2, 215223
215
Wenhao Pu1
Changsui Zhao1
Research Article
Yuanquan Xiong1
Cai Liang1
Xiaoping Chen1
Peng Lu1
Chunlei Fan1
1
A two-fluid model based on the kinetic theory of granular flow was used to study
three-dimensional steady state flow behavior of dense phase pneumatic conveying
of pulverized coal in a vertical pipe, where the average solid concentration ranges
from 11 % to 30 %, and the transport pressure ranges from 2.6 Mpa to 3.3 Mpa.
Since the solid concentration is rather high, a kekpep model which considers
the turbulence interaction between the gas and particle phase, was incorporated
into the two-fluid model. The simulation results including profiles of gas and
particle phase axial velocity, profiles of solid concentration, profiles of the turbulence intensity of the particle phase, as well as the value of the pressure gradient
were reported. Then, the influences of solid concentration and transport pressure
on the flow behaviors were discussed. The experiment was also carried out to validate the accuracy of the simulation results which showed that the predictions of
pressure gradient were in good agreement with the experimental data. Simulation
results indicate that the location of maximal solid concentration deviates from
the pipe center and the deviation becomes more obvious with the solid concentration increasing, which is analogous to the phenomenon in the liquid/solid
flow. Besides, pressure gradient declines as the transport pressure decreases,
which is validated by experiment described in the paper. Moreover, the analysis
indicates that it is necessary to consider the turbulence of particles for the simulation of dense phase pneumatic conveying at high pressure.
Keywords: Granular flow, Kinetics, Pneumatic conveying, Two-fluid model
Received: September 23, 2007; revised: November 05, 2007; accepted: November 07, 2007
DOI: 10.1002/ceat.200700350
Introduction
Coal gasification technology provides a clean and high-efficient way to utilize coal. The entrained pulverized coal gasification technology is a sort of large-scale coal gasification technology. Dense phase pneumatic conveying of pulverized coal
at high pressure is one of the most important techniques for
entrained pulverized coal gasification technology.
Simulation could provide some information, which cannot
be obtained from experiment, for designing and optimizing
the dense phase pneumatic conveying systems. The kinetic theory of granular flow is widely used to simulate the flow behav-
http://www.cet-journal.com
216
W. Pu et al.
without considering the collisions of particles, which is generally restricted to dilute gas-particle flows. Chan et al. [8] combined the kinetic theory with the kp-equation and simulated
the two-dimensional hydrodynamics in the riser. Zheng et al.
[9] proposed a kekpep model to simulate the two-dimensional flow in the riser considering the effect of particle collisions on particle turbulence. This proved that the particle
phase turbulence has indispensable influence on the whole
flow system, but the average solid concentration was below
5 %. However, no attempt was made for much higher solid
concentration for pneumatic conveying.
Only a few research studies on dense phase pneumatic conveying at high pressure have been reported in the literature so
far. Most of those investigations [1013] were focused on information about the pressure gradient by experiment; little
work has been found in the literature that includes other aspects of dense phase pneumatic conveying. Geldart and Ling
[10] conducted experimental research on the total pressure
drops of high-pressure dense phase conveying of fine coal in
which the solid concentration is not reported. Xiong et al.
[11, 12] studied pressure gradient for vertical and horizontal
pipes in dense phase pneumatic conveying at high pressure
and gave the empirical formula. However, the influence of
transport pressure on pressure gradient had not been considered in their research.
In dense phase pneumatic conveying at high pressure, both
the solid concentration and the gas phase Reynolds are high
and the flow is turbulent. The solid concentration of the present work is much higher than those reported in the literature
on the dense phase pneumatic conveying and the average solid
concentration is up to 30 %. Thus it is necessary to consider
both small-scale fluctuations due to particle-particle collision
and large-scale particle fluctuations due to particle turbulence.
Previous studies on particle phase turbulence are within the
relatively dilute regime and the average solid concentration is
below 5 % in the riser. Here an attempt is made to extend the
particle phase turbulent model to much higher solid concentration for dense phase pneumatic conveying at high pressure.
The particle phase turbulent kpep equations were obtained by
analogy to the ke equations. The various types of interactions
between the gas and solids are considered: (1) drag force from
interactions between the mean velocity of the gas phase and
that of the particle phase, (2) gas phase Reynolds stress from
the interactions between gas-phase velocity fluctuations, (3)
particle phase Reynolds stress due to interactions between particles phase velocity fluctuations, (4) change in the turbulent
kinetic energy of both the gas phase and particle phase due to
interactions between the gas phase and particle phase velocity
fluctuations.
A kekpep model considering the turbulence interaction
between the gas and particle phase was incorporated into the
two-fluid model based on the kinetic theory of granular flow
to simulate flow behaviors of three-dimensional steady state
dense phase pneumatic conveying of pulverized coal in a vertical pipe. The axial velocity profiles of the gas and particle
phase, profiles of solid concentration, profiles of the turbulence intensity of the particle phase, and the pressure gradient
were obtained. Influences of the solid concentration and transport pressure on the flow behavior are discussed. The experi-
ment was carried out to validate the results predicted while the
predictions of pressure gradient were compared with the experimental data.
Mathematical Models
The model adopted is based on the fundamental concept of interpenetrating continua for multiphase mixtures. It is assumed
that different phases can be present at the same time in the
same computational volume. The macroscopic balance equations of mass, momentum, and energy conservation are then
solved for each phase considered. Appropriate constitutive
equations have to be specified in order to describe the physical
and rheological properties of each phase and to satisfy the conservation equations.
2.1
Gas Phase
(1)
ag pg sg
(2)
vg ag qg g
8
>
<
>
: 150
(
CD
a s a g q g j vg v s j
ag 2:65
qa
1:75 g s vg vs
2
C
4 D
a2s lg
ds
ag ds
ds
ag > 0:8
ag 0:8
1 0:15Res 0:687 Res < 1000
0:44Res 1000
24
Res
ag qg ds vs
lg
vg
l
3 g
vg I
1)
http://www.cet-journal.com
2.2
Two-fluid model
(7)
as pg
ss bvg
vs as qs g
l
3 s
vs I
(9)
The solid pressure, ps, shear solid viscosity, ls, and bulk solid viscosity, ks, can be determined as a function of granular
temperature according to the following relations:
ps = asqsHs + 2 qs(1 + ess) as2g0,ssHs
(10)
H
4
ls as qs ds g0;ss 1 ess s 1=2
5
p
p
10qs ds Hs p
4
1 1 ess as g0;ss 2
5
961 ess g0;ss
11
12
where ess is the restitution coefficient of particle-particle collision and g0,ss is the radial distribution function expressing the
statistics of the spatial arrangement of the particles. In this
study, the following expression is adopted:
g0,ss = [1(as/as,max)1/3]1
(13)
The particle phase pseudo-temperature equation of the conservation of particles fluctuating energy is given by [1619]:
3
2
qs as vs Hs ps I ss : vs
kHs Hs
The first term on the right-hand side of this equation represents the rates of production of pseudo-thermal energy by
shear. The second represents the diffusive transport of pseudothermal energy. The third term, cHs, in the equation represents
dissipation of pseudo-thermal energy through inelastic collisions, whereas the fourth term, Us, denotes the exchange of
fluctuating energy between gas and particles. They are defined
as [14]:
cHs 31
4 p
Hs =p
ds
vs
fs = 3bHs
15
(16)
p
150qs ds Hs p
6
1 as g0;ss 1 ess 2
5
3841 ess g0;ss
r
Hs
2a2s qs ds g0;ss 1 ess
p
kHs
17
ps
ss as ls vs vs T as ks
217
cHs fs
14
lt;i
a q k ai qi Ui ki ai
ki
t i i i
rk
ai Gk;i ai qi ei bCli kl Cil ki
lt;l
lt;i
bUl Ui
al bUl Ui
a
al rl
ai ri i
18
lt;i
e
a q e ai qi Ui ei ai
re i
t i i i
ei
ei
C1e ai Gk;i C2e ai qi ei C3e bCli kl Cil ki
ki
ki
lt;l
lt;i
bUl Ui
a bUl Ui
a
al rl l
ai ri i
19
where Ui is the phase-weighted velocity and Gk,i is the generation of turbulent kinetic energy. The gas or particle phase turbulent viscosity is defined as:
lt;i qi Cl
k2i
ei
(20)
2.3
60 Ug
1
49 1 as;in
Gg
pD2 =4
2r=D1=7
(21)
(22)
http://www.cet-journal.com
218
W. Pu et al.
(23)
(24)
Ms Mg Ms
qs qg
qs
equations using the finite volume method. The power law interpolation scheme of discretization was used for momentum
solutions, which provides solutions with accuracy between that
obtained from first- and second-order schemes. Compared
with other higher-order schemes, this method was more robust and less computationally intensive. Taking advantage of
the strong coupling between pressure and velocity, the phasecoupled SIMPLE iterative algorithm was used for the pressurevelocity coupling. The solution is assumed to converge when
the sum of normalized residuals has fallen below a specified
level d:
P
jR j
PCV U < d
(32)
CV jUj
where RU is the local residual of the U equation, U is the corresponding local quantity, and subscript CV denotes the control volume. In the present study, d was assigned as 0.001. The
simulations were carried out on the supercomputer, Sunway2000A, in the Wuxi Supercomputing Center. In the present
study, the length of the vertical pipe is 4 m with an inner diameter of 10 mm. The material parameters used in the calculations was the same as the experimental data which was given
below.
(26)
2
ks;in 0:004 vs;in
Experimental Setup
(27)
3=4
(28)
2
Hs;in 0:004 vs;in
(29)
13
2
1
3
P
11
10
11
p
3
a p
Hs jvsw j2
qw pqs g0;ss f s
6
as;max
p
a
3
pqs g0;ss 1 e2w s H3=2
4
as;max s
11
10
7
5
6
F
10
31
10
11
12
11
11
11
11
10
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of the dense phase pneumatic conveying system of pulverized coal. (1) Electro valve; (2) Weigh cells; (3) Hoppers; (4) Pressurerizing gas; (5) Fluidizing gas; (6) Supplemental gas; (7) Header; (8) Nitrogen cylinder; (9) Visual section;
(10) Pressure transducer; (11) Differential pressure transducer; (12) A/D converter;
(13) Computer.
http://www.cet-journal.com
Two-fluid model
ameter of 10 mm. The nitrogen, as conveying gas, was introduced into the system via a header (7) connected with sixteen
Nitrogen cylinders (8) and then divided into three parts: fluidizing gas (5), pressurizing gas (4), and supplemental gas (6).
The fluidizing gas (5) fluidized the pulverized coal at the bottom of the sending pressure hopper, and then drove the pulverized coal into the conveying pipe. The pressurizing gas (4)
was to maintain the stabilization of pressure in the sending
hopper. The supplemental gas (6) was used to adjust the nitrogen flow rate in a wide range and prevent the pipe from blockage to guarantee continuous transport of pulverized coal. The
pressure in the receiving hopper was controlled by an electro
valve (1). Each of the three nitrogen flow rates were measured
and controlled by a metal rotor flow meter. The dosing hopper
(3) was suspended on three load cells (2) by which the pulverized coal mass flow rate was measured. The PD-23 differential
pressure transducer (11) was used to measure the pressure
drop of the vertical pipe. The measurement section located at
the middle of the pipe was about 2 meters away from the bend
to ensure negligible end effects. A computer data acquisition
system was employed to record the data of flow rates and pressure drops.
4.1
219
1.6
1.4
1.2
Ms=0.17kg/s Ug=4.3m/s
0.8
vgz,vsz/Ug
1.0
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
-1.0
-0.5
r/R
0.0
0.5
1.0
(a)
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
-1.0
-0.5
r/R
0.0
0.5
1.0
0.5
1.0
(b)
0.5
(2/3ks) /Ug
Fig. 2 illustrates the radial profiles of gas and particle axial velocities, the solid volume fraction, and the turbulence intensity
of particle phase computed under the following conditions.
Here the particle mass flow rate is 0.17 kg/s, the superficial gas
velocity (Ug) is 4.3 m/s, and the solid volume concentration is
30 %. Fig. 2a) shows the computed radical profiles of gas and
particle axial velocities normalized with the superficial gas velocity. It is observed that the predicted particle axial velocity is
slightly smaller than the predicted gas axial velocity, except for
the region near the wall where the predicted particle axial velocity is larger than the predicted gas axial velocity. Because
the particle terminal velocity is only 0.06 m/s, the slip velocity
between the gas phase and the particle phase is very small.
Also, because the gas flow is subject to the no-slip condition at
the wall, while the particle phase slips, the predicted particle
axial velocity is larger than the predicted gas axial velocity near
the wall. The profiles of particle axial velocity show a similar
tendency to that of the gas axial velocity. It implies that the
drag force plays an important role in the particles movement.
Fig. 2b) shows the radical profiles of the solid volume fraction. It can be seen that the solid volume fraction with higher
value in the central region and lower value near the wall. The
distribution of solid volume fraction is non-uniform and the
maximum value of solid volume fraction is about 0.42 at about
0.7 R. To make the energy consumption the least, the particles
intend to move towards the centre region to decrease the solid
friction loss. So the solid volume fraction near the wall is low.
In dilute phase pneumatic conveying, the particle phase intends to move towards the central region and the maximum
solid volume fraction locates at the central region. In dense
phase pneumatic conveying, however, it is (a) axial velocity of
0.30
0.25
Ms=0.17kg/s Ug=4.3m/s
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
-1.0
-0.5
r/R
0.0
(c)
Figure 2. Profiles of axial velocities of gas and particle phase,
particle volume fraction, and particle turbulence intensity. (a) Axial velocity of gas and particle phase, (b) particle volume fraction, (c) turbulence intensity.
gas and particle phase, (b) particle volume fraction, and (c)
turbulence intensity.
Alajbegovic et al. [21] and Sakaguchi et al. [22] in the experiments on liquid/solid up flow in a pipe observed that the
maximum solid volume fraction deviated from the centre and
the peak shifted towards the wall as the solid volume fraction
increased, respectively. The solid volume fraction was below
5 % in these experiments. The predictions on solid volume
fraction profiles show similar trends. It indicates that dense
phase pneumatic convey at high pressure shares similar characteristics with liquid/solid flow; because Seville et al. [23] stated
that at a mechanistic level, the distinction between hydraulic
and pneumatic conveying lies in the ratio of the density of the
conveyed solids to that of the conveying fluid. When the pressure of nitrogen reaches 3 MPa, nitrogen density is 30 times
http://www.cet-journal.com
220
W. Pu et al.
1.6
1.4
1.4
1.2
1.2
0.8
0.6
vgz,vsz/Ug
vgz,vsz/Ug
1.0
Ms=0.17kg/s Ug=6.2m/s
transport pressure 3.3Mpa
gas axial velocity
particle axial velocity
0.8
Ms=0.098kg/s Ug=7.7m/s
0.6
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.0
-1.0
1.0
-0.5
0.0
r/R
0.5
0.0
-1.0
1.0
-0.5
0.4
Ug=6.2m/s
0.3
0.3
0.1
0.1
-0.5
r/R
0.0
0.5
0.0
-1.0
1.0
-0.5
Ms=0.17kg/s Ug=6.2m/s
0.25
Ms=0.098kg/s Ug=7.7m/s
0.20
(2/3ks) /Ug
(2/3ks) /Ug
0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
0.5
1.0
0.30
0.30
0.15
0.15
0.10
0.10
0.05
0.05
0.00
-1.0
r/R
(b)
(b)
0.20
1.0
0.2
0.2
0.25
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.0
-1.0
0.0
(a)
(a)
0.4
r/R
-0.5
r/R
0.0
0.5
1.0
0.00
-1.0
-0.5
r/R
0.0
(c)
(c)
http://www.cet-journal.com
Two-fluid model
7.7 m/s, lower particle mass flow rate of 0.098 kg/s, and the
solid concentration of 11 %. Compared with Fig. 2 and Fig. 3,
it can be seen from Fig. 4 that as the solid volume fraction increases, the location of the maximum particle volume fraction
moves towards the wall and the turbulence intensity decreases
slightly.
4.2
vgz/Ug
1.2
1.0
Ms=0.17kg/s Ug=5.9m/s
P=3.3Mpa
P=2.6Mpa
0.8
0.6
-1.0
-0.5
r/R 0.0
0.5
1.0
(a)
221
1.6
14
Ms=0.17kg/s transport pressure 3.3Mpa
1.4
1.2
1.0
-0.5
r/R
0.0
experimental data
experiment fitting curve
prediction
prediction fitting curve
10
Ms=0.17kg/s Ug=5.9m/s
P=3.3Mpa
P=2.6Mpa
0.8
0.6
-1.0
vsz/Ug
12
0.5
1.0
[22]
The model
6
4
2
2
(b)
p=3.3Mpa
p=2.6Mpa
0.2
0.1
-0.5
r/R
0.0
0.5
1.0
(c)
Figure 5. Profiles of axial velocities of gas and particle phase and
particle volume fraction. (a) Axial velocity of gas phase, (b) axial
velocity of particle phase, (c) particle volume fraction.
12
10
Ms=0.17kg/s Ug=5.9m/s
0.3
0.0
-1.0
10
(a)
0.5
0.4
10
12
(b)
Figure 6. Pressure gradient vs. superficial velocity. (a) Transport
pressure 3.3 MPa, (b) transport pressure 2.6 MPa.
http://www.cet-journal.com
222
W. Pu et al.
4.3
Particle Turbulence
-1
10
Ms=0.17kg/s Ug=5.9m/s
-2
Length Scale
10
-3
-4
10
-5
10
-6
-0.5
r/R
0.0
0.5
1.0
0.5
1.0
(a)
0
10
Ms=0.17kg/s Ug=5.9m/s
-1
Time Scale
10
-2
10
-3
10
-4
10
-1.0
-0.5
r/R
0.0
1=4
lk m3s es
(33)
sk ms =es 1=2
(34)
(b)
Figure 7. The comparison of length scales and time scales between particles turbulence and particle collision. (a) Length
scales, (b) time scales.
(36)
10
10
-1.0
Conclusions
A kekpep model considering the turbulence interaction between the gas and particle phase was incorporated into the
two-fluid model based on the kinetic theory of granular flow
to simulate three-dimensional steady state flow behavior of
dense phase pneumatic conveying of pulverized coal in a vertical pipe. The influences of solid concentration and transport
pressure on flow behavior are discussed and the predictions of
the pressure gradient are in good agreement with the experimental data. Based on the results presented here, the following
conclusions may be drawn:
In dense phase pneumatic conveying at high pressure, the
profile of the solid concentration is non-uniform. The location
of maximal solid concentration deviates from the pipe centre
and the deviation becomes more obvious with the solid concentration increasing, which is analogous to the phenomenon
in the liquid/solid flow.
As the superficial velocity increases, pressure gradient decreases first and then increases. The model predictions of
the pressure gradient are in good agreement with the experimental data.
As the transport pressure decreases, the pressure gradient
declines. The predictions are validated by the experiment.
The particle turbulence has an important influence on dense
phase pneumatic conveying at high pressure.
http://www.cet-journal.com
Two-fluid model
223
Acknowledgements
References
Symbols used
ds
D
ps
vg
vs
Ug
kg
[m]
[m]
[N/m2]
[m/s]
[m/s]
[m/s]
[m2/s2]
ks
[m2/s2]
g0,ss
ess
[]
[]
ew
[]
Greek letters
ag
as
b
[]
[]
[]
U
qg
qs
lg
ls
ts
Hs
sg
ss
[]
[kg/m3]
[kg/m3]
[kg/(ms)]
[kg/(ms)]
[m2/s]
[m2/s2]
[kg/(ms2)]
[kg/(ms2)]
Subscripts
g
s
max
gas phase
solid phase
maximum
http://www.cet-journal.com