Transport in Porous Media 27: 99118, 1997. c 1997 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

99

Wall Region Porosity Distributions for Packed Beds of Uniform Spheres with Modied and Unmodied Walls
JON D. MCWHIRTER1 , MICHAEL E. CRAWFORD2 and DALE E. KLEIN2
College of Engineering, Box 8060, Idaho State University, Pocatello, ID 83209 U.S.A. e-mail: mcwhjon@if.if.isu.edu 2 Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Texas at Austin, U.S.A. (Received: 26 March 1996; in nal form: 27 November 1996) Abstract. A mathematical derivation of the porosity (local void fraction) distribution near the walls of packed beds of uniform spheres is presented. This investigation supports the study of methods of reducing or eliminating the so-called wall effect, or bypass ow, which accompanies the increase in porosity when spheres come in contact with a solid boundary. Limiting the amount of bypass ow is important in certain applications such as in packed bed nuclear reactors where bypass ow allows some coolant to avoid the high power density core region. Four basic porosity distributions are determined. The rst investigates the case where spheres against a at wall are packed in the tightest possible packing density. This density is then reduced by changing the sphere spacing until the minimum porosity matches that obtained experimentally. In the other cases, the effect of various ways of embedding spheres in the wall on the wall region porosity is examined. By partially embedding spheres in the wall, the porosity at the wall is reduced and the most direct cause of the bypass ow is thereby eliminated. The porosity is found by evaluating the ratio of the solid area to total area in a plane which is parallel to the wall. The local porosity is derived as a function of distance from the wall in the region within one-half a sphere diameter from the wall. The average porosity of the wall region is also calculated. This research has application to ow situations such as packed bed chemical reactors, pebble bed nuclear reactors and ow in packed beds. Key words: packed bed, bypass ow, well effect.
1

Nomenclature

A d D g k r R S V y z  "

area. sphere diameter. container diameter. unoccupied normal distance from wall. dimensionless distance from wall, r=R. normal distance from wall. sphere radius, d=2. spacing parameter. volume. radius of circle formed by intersection of a sphere with a plane parallel to a wall. local distance from sphere center normal to a wall. angle between specic planes. porosity.

100 1. Introduction

JON D. MCWHIRTER ET AL.

The distribution of porosity in the immediate vicinity of a solid boundary may have a profound effect on the overall dynamics of uids owing through porous media composed of uniform spheres. The porosity, dened as the local uid volume fraction, is unity at the wall and then converges to a smaller value. This peak in the porosity at the wall generally causes a greater ow rate of uid near the wall. A possible method of eliminating or reducing the wall effect is to implant spheres into the wall, since the implanted spheres reduce the porosity at the wall. This work presents a derivation of the porosity near the wall as a function of distance from the wall for several sphere packings: face centered cubic sphere pattern embedded in a wall; body centered orthorhombic sphere pattern embedded in a wall; and modied face centered cubic sphere pattern with a variable lattice separation embedded in a wall. 2. Background The ow of uids through packed beds composed of uniform spherical shapes is encountered frequently in engineering. One aspect of uid ow within such porous media is the bypass ow which occurs near the boundaries in internal ow. This bypass ow, which is also called the wall effect, has been investigated by many researchers (Price, 1968; Marivoet et al., 1974; Lerou and Froment, 1977; Bahnen and Stojanoff, 1987). Several researchers believe the primary cause of the wall effect is the larger pore sizes occurring at the boundaries of the packed sphere container, while other factors, such as the degree of randomness of the sphere packing near the wall encourage bypass ow to a lesser degree (Cohen and Metzner, 1981; Epstein, 1988). The larger pore size at the boundaries occurs since the spheres adjacent to the wall cannot pack together as tightly as spheres away from the wall. The porosity, ", is unity at the wall and reaches a steady value in an oscillatory manner away from the wall as reported and discussed by Benenati and Brosilow (1962), Ridgeway and Tarbuck (1968), Haughey and Beveridge (1969), and Schneider and Rippin (1988). Bypass ow can be benecial or detrimental, depending upon the application. Heat transfer through the boundary of a packed bed chemical reactor is one situation where bypass ow may help: the larger velocity gradient at the wall augments heat transfer at the wall. Bypass ow near the walls of a gas-cooled packed bed nuclear reactor diverts coolant ow away from the high power density core region without simultaneous benet. Methods of suppressing bypass ow are needed for those applications where bypass ow is not desirable. The simplest method of accomplishing suppression of the wall effect is to reduce the relative contribution of the wall effect to the overall uid mechanics

POROSITY DISTRIBUTIONS FOR UNIFORM SPHERES

101

Figure 1. Spheres in tightest possible conguration in contact with at wall.

by forcing the ratio of the container diameter, D , to the sphere diameter, d, to be above 30 (Cohen and Metzner, 1981). This can be accomplished by using a larger container, smaller spheres, or both. However, D=d ratios of less than 30 are common in engineering practice (Rose, 1950; Fand et al., 1987; Chu and Ng, 1989). A possible method of suppressing the wall effect for situations where the D=d ratio is below 30 is to embed spheres into the wall. This work presents a derivation of the porosity as a function of distance from the wall for spheres in contact with a wall, a face centered cubic sphere pattern embedded in a wall, a body centered orthorhombic sphere pattern embedded in a wall, and a modied face centered cubic sphere pattern with a variable lattice separation embedded in a wall.

3. Porosity Distribution for Spheres in Contact with a Flat Wall The actual porosity distribution for randomly packed uniform spheres in contact with a at wall has been determined experimentally (Benenati and Brosilow, 1962). As a tool for comparison, this porosity distribution will be examined analytically. Initially the spheres in contact with the wall are considered to be packed in the tightest possible arrangement, body centered orthorhombic. Dene a study volume as that region formed by the centers of three adjacent spheres in contact with the wall and one sphere radius R deep. The objective is to nd the porosity as a function of the distance from the wall. As shown in Figure 1, the normal distance from the wall is denoted r . The local coordinate from the sphere center also perpendicular to the wall is z , and y is the radius of the circle formed by the intersection of the sphere with a plane parallel to the wall and a distance z from the sphere center. The local porosity, ", is dened as the ratio of the void volume to the total volume. When this volume becomes very thin in the direction normal to the wall, i.e., r or z small, the porosity is equal

( )

102

JON D. MCWHIRTER ET AL.

to the ratio of the void area to the total area in a plane parallel to the wall

A(r)void, jj to wall Atotal, jj to wall

rAtotal, jj to wall
V (r) =
lim 0
V void, jj to wall = "(r); (1) r! total, jj to wall where A(r )void, jj to wall is the area of the study volume void space in the plane parallel to the wall, Atotal, jj to wall is the total study volume area in the plane parallel to the wall, and
r is the differential distance normal to the wall. The total

=
lim 0 r!

r

Ar+
r void,

jj

to wall

+Ar
r void,

2

jj

to wall

study volume area in the plane parallel to the wall must equal the sum of the study volume void area in the plane parallel to the wall and the study volume solid area in the same plane at a given distance from the wall. The solid area parallel to the wall can be visualized as the intersection between the solid and a plane parallel to the wall (hereafter referred to as solid intersection area). The relationship between the porosity and solid and total areas is therefore

Atotal, jj to wall = A(r)void, jj to wall + A(r)solid, jj to wall ; A(r)solid, jj to wall 1 "(r ) = Avoid, jj to wall : A(r)solid, jj to wall = 1 (Asphere, jj to wall ) 2

(2)

The area contribution parallel to the wall from each of the three spheres in the study volume totals to one half, i.e., three one-sixth segments, so (3)

at a given position from the wall. The solid intersection area parallel to the wall at a position z from the sphere center contributed by a sphere tangent to the wall is the area of a circle of radius y , or A z sphere, to wall y 2  R2 z 2 . To present this area in terms of the distance from the wall, r , rst note that z R r , so A r sphere, to wall  2Rr r 2 . The area of the study volume in the plane p parallel to the wall, Awall, to wall , is 3R2 . The porosity is then

()

()
1

jj

= ( jj

jj

= (

A  r "(r)spheres against = Asolid, jj to wall = p R 3 total, jj to wall wall, tight  p

wall, tight

1 2

r 2 ; R
(4)

"(r)spheres against = 1

r R

1 2

r 2 : R

POROSITY DISTRIBUTIONS FOR UNIFORM SPHERES

103

The average porosity within the study volume is the total void volume (space not occupied by spheres) in the study volume divided by the total volume. The void volume of an innitesimal region with thickness r is dV r void " r dVtotal " r Atotal, to wall r. Thus, the average porosity of the entire study volume is found by integrating the porosity from the wall to a sphere radius away from the wall, or

()

jj

() = ()

"wall region

R Vvoid = study volume dV (r)void space = Vtotal Vtotal RR "(r)A dr = r=0 RA wall, jj to wall total, jj to wall

By dening k

= r=R, dk = 1=R dr, this integral is readily converted to

Z 1

=R
1

r=0

"(r) dr:

(5)

"wall region =

The average porosity for spheres in contact with a at wall in the range 0 6 r=R 6 1 is then

k=0

"(k) dk:
k =1 
0

(6)

"wall region spheres =

against wall, tight against wall, tight

 p (k
3

1 2

(k) ) dk = 1
2

3 3

 p;
(7)

"wall region spheres = 0:3954:

The value of the minimum porosity should occur at r R (since the solid intersection area is largest there) and can be veried by differentiating the expression for " r and setting it equal to zero

()

d " dr :

8 <

 1 r  (r)spheres against ; = p3 R R2 = 0: wall, tight  p = 0:0931:

9 =

(8)

The minimum porosity is therefore

"min, spheres against = "(r = R)spheres against = 1

wall, tight wall, tight

2 3

(9)

The above value of "min, spheres against wall tight is notably smaller than the minimum porosity of a randomly packed bed of uniform spheres, "random, min 0:2, found by Benenati and Brosilow (1962). This is expected since spheres at the

104

JON D. MCWHIRTER ET AL.

Figure 2. Spheres with variable spacing in contact with at wall.

wall of a randomly packed container will not actually pack in the tightest possible conguration. In order to produce a model of porosity which more closely agrees with the empirical results, the sphere packing arrangement in the study volume will be adjusted so that the minimum porosity agrees with the results of Benenati and Brosilow [1962]. The new arrangement of the spheres is depicted in Figure 2. The study volume for this arrangement is that region formed by the centers of two spheres a distance 2P apart and the center of a third sphere in contact with the rst two, and a distance R away from the wall. The area contribution parallel to the wall of the spheres in the study volume is again half the area contribution of a single sphere (sum of internal angles of a triangle equals  ). The solid intersection area of the study volume in the plane parallel to the wall is 1 2P 4R2 P 2 1=2 . 2 Note that for the case studied previously, P R. The value of P which makes "min, spheres against wall 0:2 will be found. The porosity as a function of distance from the wall is

( )( )(

"(r)spheres against wall =

packing conguration, while the upper limit corresponds to the case where the two spheres in the middle (spheres A and B in Figure 2) move vertically toward each other until contact is made. The porosity again reaches its minimum at r R. The minimum porosity is

(2k k2 ) q : (10) 2(P=R) 4 (P=R)2 This expression agrees with the previous case when P = R, as expected. This p expression is valid for R < P < 3R: the lower limit corresponds to the tightest

Asolid, jj to wall Atotal, jj to wall = 1

(pRr r2) 2 2P 4R 2 P 2

=1

"spheres against = "(r = R)spheres against wall

wall, min

=1

(P=R)


4

(P=R)2

(11)

POROSITY DISTRIBUTIONS FOR UNIFORM SPHERES

105

This is set equal to Benenati and Brosilows (1962) "min 0:2. Solving for P yields two solutions, P p 1:5428R, and P 1:2726R. Both of these solutions are in the range R < P < 3R. However, these two answers correspond to the same arrangement: if P is set to be one of these solutions and the sphere arrangement is rotated by 90 degrees in the plane parallel to the wall, the other spacing results. When either value of the spacing P=R is inserted in the expression for the porosity, the result is

"(r)spheres against wall = 1 "wall region, spheres =

against wall

0:8f2r=R

(r=R)2g:

(12)

The average porosity in the wall region is

Z 1

k =0
Z 1

"(k)spheres against wall dk

2 41

=
"wall region = 1  3

k =0

(2k k2) 5dk; q 2(P=R) 4 (P=R)2

1 4

(13)

(P=R)

(P=R)2

= 0:4667;

for either value of P . This compares with Benenati and Brosilows (1962) experimentally determined value of " 0:43 for the entire packed bed. The graph in Figure 3 shows the wall region porosity distribution for this case along with the average porosity. This section concludes with the claim that a typical wall region r 6 R for a bed of randomly packed uniform spheres against a bare wall may be modeled by the sphere arrangement shown in Figure 2 with a spacing P 1:273R:

4. Porosity Distribution for Modied Face Centered Cubic The porosity distribution for an embedded modied face-centered cubic (MFCC) conguration will now be examined. This conguration is called modied because it is obtained by starting with four half- buried spheres touching each other in a square pattern with a sphere on top touching all four spheres below. The spacing of the four spheres is uniformly relaxed until the top sphere just touches the wall. The four base spheres are embedded halfway into the wall. Susskind and Becker [1967] referred to this pattern as a rhombohedral geometry (although none of the spheres were embedded in the wall). Figure 4 shows this arrangement. The study volume selected for this arrangement is the square area in the plane parallel to the wall with corners coinciding with the centers of the embedded spheres, and one sphere radius from the wall. The area of this study volume in the plane parallel to the wall is 6R2 . For one of the spheres embedded in the wall, the

106

JON D. MCWHIRTER ET AL.

Figure 3. Porosity, spheres in contact with at wall P=R = 1:273 vs. sphere radii from wall.

Figure 4. MFCC conguration.

vertical distance z coincides with the normal distance from the wall, r . Hence, for an embedded sphere, the area in the plane parallel to the wall a distance r from the wall is

A(r)embedded sphere, jj to wall = (R2 r2): A(r)tangent sphere, jj to wall = (2Rr r2):

(14)

For the sphere tangent to the wall, as in the case of spheres on a at wall, the expression for the area in the plane parallel to the wall a distance r from the wall is (15)

The total solid intersection area contains contributions from the embedded spheres and from the sphere tangent to the wall. The net area contribution of the

POROSITY DISTRIBUTIONS FOR UNIFORM SPHERES

107

Figure 5. Modied face centered cubic wall region porosity.

embedded spheres in the study volume equals the area of one whole embedded sphere, so

Asolid, jj to wall = Aembedded sphere, jj to wall + Atangent sphere, jj to wall ; Asolid, jj to wall = (R2 r2) + (2Rr r2) = (R2 + 2Rr 2r2):
Therefore,
2 A 2Rr "(r)MFCC = Asolid, jj to wall = (R + 6R2 total, jj to wall ( )  1 + 2 r 2  r 2 ; =6 R R ( )  1 + 2 r 2  r 2 : "(r)MFFC = 1 6 R R

(16)

2r 2

)
(17)

From this expression, the average porosity in this region (within one half a ball diameter from the wall) is computed

"wall region, MFCC =

Z Z
0

r=R=1 k =1

"(r=R) d(r=R)
1 6

[1

f1 + 2k

2k 2 g dk;

(18)

"wall region, MFCC = 1

2 9

= 0:3019:

A graph showing the wall region porosity distribution and average porosity is presented in Figure 5.

108

JON D. MCWHIRTER ET AL.

Figure 6. Body centered orthorhombic conguration.

5. Porosity Distribution for Modied Body Centered Orthorhombic A sphere packing pattern was sought which approximates the macroscopic properties of a random packed bed arrangement far from the wall. The body centered orthorhombic (BCOR) pattern was selected after studying Goodling and Khader (1985). They determined that the average porosity and coordination number (average number of spheres in contact with any other sphere) of a bed of randomly packed uniform spheres could be approximated by a BCOR sphere packing. Bernal and Mason (1960) corroborate these ndings. The analytical study to determine the porosity distribution for the BCOR conguration will be discussed. The BCOR sphere packing arrangement is depicted in Figure 6. Top, side, and front views of a portion of the lattice are shown in the upper left, lower left, and lower right positions of the gure, respectively. The upper right position depicts the plane selected for study. An arrangement was sought which provides some space between spheres? . Each sphere in the plane shown below has been labeled and the corresponding location within each view of the arrangement is shown. Figure 7 shows the dimensions between various spheres in the plane of interest. The plane ii through the centers of spheres A, B, C and D just barely intersects spheres E, F and G. This intersection can be avoided by forming another plane parallel to and just left of and below the original plane so that spheres E, F and
? The spheres for all these arrangements could be embedded in a wall by placing the spheres in drilled holes. If a pattern with embedded spheres in contact were selected, holes drilled into a container would have to be in contact. This is prohibitively difcult from a fabrication standpoint.

POROSITY DISTRIBUTIONS FOR UNIFORM SPHERES

109

Figure 7. BCOR conguration.

Figure 8. Adjustment of plane for Body Centered Orthorhombic conguration.

G are tangent to this new plane? . This modication is presented in Figure 8. This arrangement will be referred to hereafter as modied body centered orthorhombic (BCOR). The porosity for this arrangement will be found. The study volume for this arrangement is the rectangular region formed by the centers of spheres B, C, and D and one sphere radius from the wall as shown in Figure 7. Note that the area contributions of spheres E, F, and G must be included in the calculations. The solid intersection areas of spheres E, F, and G sum to a whole sphere within this study volume, as do the solid intersection areas of spheres B, C, and D. The distance the plane is adjusted must be determined so that the solid intersection areas each sphere contributes in the plane parallel to the wall can be calculated. As shown in Figure 9,
? The intersection between the spheres labeled E, F and G is undesirable from an implementation standpoint because holes of two different sizes would have to be drilled in a container. One drilled hole size would correspond to a sphere diameter (spheres A, B, C and D) while the other would correspond to the diameter of the area of intersection between the sphere E, F and G and the plane of the wall. This would be very tedious from a construction viewpoint.

110

JON D. MCWHIRTER ET AL.

Figure 9. Body Centered Orthorhombic geometry.

Figure 10. Geometry for sphere embedded in wall.

the adjusted plane is offset from the original plane by the value R 1 cos  , where  is the angle between the plane formed through the centers of spheres F and G and perpendicular to the wall and the plane passing through the centers of spheres C, F and G. This angle is also the angle between a plane passing through the centers of spheres B, C and D, and a plane passing through the center of sphere C tangent to spheres B and D. This latter observation on the p angle  reveals that the tangent of  is 0.5, so  26:57 degrees, and cos  2= 5. The calculation of the wall region porosity in this case can be simplied by dividing the study volume into two regions. The rst region extends from the wall to R 1 cos  , and the second from R 1 cos  to R.

POROSITY DISTRIBUTIONS FOR UNIFORM SPHERES

111

Figure 11. Geometry for sphere tangent to wall.

Figure 10 shows one of the spheres embedded in the wall, such as spheres B, C and D. Relationships for the analysis become

z = R(1 cos ) r; 0 6 r 6 R(1 cos ); z = r R(1 cos ); R(1 cos ) 6 r 6 R; A(z)embedded sphere, jj to wall = y2 = (R2 z2); A(r)embedded sphere, jj to wall = fR2 [R(1 cos ) r]2 g; 0 6 r 6 R(1 cos ); A(r)embedded sphere, jj to wall = (R2 [r R(1 cos )]2 ); R(1 cos ) 6 r 6 R:

(19)

The contribution to the area parallel to the plane of the wall from the tangent spheres such as spheres E, F and G will be found. Figure 11 depicts one of these spheres. For this case, the expression for the solid intersection area is valid for 0 6 r 6 R. Since z R r , then

= A(z)tangent sphere = y2 = (R2 z2 ) = (R2 (R r)2); A(r)tangent sphere = (2Rr r2):

(20)

Recall that the solid intersection areas of spheres B, C and D sum to one whole sphere area in the plane parallel to the wall, as do the solid intersection areas of spheres E, F and G. Therefore,

Asolid, jj to wall = [fR2 [R(1 cos ) r]2 g + (2Rr r2)]; 0 6 r 6 R(1 cos ); Asolid, jj to wall = [fR2 [r R(1 cos )2 g + (2Rr r2)]; R(1 cos ) 6 r 6 R:

(21)

112

JON D. MCWHIRTER ET AL.

p The 2total area of the study volume in the plane parallel to the wall plane is p 15(D =2) = 2 15R2 . Therefore, 1 "(r )mod BCOR A = Asolid, jj to wall total, jj to wall "( ) #   r 2 + 2 r  r 2 = 2p15 1 (1 cos ) R R R 0 6 r=R 6 1 cos ; (22) 1 "(r )mod BCOR A = Asolid, jj to wall total, jj to wall "( ) #   r (1 cos )2 + 2 r  r 2 = 2p15 1 R R R 1 cos  6 r=R 6 1:
Upon comparing the solutions for the two regions and noting that


r (1 R

cos 

) = (1

2

r 2 ; cos ) R

(23)

it is seen that the solutions in each of these regions are equivalent. Hence,

"(r)mod BCOR  =1 p

"(

2 15

r (1 R

2= 5

2 )

r + 2R

r 2 R

0 6 r=R 6 1:

(24)

The average porosity for this pattern within a sphere radius from the wall will be found. As in the earlier work,

"wall region; mod BCOR

= =

Z
0

r=R=1

"(r=R)mod BCOR d(r=R)

2 15

Z
0

k =1 

 p f[1 (1

2= 5

))2 ] + 2k(2

2= 5

))

2k 2 g dk; (25)

POROSITY DISTRIBUTIONS FOR UNIFORM SPHERES

113

Figure 12. Wall region porosity for modied body centered orthorhombic conguration as a function of sphere radii from the wall.

Figure 13. Modied face centered cubic conguration.

where k

= r=R. Evaluating this integral yields

2 15 2= 5

"wall region; mod BCOR  = 1 p f[1 (1

)2] + (2

2= 5

2 3

g;

(26)

"wall region; mod BCOR = 0:4209:

A graph of the porosity distribution in the wall region for this case is presented in Figure 12 along with the average porosity.

114

JON D. MCWHIRTER ET AL.

6. Examination of Spacing of First Layer of Spheres on Wall Region Porosity for Modied Face Centered Cubic Finally, the wall region porosity as a function of a spacing parameter will be studied. The spacing parameter to be used is the distance from the wall of the rst layer of spheres beyond the embedded spheres in the face centered cubic pattern. The spacing among the spheres can be adjusted so the bottom of the upper sphere is at a distance g from the wall. The study volume is specied as that region one sphere radius from the wall, with sides consisting of planes normal to the wall cutting through the centers of adjacent embedded spheres as depicted in Figure 13. The spacing between the centers of the spheres embedded in the wall is denoted p by S . The cross diagonal distance is therefore 2S . The porosity can be found in terms of g by deriving a relationship between S and g . Applying the Pythagorean theorem to the triangle formed by the segments R g , 2R and half the diagonal spacing yields

4R

2S 2

!2

+ (g + R )2 ;

S 2 = 2f4R2 (g + R)2 g:

(27)

The solid intersection area contribution from the upper sphere will be zero for 0 6 r 6 g . The area contributions for the embedded spheres within the study volume total to one sphere. Therefore, the porosity in this region is 1

A "(r)mod FCC = Asolid, jj to wall total, jj to wall 2 r2 =  f4R(R (g + )R)2 g ; 0 6 r 6 g; 2 2   r
2  n 1 R o ; 0 6 r 6 g: =1 "(r)

mod FCC

(28)

2 4

It can be shown that 0 6 g 6 2 1 R. (The upper limit corresponds to the case where the embedded spheres come in contact, i.e., S 2R. This corresponds to the BCC conguration.) The region g 6 r 6 R, where the upper sphere must be included in the porosity calculations, will be considered. As before,

(p

g + 1
2 R

A(z)upper sphere = y2 = (R2 z2 ): (29) The relationship between z and r is z = R + g r = R (r g ). Therefore, A(r)upper spheres = y2 = fR2 [R (r g)]2 g; (g 6 r 6 R) (30)

POROSITY DISTRIBUTIONS FOR UNIFORM SPHERES

115

Figure 14. Porosity versus sphere radii from wall, modied FCC, various g .

and so now, by including the embedded spheres,

Asolid, jj to wall = (R2 r2) + fR2 [R (r g)]2 g; (g 6 r 6 R):

It follows that

(31)

A "(r)mod FCC = Asolid, jj to wall total, jj to wall 2 2 2 2 [R =  (R r f)4+ fR (g + R)2(gr g)] g ; 2 R2   n o g
2 r
2 + 1 1  r
1 R n R R o "(r) =1  ;
1
mod FCC

(g 6 r 6 R);
"(r)mod FCC = 1  n 2


g

2 R +1

(32)

1 4

o g + 1
2 ; R

r
2 R

0 6 r 6 g:

These formulae present the wall region porosity distribution for the modied FCC conguration as a function of the distance from the wall with g , the distance of the upper sphere from the wall, as a parameter. The graph is shown in Figure 14 for g=R 0:0, 0:2, and 0:4. It is useful to know how the average porosity in the wall region depends upon the parameter g ; the arrangement with minimum wall region porosity is an excellent candidate for a pattern to minimize the wall effect. Since the porosity is given

116

JON D. MCWHIRTER ET AL.

in two regions, the evaluation of the porosity will be evaluated for each of these regions.

"wall region; mod FCC   Z 1   r r = 0" R d R mod FCC     Z 1   Z g=R   r r r + r = 0 " R d " R d R R : g=R mod FCC mod FCC
The rst integral in Equation (33) is
Z
0

(33)

g=R <
:

 n (1 k2)
2 4

g R +1

n k
2 o ; dk = 4k 2
4

9 =

g + 1
2 o R
1 3

1 3 3

3g=R 5
0

g g = R n R 2
4 The second integral in Equation (33) is
8 Z 1 <

R g + 1
2 o : R

g
3

g=R :
2

 (1 k 2 ) +
2
1 3 3n

g + 1
2 o R
1

g 2 o 9 = R
; 3

dk

= 4k  2k 2 = (1

k +1 3
4

2 g R +1  g 3

ko

g
3 1 R 5 g=R

4 2 n g=R)  3 + 3 2

g 2R R
2 o : g R +1
 g 3

The sum of the integrals is

"mod FCC = (1 "mod FCC = 1

4 2 g=R) + g=R  3 + 3 2 4 n+ 1 3 3

R n

g 2R

 g 3

2 4

R g +1 R

g R:
o
2

g +Ro
2 g R +1

1 3

g
3 R ;
(34)

( = )

The wall region average porosity versus the parameter g=R is shown in Figure 15. The gure shows that when the rst layer sphere isp tangent to the wall g 0 , the average porosity is higher than for a BCC g 2 1 R conguration.

( =(

) )

POROSITY DISTRIBUTIONS FOR UNIFORM SPHERES

117

Figure 15. Wall region average porosity for modied face centered cubic as a function of the distance (sphere radii) of upper sphere from wall.

Figure 16. Wall region porosity.

7. Conclusions and Recommendations for Future Work The porosity distributions in the wall region for MFCC, BCOR and at wall with sphere spacing in one direction of 1.273D are presented in Figure 16, along with the average porosities in the wall region for each of these cases. The likely candidate for the best wall pattern is the MFCC since it does not entail any of the drawbacks mentioned for the BCOR pattern and has the lowest wall region porosity. The goal of this work was to study analytically the effects on wall region porosity of embedding spheres in the wall in various patterns as a means of reducing the porosity of the wall region. Embedding spheres into the wall should reduce the wall effect, since the likely cause of the wall effect (higher average porosity in the vicinity of the wall) is eliminated.

118

JON D. MCWHIRTER ET AL.

Experimental and analytical works are recommended as follow-on projects from this work. It is recommended that a wall be constructed withp MFCC pattern at the the wall with g 0. (Although the BCC (MFCC with g 2 1 R ) results in a slightly lower wall region average porosity, this pattern is difcult to implement experimentally since the spheres in the wall would be touching.) A series of uid ow experiments should determine if this method is indeed effective in reducing or eliminating the wall effect. Numerical modeling of uid ow in a porous media using the various wall region porosity distributions is also recommended, either in conjunction with or prior to the experimental work.

( =(

) )

Acknowledgements I wish to thank Mr George Avlonitis for checking the mathematical accuracy of the many tedious expressions in this work. Bibliography
Bahnen, R. H. and Stojanoff, C. G.: 1987, Velocity uctuations at the walls of a packed bed of spheres for medium re-numbers, ASME J. Fluids Engi. 109, 242247. Benenati, R. F. and Brosilow, C. B.: 1962, Void fraction distribution in beds of spheres, AIChE J. 8(3), 359361. Bernal, J. D. and Mason, J.: 1960, Co-ordination of randomly packed spheres, Nature 188, 910911. Chu, C. F. and Ng, K. M.: 1989, Flow in packed tubes with a small tube to particle diameter ratio, AIChE J. 35(1), 148158. Cohen, Y. and Metzner, A. B.: 1981, Wall effects in laminar ow of uids through packed beds, AIChE J. 27(5). Epstein, N.: 1988, On tortuosity and the tortuosity factor in ow and diffusion through porous media, Chem. Eng. Sci. 44(3), 777779. Fand, R.M. and Thinakaran, R.: 1990, The Inuence of the wall on ow through pipes packed with spheres, J. Fluids Eng. 112, 8488. Fand, R. M., Kim, B. Y. K., Lam, A. C. C. and Phan, R. T.: 1987, Resistance to the ow of uids through simple and complex porous media whose matrices are composed of randomly packed spheres, J. Fluids Eng. 109, 268274. Goodling, S. and Khader, M.: 1985, Co-ordination number distribution of spherical particles in a packed cylindrical bed, Powder Technol. 44, 5355. Haughey, D. P. and Beveridge, G. S. G.: 1969, Structural properties of packed beds A review, Canad. J. Chem. Eng. 47, 130139. Lerou, J. J. and Froment, G. F.: 1977, Velocity, temperature and conversion proles in xed bed catalytic reactors, Chem. Eng. Sci. 32, 853861. Marivoet, P., Teodoroiv, P. and Waje, S. J.: 1974, Porosity, velocity, and temperature proles in cylindrical packed beds, Chem. Eng. Sci. 29, 18361840. Price, J.: 1968, The distribution of uid velocities for randomly packed beds of spheres, Mech. Chem. Eng. Trans. May, 714. Ridgeway, K. and Tarbuck, K. J.: 1968, Voidage uctuations in randomly-packed beds of spheres adjacent to a containing wall, Chem. Eng. Sci. 23, 11471155. Rose, H. E.: 1950, Fluid Flow through Beds of Granular Material, Proceedings of the Institute of Physics Conference at Leamington Spa, London, Oct. 2528, pp. 136161. Scheidegger, A. E.: 1974, The Physics of Flow Through Porous Media, 3rd edn, University of Toronto Press. Schneider, F. A. and Rippin, D. W. T.: 1988, Determination of the local voidage distribution in random packed beds of complex geometry, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 27, 19361941. Susskind, H. and Becker, W.: 1967, Pressure drop in geometrically ordered packed beds of spheres, AIChE J. 13(6), 11551159.