase, the Kelvin Helmholtz instability is able to redistribute the flux of energy of the solar wind that flows parallel to the magnetopause. The energy transport associated with the Kelvin Helmholtz instability contributes significantly to the magnetosphere and magnetosheath dynamics, in particular at the flanks of the magnetopause where the presence of a magnetic field perpendicular to the velocity flow does not inhibit the instability development. By means of a 2D two-fluid simulation code, the behavior of the Kelvin Helmholtz instability is investigated in the presence of typical conditions observed at the magnetopause. In particular, the energy penetration in the magnetosphere is studied as a function of an important parameter such as the solar wind velocity. The influence of the density jump at the magnetopause is also discussed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document