Sie sind auf Seite 1von 13

Moopr,LING THE TURBULENT FLow oF NoN-NnwtoNIAN

SLURRIES

P.T. Slatter*

(First received August 1993; Final version October 1995)

The only reliable approach open to designers of pipeline L pipe length m


systems conueying non-Ir{ewtonian slurcies in the turbu- M mass kg
Ient flo, regime has been large scale pipe tests. This pa- n flow behaviour index
per addresses this design problem, with particular empha- ,Af number of items
sfs on the theoretical modelling of the turbulent fl,ow be- A volumetric flow rate of slurry ^3 l,
hauiour of these slurcies in pipes. The literature and the- R pipe radius m
ory pertinent to the flow of slurries in pipes is eramined. Re Reynolds number
A neu model for the prediction of the turbulent energy t time s
gradient is deueloped from widely accepted fundamentals. u point velocity m/s
A particle roughrtess effect has been obseraed and turbu- V average slurry velocity m ls
Ient flo, is modelled using a neu roughness Reynolds V. shear velocity m ls
nuTnber to corcelate the roughness function. Three test y distance from the pipe wall m
facilities were built for the establishment of a data base of tt dynamic viscosity Pa s
non-Newtonian slurry behauiour - a tube aiscometer and p' apparent dynamic viscosity Pa s
two parnped recirculating pipe test rigs. The erperimen- p slurry or fluid density kg/-t
tal inuestigation coaered wide ranges of diameter (5 mm T shear stress Pa
to 200rnrn nominal bore), Tnean pipe aelocity (0.1 m/s ry yield stress Pa
to 10 */s), slurry relatiae density (1.02 to 1.65), uol- X von Karman constant
umetric concentration (2% to 37%), solids relatiue den-
sity (2./ to 2.5) and particle size range (d"u :24 to 120
prn). Turbulent flow predictions using the new turba- Subscripts
lent model are o,ccurate and better than preaious models, 0 at the pipe wall
particularly in the rough wall region. The new analy- 85 85th percentile of the particles passing
sis is based on physical behaaiour and contributes to the calc calculated
understanding of the mechanisms inaolued. obs observed (experimental)
p particle
Nomenclature r roughness
s solids
A constant cross-sectional area m2 v volumetric
B roughness function w water
d particle diameter p,m x representative
D internal pipe diameter m
E error function
f Fanning friction factor
g gravitational acceleration Introduction
H manometer head difference ^1"2
m
i statistical identifier This paper deals with the pipe flow of homogeneous non-
k hydraulic roughness Newtonian slurries. In particular, smooth wall, partially
hrrr'
K fluid consistency index rough wall, and fully rough wall turbulent flows are ex-
Pa s'
amined, and a new analytical solution for determining
*
Associate Director, School of Civil Engineering, Cape Tech- head loss is offered which differs fundamentully from pre-
nikon, P.O. Box 652, Cape Town, 8O0O South Africa vious theoretical approaches.

R & D Journal, 1996, l2(2) 68


Staternent of the problem
The turbulent pipe flow of these slurries is not well
understood, despite the large amount of research in- 12

terest in this area.1 Slurries having similar viscous


properties are known to have dissimilar turbulent @
10

c
properties.2 According to Shook & Roco3 the predictions 88
of the various theories in the literature differ signifi- tt
c
J
lL6
cantly. o
o
o
Recent attempts to predict the pipe flow energy re- c
tr1
quirements for these slurries in terms of their viscous f
o
E
characteristics have met with limited success4,s and er-
rors of up to 50% have occurred. Any problems asso-
ciated with the rheological characterisation of a slurry {, 0,5 I 1,5
would increase the uncertainty of the results. The im- Log[Re r]
plications of errors of this magnitude could be that the
Figure 1 Roughness function correlation for Newtonian
wrong size pump or pipe diameter are specified and that
fluids
the system will not operate at the required throughput.
These errors are unacceptable. The errors are also gen- The oblique asymptote in Figure 1 is the line B =
eral and other types of error may arise as each hydro- 2.5 lt ( Rr,)+5.5 which represents smooth wall turbulent
transport application is different. From a practical, engi- flow. The horizontal asymptote is the line B - 8.5 which
neering point of view, existing theoretical design meth- represents fully developed or rough wall turbulent flow.
ods for non-Newtonian slurries are inaccurate and the The top curve is the locus of data for pipes with uni-
results lack confidence. form roughness from the experiments with sand rough-
The only reliable approaches open to designers of ened pipes by Nikuradse.T
pipeline systems conveyittg non-Newtonian slurries are The lower curve is the equation of Colebrook and
either full scale pipeline tests, or scale up of tests over White8 and represents the locus of data for commer-
wide ranges of laminar and turbulent flow for the slurry cially available (randomly rough) pipes. This equation
under consideration.6 Design procedures are therefore is widely used for the design of Newtonian pipelines. For
costly and inefficient. fully developed rough turbulent flow, the roughness func-
tion is constant (B
Objective in this region is totally independent of the viscous char-
The objective of this paper is to present a more reli- acteristics of the fluid.
able theoretical analysis for the flow of non-Newtonian
slurries in pipelines. The analysis is based on widely ac- Non-Newtonian turbulent flow models
cepted fundamentals and incorporates turbulent flow in Non-Newtonian turbulent flow models can be divided
smooth, partially rough and fully rough wall pipes. This into three categories. Firstly there are the models that
analysis is shown to predict test data more reliably than have a strong analytical approach, such as those of
previous models. Torrances and Wilson & Thomas.10 Secondly there are
the rnodels that are purely empirical, such as Bowen'r11
Analysis of turbulent flow of Newtonian fluids in approach. The third category lies between these two ex-
pipes tremes, such as the models of Dodge & Metznerl2 and
Kemblowski k Kolodziejski.13 Only the first are of in-
Based on the Prandtl mixing iength model, the velocity
terest in this paper.
distribution for Newtonian turbulent flow in pipes is7
The yield pseudoplastic model was found to best char-
acterise the rheology of all the slurries tested for this in-
(1)
ft-,+r"I+B vestigation, and the method of Lazarus & Slatterl4 was
used to extract the rheological constants ry , K and n.
B can be correlated using a roughness Reyno)ds nurnber

!,1 e wt oni an approrimati on


pv" k
Re, = (2) Standard lt[ewtonian theory can be used, but a value for
p
the viscosity of the fluid is required. Usually the term
The correlation is shown in Figure 1. viscosity is meaningless once a non-Newtonian approach

R & D Journal, I996, I2(2.) 69


has been adopted. However, an apparent or secant vis- areas which are of particular importance to the develop-
cosity p/ 15 can be defined. Note that p,' is not a con- ment of the present model.
stant for a given fluid and pipe diameter, but must be Firstly, it is well established in the literature that there
evaluated at a given value for rs. is a strong similarity between the turbulent behaviour
The Torrance Model of Newtonian fluids and non-Newtonian slurries, despite
their significantly different behaviour in the laminar flow
Using the same mixing length model and method of
regime .r2,16,L7,18, 19,20,2r,22,23
derivation as for Newtonian turbulent flow, Torrancee
Other researchers have shown that the velocity distri-
derived a model for non-Newtonian turbulent flow in
bution in the turbulent core of turbulent non-Newtonian
pipes using the yield pseudoplastic rheological model as
slurry pipe flow is similar to that of Newtonian
the starting point. An important departure is that the
fluids .z+ The logarithmic nature of these velocity distri-
von Karman constant is taken to be 0 .36 n and is there-
butions has been demonstrated experimentallyn,'u,26 and
fore dependent on the viscous characteristics of the fluid.
can be accepted for the purpose of theoretical analysis.
Similarly, Torrance derived a model for fully developed Secondly, non-Newtonian slurries are widely regarded
rough turbulent flow in which the von Karman constant as homogeneous and their behaviour can apparently be
is assigned the value 0.4 n. This model therefore pre- successfully described by continuum models, especially
dicts that the behaviour in this region is dependent on in the laminar regime. It is customary to ignore the
the viscous characteristics of the fluid in contrast to fact that solid particles are present. A key aspect of the
Newtonian flow. new model is that this thesis in untenable. The presence
Torrance makes no comment on partially rough wall of solid particles as an inherent component of the fluid
turbulent flow. becomes important when one considers the following:
A characteristic of the Torrance model is that the rhe-
ological parameters are treated separately, in separate 1. One of the cornerstones of classical turbulence
terms in the expression. This leads to the problem that analyses is the existence of a laminar sub-layer.
the yield stress does not appear in the Reynolds number The non-Newtonian turbulent theory of Wilson k
formulation. Thomasl0 predicts a thickened laminar sub-layer
over and above that for an equivalent Newtonian
The Wilson €t Thomas Model fluid. However, the size of the solid particles which
Wilson & Thomaslo (also 15,1u ) p.oduced an analysis of must be present in the laminar sub-layer are of a
the turbulent flow of non-Newtonian fluids based on en- similar order of magnitude to the thickness of the
hanced micro-scale viscosity effects. This model predicts laminar sub-layer. One possible conclusion is that
a thickening of the laminar sub-layer by a factor called the boundary layer is affected in some way by the
the area ratio. This area ratio is defined as the ratio of presence of the solid particles.
the integrals of the non-Newtonian and assumed Newto-
nian rheograms (using the apparent or secant viscosity 2. The velocity gradients in the region of the pipe wall
are known to be steep.27 Calculations to determine
/r') under identical shear conditions. The thickened lam-
inar sub-layer results in an increase in the mean velocity the ctrange in velocity which can be expected over
over that for an equivalent Newtonian fluid. the diameter of a particle under average test con-
ditions show that it is of the order of 1 mls in the
This model represents an improvement on the Newto-
region of the pipe wall. Such rapid changes in veloc-
nian approximation method. A method for scale up of
ity will be impeded because the solid particles will
turbulent data, based on the above model, has also been
resist shear. The velocity gradients in the region of
proposed.lo
the pipe wall are therefore so steep that the presence
Rough wall and partially rough wall turbulent flow can of solid particles must have a diminishing effect on
be accommodated in the model by using the appropriate these velocity gradients.
roughness when determining the equivalent Newtonian
mean velocity. However, this can only be approximate, 3. Clearly, the continuum approximation2s must break
since the interaction between the pipe roughness and the down in the region of the pipe wall when the size of
laminar sub-layer will clearly be different when the thick- the solid particles becomes large compared with the
ened laminar sub-layer is present. scale of the modelling. The effect of the particles
must be accounted for.
Discussion of literature 4. If the continuum approximation is untenable in the
The literature on non-Newtonian turbulent flow is ex- wall region, the implication is that the particles and
tensive and well-kown. This review concentrates on six the slurry pseudofluid will have to be considered as

R & D Journal, 1996, l2(2) 70


separate phases at the crucial interface between the vious models is that they apply only to the specific ma-
laminar sub-layer and the turbulent core. Parti- terials tested, or upon the test results used to generate
cles of various sizes will be subjected to drag forces correlation coefficients. These models then relate only to
in an environment which is neither wholly laminar those specific circumstances and cannot be universally
or turbulent, but somewhere in between. In the applied. One of the obvious ways of solvittg this prob-
face of this extremely complex situation, it is logi- lem is to ensure that the model reverts to the Newto-
cal to model the behaviour in terms of a dimension- nian model when the rheological parameters are relaxed
less group which encompasses both the particle and toNewtonianconditions(r, =0, K = p and n =1).
o,ilHr e Rev n or d s n u mb er i s Note that this condition cannot guarantee universality -
3;:0, :l il' ilff:i"iJ,'iii* rather, it implies the opposite; any analysis which does
not revert to the Newtonian form can never be univer-
The particles must therefore physically obstruct the sally applicable.
theoretical steep velocity gradients in the region of the
wall resulting in a decrease in the velocity gradient at New analysis
the pipe wall. It is also knownT that the effect of pipe
roughness can cause a decrease in the velocity gradient The principle objective in the development of the new
at the pipe wall. However, ir the case of slurries, the analysis is to accommodate the brea( down of continuum
particles, although they are indeed sand particles, are admissibility in the region of the pipe wall where the
not fixed or uniform, as in Nikuradse's experiments,T but particles must have an effect because of their physical
they will have an effect similar to a surface roughness. size. Furthermore, the new approach is an attempt to
It can therefore be postulated that the results will lie explain the behaviour of non-Newtonian slurries and to
somewhere between the two data curves of Nikuradse base the mathematical modelling on these quantitative
and Colebrook & White,s as shown in Figure 1. descriptions.
Thirdly, the partially rough wall turbulent flow re- The new analysis has therefore proceeded from the
gion has been postulated to be relatively broad by followittg initial assumptions based on the previous ar-
researchers such as Dodge U Metznerl2 and Wilson guments:
& Thomas.l0 However, the above remarks on particle
roughness, as well as the experiments by Park26 indi- o The velocity distribution is logarithmic and similar
cate that the transition region is much narrower for non- to the classical Newtonian turbulent velocity distri-
Newtonian slurries than for Newtonian fluids. bution over the entire core region.
Fourthly, in the derivation of the relationships in tur-
bulent flow, it is standard practice to as,sume that the o There is a roughness effect caused by the solid par-
viscous stresses are negligible when compared with the ticles in the slurry.
turbulent stresses in the turbulent core region .27 Because
o Fully devgloped rough wall turbulent flow does ex-
of the striking similarity between the tuibulent be-
ist and the partially rough wall turbulent region is
haviour of Newtonian fluids and non-Newtonian slurries,
much narrower than for Newtonian fluids.
it would appear unlikely that the behaviour of the slurry
in fully developed rough turbulent flow should depend o Fully developed turbulent flow is independent of the
on the viscous characteristics of the slurry. Wilsono has viscous characteristics of the slurry.
stated that turbulence is a process dominated by iner-
tial forces. Indeed an absolute asymptote, independent o Plug flow does not occur.
of the viscous characteristics of the slurry, such as ex-
ists for Newtonian fluids, would be a useful engineering Furthermore, the new model should revert to the New-
tool, in view of the highly sensitive nature of the yield tonian model.
pseudoplastic model.s
Fifthly, for the laminar flow of fluids with a yield Formulation of the velocity distribution
stress, wherer 1r, the fluid cannot shear and plug flow The basic velocity distribution for Newtonian turbulent
occurs. Previous researcherslO,2e have assumed that the flow in rough pipes is taken to be valid based on the
same phenomenon will occur in turbulent flow. However, above assumptions, i.e.:
the velocity profiles of Park26 and Xua show no such ef-
fect and indicate rather that the flow is turbulent over
the entile core region. Plug flow has therefore not been
admitted on the strength of this experimental evidence.
+-Aht*t (3)

The value of the coefficient A has usually been taken as


Sixthly, one of the problems that has arisen with pre- the inverse of the von Karman universal constant. Now,

R & D Journal, 1996, l2(2) 71


turbulence is an inertial rather than a viscous processo The solid particles must play a role and the rough-
and so viscous forces are taken to be negligible in the tur- ness size d* must be chosen accordingly. Since slurries
bulent region.27 Experimental evidence shows that the typically contain a continuous range of particle sizes, a
velocity distributions in Newtonian and non-Newtonian representative particle size must be found. The effect of
turbulent flow are similar. For these reasons the value roughness on turbulence can be thought of as an aggra-
of A has been chosen as the inverse of the von Karman vation at the wall which stimulates turbulence. Clearly
universal constant, IIX 2.5. then the larger particles will have a more dominant effect
-
In order to correlate the roughness function B, it is on turbulence than the smaller particles. Also, the larger
necessary to formulate the roughness Reynolds number particles will shield the smaller ones, reducing their ef-
in terms of the yield pseudoplastic model. A prob- fectiveness in stimulating turbulence.s For the slurries
lem with previous models has been the inadequate for- tested, the des size was found to be a good representa-
mulation of this important parameter, e.B. a formu- tion of the turbulent roughness size effect of the solid
lation excluding the yield stress je,zs The new work on particles in the slurry, i.e. d*
non-Newtonian Reynolds numbers (Rr, in Slatter k supported by the sensitivity analysis in a later section.
Lazarur3o) proves particularly valuable at this point. It is important to note that the Malvern instrument was
By analogy with the Newtonian approach, the rough- used for particle size measurements other methods
ness Reynolds number for a yield pseudoplastic slurry may produce significantly different results.32
can be formulated using the same basic form as Rez as The mean velocity can be obtained by integrating over
follows: the cross section of the pipe yielding

(4)

Higher turbulence inbensities in the wall region re- #-!r,, (*) +B-37b (6)

ported by Park26 provide strong experimental evidence


in support of a partic,le roughness effect in the wall re- Experimental data are now needed to correlate the
glon. roughness function B against the roughness Reynolds
An alternative derivation of the roughness Reynolds number.
number can also be derived by combining the approach of
Dedegil3l and incorporating the fundamental Reynolds
number definitions used by Slatter k Lazarus,3o as fol-
lows:
Correlation of the roughness function

(5) The roughness function B was correlated against the


roughness Reynolds number in the same way as for New-
where dp is the particle diameter and V'" is the veloc- tonian turbulent flow.
ity differential between the particle and the surrounding The correlation of data for the rlew rnodel is shown in
fluid. Figure 2, with the curves and asymptotes for the Niku-
As stated above, the velocity differential can only ma- radse and Colebrook White loci. All turbulent data from
terialize once the continuum approximation breaks down the data base have been used in Figure 2 (sorne 500 data
in the wall region. Since this is a region of steep velocity points).
gradient atrd indeterminate regime (neither fully larni-
The data lie above the Colebrook White curve.
nar nor fully turbulent), an exact value of the velocity
differential caunot be determined. In the face of this Since the particles in the slurry are neither fixed nor
complex situation, the shear velocity could be used as a uniforrn in size, &s they were for Nikuradse's experi-
dimensionally representative velocity parameter. rnents, the roughness effect of the solid particles is not
From this formulation, equation (5), it can be seen expected to be as great as in lt{ikuradse's experiments.
that by introducing the shear velocity as a dimerrsion- This is reflected in Figure 2.
ally representative velocity parameter in the rvall region, The figure also shows that the data lies close to t,he
and the representative particle size d*, the roughness t,wo asymptotes which describe the lirnits of behaviour
Reynolds number, equation (4), will result. This impor- of Newtonian turbulent flow. On the strength of these
tant dimensionless group. and the ra,tionale behind its two points. the correlation chosen for this analysis is
formulation, can be seen as part of the nerv analysis. therefore the two asymptotes i.e.:

R & D Journal, 1996, I2f 2) 72


effect of various representative particle sizes would have
on the accuracy of the analysis has been carried out.
A wall shear stress prediction error function can be
defined as
sN 100 lro obs i-To."r.i ll
E,
Lt-r T
( 10)
tr

Table 1 Wall shear error sensitivity to representative


particle size
d* percentile E, l%l Standard deviation
0
100 1 000 I 0000
dso 12 .88 9.88
dss 12.24 9.54
Figu re 2 Roughness function correlation for deo 11.59 9. 19

non- Newtonia n slu rries des 10.91 8.89


dro 10. 18 8.63
1. Smooth Wall Turbulent Flow dzs 9.42 8.49
If Re, dao 8.75 8.46
IS
analogous with smooth wall turbulent flow. dsr 8.58 8.99
dgo 9.79 10.35
dgs 13.57 12.95
V dr oo 42.67 26.98
.J.

V"
2.51n 2.51n Re" + I.75 (7)

70
2. Fully Developed Rough Wall Turbulent Flow
8eo
If Re, > 3.32 then B = 8.5. This is analogous with L
o
fully developed or rough wall turbulent flow and will .5so
t
yield a constant value for the Fanning friction factor lt
!ro
f o
!so
6

V 3ro
2.51n + 4.75, (s) t0
v.
which reduces to

(e)
F gure, ;. ;*:, 1l::1l::'il',*ii,,:
#_407'og(-3) representative particle size
The average percentage error when calculating the This error function gives an average percentage error.
roughness function , B, using this correlation is g .2% with The error function for the new model and the standard
a standard deviation of 7 .S%, and a log standard error deviation of this error is shown in Table 1 and Figure
of 0 .0024. 3 for all tests in the data base (excludittg the 200 mm
This correlation produces a transition from the diameter pipe results - see section on Pipe Roughness).
smooth to the rough flow condition which is abrupt. Table 1 and Figure 3 show that the dar size provides
The correlation further shows that the assumptions re- the minimum error, and shows the sensitivity of the new
garding the turbulent behaviour of non- Newtonian slur- model to a change in representative particle size. The
ries are valid for the slurries tested. asymmetry of Figure 3 is due to the shape of the particle
size distributions which are much steeper for d
Sensitivity analysis of the representative
than for d ) das.
particle size
Experimental work
The above analysis relies on the assumption that the
des size is the best representative particle size. [n order Apparatus was built and test work performed specifically
to justify this assumption, a sensitivity analysis of the with the following objectives in mind:

R & D Journal, 1996, I2(2) 73


o to measure the rheology accurately rate and the pressure drop across a known length of the
tube is measured using a differential pressure transducer.
o to test over as wide a range of flow velocities and All the test section entry lengths can be changed to
diameters as possible detect for undeveloped flow or time dependency.

o to do test work using different particle size distribu- The Mini Rig
The mini rig is a pumped pipeline test loop using small
tions
diameter PVC pipes. This rig consists of a Warman
o to accumulate a database of test data for the evalu- 1.5 x 1 solids handling centrifugal pump, a 3 m long test
ation of existing turbulent flow theory and the new section with interchangeable clear PVC test sections of
model. diameter 6 mm, 15 mm, and 25 rnm nominal bore, and
connecting pipes. The flow rate is measured with a 25
One of the most fundamental aspects of this investi- mm nominal bore Altometer magnetic flux flowmeter.
gation is that the turbulent pipe flow head loss can be Slurry is pumped from the 150 mm nominal bore pipe
predicted from the rheological data of the same fluid. in the East RiS, through the Mini Rig to a weigh tank.
Rheological data can only be obtained from tests under This ensures that exactly the same slurry is tested in
laminar flow conditions so it was vital that experiments both the East and Mini rigs. The weigh tank is used to
were performed in order that reliable data over large cheek the calibration of the flow meter during tests. The
ranges for both the laminar and turbulent regimes could pump has a variable speed hydraulic drive.
be measured for the same non-Newtonian slurry. All the test section entry lengths can be changed to
Non-Newtonian mine tailings and kaolin clay slurries detect for undeveloped flow or time dependency.
were tested in pipes of diameter ranging from 6 mm to
200 mm nominal bore with mean velocities ranging from The East Rig
0.1 m/s to 10 m/s. An important aspect of the experi- The east rig is a recirculating pumped pipeline test cir-
ments is that the same slurry was used for each test set. cuit with three test sections of diameter 80 ffiffi, 150 mm,
A test set is a set of tests using different pipe diameters and 200 mm nominal bore.
but the same slurry. Slurry is collected in a galvanised steel feed hopper
A database of 61 pipe tests was generated. This which has a capacity of approximately 2 m2. Slurry then
database wa"s then used to evaluate theoretical models passes directly from the hopper into the pump. The
for the prediction of the behaviour of non-Newtonian pump is a Mather and Platt 8 x 6 which is driven by a
slurries in pipes. variable speed hydraulic drive.
Flow is measured using magnetic flux flow meters are
located in the vertical pipe sections. Clear viewing and
Apparatus
test sections are located in the return horizontal lines.
Three different sets of apparatus were used to gather The 200 mm line is steel, the others are PVC. The return
experimental data for this investigation. These were the lines are then fed back through an in-line heat exchanger
Balanced Beam Tube Viscometer, the Mini Rig, and the and a pneumatic diverter valve into the hopper. The in-
East RiS. line heat exchanger maintains the slurry at a constant
temperature. The diverter valve feeds the weigh tank
The Balanced Beam Tube Viscometer which is used for flow rate determination and flow meter
The Balanced Beam Tube Viscometer (BBTV) devel- calibration. For the slurries tested, ro external agita-
oped by the author is a device for measuring the flow tion was necessary to maintain solids suspension in the
characteristics of a slurry.33 The BBTV is, in fact, a hopper.
miniature pipeline34 and its use extends beyond viscom-
etry. Pressure tappings
This instrument consists of two pressure vessels which Differential pressure measurements are made from static
are located approximately 6 m apart at either end of a pressure tappings located in the pipe walls of each of
steel beam. This beam is centrally supported on a knife the horizontal test sections. The tappings have length
edge and a load cell is located under the left hand vessel. to diameter ratios greater than four to ensure accurate
The vessels can be connected by transparent tubes of readings.ss The tappings are 3 mm in diameter and great
different diameter. care was taken to remove any burrs from the inside edge
The, prime mover is compressed air which forces the of each tapping.
slurry through a selected tube at a controlled rate. The Each tapping is fed through a vblve to an isolation
average slurry velocity is obtained from the mass transfer pod which collects any solids that may enter the pres-

R & D Journal, 1996, l2(2) 74


sure tapping. Each pod has a valve for flushing away Gold Slimes Tailings: Various size fractions were ob-
collected solids with clear water. Clear water lines then tained by mechanical sieving:
connect the pod to the manometer and differential pres-
sure transducer (D PT) . Tailingsl d<500 pm
The test sections are preceded by unobstructed Tailings2 d< 106 pm
straight pipe of at least 50 pipe diameters .24,35 The only Tailings3 d<62pnn
exception is the 200 lnm nominal bore pipe which, due Tailings4 d<42prm
to space constraints, has a straight entry length of 35
pipe diameters.
These slurries were then tested in the BBTV.36

Determination of rnaJor pararneters Trp Water: The tap water had a pH of 9, was slightly
The average slurry velocity and the wall shear stress are super-saturated with respect to calcium carbotrate (2
derived from the measured quantities as follows: mg/l), total alkalinity was 35 r.rrgl I as CaCO3, total
calcium was 35 mg/l as CaCOs, and ionic strength was
less than 0.001 (molar scale).s7 Although the resulting
Auerage Slurry Velocity rnixtures were regarded as chemically stable, it should
The average or mean slurry velocity (V ) is defined as the be noted that the rheology of these slurries can change
volurnetric flow rate Q) divided by the cross sectional with their ionic character. For this reason, tests on a
area (A) of the pipe and is calculated given slurry were carried out on the same dry. The time
available for any chemically related rheology changes was
jf
at
a 4Q 4lvI
(11) therefore kept to a minimum.
.4 rD2 rptD2
Test procedure
where M is t,he rnass of slurry of density p collected in
t,he weigh t,ank in time t seconds. The test procedure in all three set,s of apparatus was
similar and was as follows:
Wall Shear Stress
The wall shear stress (ro ) is determined from the water The apparatus was filled with slurry and the concen-
nlarrorneter head difference (I/) over a known length of tration adjusted as required by either adding solids
pipe (L), i.e. the test section, &s follows:
or tap water. The slurry is then circulated at the
same time to ensure thorough mixing.
/0
PwgHD ( 12)
4L
A sample of the slurry is taken for relative density and
particle size distribution tests and the transducers
Material are calibrated.
The following solids nraterials lvere used to make up the
slurries for t,he tests.
The pods are connected to the tappings and the pres-
Kaolin: Kaolin slurries were prepared from dry kaolin sure measurlng system flushed of air and solids.
powder and pellets which were mixed rvith tap wat,er
to the required concentrat,ion and tested in the BBTV
and the East and Mini rigs. Although all the material The required slurry velocity is set and the transducer
was obtained from the same deposit, the particle size outputs are monitored via an automatic data log-
distributions differed slightly. ging routine. The data is them processed and the
run repeated until sufficient points have been ob-
Uranium Tailings: flranium rnining tailings slirnes
tained.
slurries were obtained wet, from a rnine. \,'ariotrs size
fra,ctions were obtained bv nrechanical sieving:
Evaluation and discussion of the new analysis
Slurry1 d< 100 ptln
Slurry2 d<250pnt
The results of a t"'"pical test are shown in Figure 4 with
These slurries were then tested in the BBTV. the predictions of the theoretical models.

R & D Journal, 1996, I 2f 2) 75


EO + E00
0oto
70
? 700
Lomlnor t
?60 T eoo
.5 Turbdml 'lo
950
o !(, soo
-nlo
L
.C
F 400
L L
o o
#to $ soo
I.20
I zoo
5
10 I roo
0 50 t00 t50 200 250 300 350 400
0
io 40 t*o"o so roo t ro
Psoudo-Shcor Rolo E V / D [t/s] ,r.t"? srr.lroT" ti:
Figure 5 Laminar sub-layer thickness
Figu re 4 Typical test results showing turbulent flow
p red ictions
Smooth wall turbulent flow
The correlation of the roughness function B shows that
Figure 4 shows that the new model provides a bet- smooth wall turbulent flow occurs if the roughness
ter prediction than the other models, particularly in the Reynolds number is less than 3.32. By analogy with
fully developed turbulent flow region. Newtonian flow, smooth wall turbulent flow is charac-
The turbulent flow evaluations for the entire database terised by an intact laminar sub-layer. In this region,
are presented in Table 2.
the solid particles do not generate extra turbulence due
to form drag.
Smooth wall turbulent flow is further characterised by
Table 2 Turbulent model evaluation - whole database
a continuously decreasing friction factor. Unfortunately,
Wilson & New
Torrance Thomas model due to the additive nature of both the constitutive rheo-
Av. % error 17.18 15.07 10.04 logical equation and the Reynolds number formulation,
Log st. error 0.0050 0.0038 0.0024 the equations do not resolve into a compact Rt-f form.
Also due to the additive nature of the fundamental rela-
Table 2 shows that the new model provides more accu- tionships is the fact that the roughness size (representa-
rate predictions than previous models for all the slurries tive particle size) does not vanish from the smooth wall
tested. equation as in the Newtonian case. However, the effect
is small and has not affected the accuracy of the model
for the slurries tested.
Larninar sub-layer thickness In this region, the new model predictions are similar
The thickness of the laminar sub-layer can be determined to those of Torrance and Wilson & Thomas. As con-
as the intersection of the velocity distributions in the cluded earlier, these models perform well in this early
laminar sub-layer and the turbulent core.6 This thick- turbulent region. The actual accuracy depends more on
ness is plotted against wall shear stress in Figure 5. the accuracy of the rheological characterisation than the
choice of model.

[Base values used in this paper, unless other-


wise stated: density Eblly developed or rough wall turbulent flow
- 100mm; r, - 10 Pa; K - 0.03 Pas'; n - 0.8; Fully developed or rough wall turbulent flow is charac-
d* :50 pm] terised by u constant friction factor and total obstruction
of the laminar sub-layer by the particles. This consti-
Figure 5 shows that the laminar sub-layer thickness tutes a useful engineering tool, because in this region,
predicted by the new model lies between the thicknesses the energy gradients depend only on the relative size of
predicted by the Newtonian approximation model and the particles (Dldsr), and provides an asymptote for the
the model of Wilson k Thomas. The new model is designer to work to in the absence of accurate rheological
closer to the predictions of Wilson k Thomas at low data. The correlation of Bowenll exploits this similarity
shear stresses and closer to the Newtonian approxima- of the fully developed turbulent flow region and it is used
tion at higher shear stresses. in his scale up law.

R & D Journal, 1996, I2(2) 76


Partially rough wall turbulent flow
One of the characteristics of the new turbulent flow 0, 0l

model is the abrupt change from smooth wall turbu-


lent flow to fully developed or rough wall turbulent flow.
However, as far as can be ascertained by observation
of the test data graphs, this is the way in which the
slurry behaves. An example of this is given in Figure I
dx/D=O, 004
6. The abrupt change and therefore the absence of any
significant transition region, ir a true reflection of the
real behaviour of these slurries. This is in sharp con-
trast to the Newtonian case, where the transition region
spans several orders of magnitude of Reynolds number 0,001
r 000 I oooo 100000 t000000
(see Moody diagra-tt). This abrupt change can also be ReJ

seen in the results of Bowen.ll Figure 8 Friction factor vs Res; new model

+
KPIPE4

0.01

+
dx/o=o, oo05

0.001
r 000 r 0000 I 00000
ReJ

Figure 6 Data showing abrupt change from smooth to 0.001


rough wall turbulence 1 000 I 0000 r 00000 I 000000
Re newt

trhiction factor / Reynolds number diagrams Figure 9 Friction factor vs R€Newt; new model
The new model can be plotted on a friction fac- Figure 8 shows the effect of differept particle sizes for
tor/Reynolds number diagram.
the same rheology. This is analogous to the relative
roughness effect shown on the Moody diagram.
0, 0l Figure I shows the convex nature of the smooth wall
ret
turbulent region when EeN"r,rs (using the secant viscos-
n=0.9 ity - see section on Newtonian approximation) is used.
rp0, E A similar curved relationship is shown by Thomas k
I Wilsonlo for this range of n values.
dx/D=o, 0005 All three diagrams show clearly the reduction in fric-
tion factor which is a characteristic of these slurries.l6

Pipe Roughness
0, 001 {- An interesting dilemma arises in the new turbulent flow
| 000 10000 100000 | 000000
model when the pipe roughness approaches or exceeds
Rc3
the representative particle roughness size. The 200 mm
Figure 7 Friction factor vs Reg for the new model nominal bore steel pipe had a hydraulic roughness of II2
pm and the tests of Park26 were in a steel pipe for which
Figure 7 emphasises the importance of the slurry rhe- a reasonable hydraulic roughness is estimated at 45 p,m.
ology in the smooth wall turbulent region. The friction These values exceeded the representative particle rough-
factor is constant in the rough wall turbulent region. ness sizes. In these two cases the matter was resolved by

R & D Journal, 1996, l2(2) 77


using the larger value of either the representative parti- The turbulent pipe flow behaviour of these slurries can
cle size or the pipe hydraulic roughness when calculating be understood qualitatively in terms of a particle rough-
the roughness Reynolds number. ness efiect.
Analysis of the Particle Roughness Effect
The effect of relative particle size on wall velocity gradi- Energy gradient prediction
ent for the new model is shown in Figure 10. Energy gradients for non-Newtonian turbulent slurry
flow can be predicted using the rheology of the slurry
and the particle size distribution. The predictive capa-
bility of the new model is more accurate than previous
I
models for the test database.
0,9 For design purposes, the model can be used to accu-
0,8 rately predict energy gradients for the turbulent flow of
0,7 dx/D=O, 035 non-Newtonian slurries. This model is mathematically
simple and easy to apply. This will facilitate more ef-
*0,6 dx/D=O,0035 ficient design of pipe systems conveyittg non-Newtonian
Eo,,
to,4 dx/D=O,00055
slurries.

0,3
0,2 F\rlly developed rough turbulent flow
0, I The fully developed rough turbulent flow behaviour for
0 non-Newtonian slurries in pipes is independent of the
0,2 0,4 06 0,8
v/n viscous characteristics of the slurry. This constitutes a
useful engineering tool which can be used as an asymp-
Figure 10 EfFect of relative particle size on wall velocity t,ote by designers.
gra d ient When the pipe roughness exceeds the representative
particle size, then the pipe roughness size should be used
This figure shows the turbulent, velocity profile for the to model the flow.
new model plotted for different representative particle The new model confirms the findings and method of
sizes (d.) for a constant average pipe velocity of 3 m/s. Bowenll and provides a rationale for his correlation.
Figure 10 shows that the effect of relative particle size The particle roughness effect reduces the velocity gra-
in the new model is to reduce the velocity gradient in dient in the wall region, similar to the effect of conven-
the wall region, in a similar way to conventional pipe tional pipe roughness. Outside of the wall region. the
roughness. continuum approximation has been accepted and no par-
The new model does not take into account any other ticle/fluid interactions have been considered.
fluid/particle interaction which may occur.
Reversion to the Newtonian rnodel
Conclusions The new model reverts to the Newtonian model asymp-
t,ot,es under Newtonian conditions.
Rheological characterisatiorr
The correct procedure for obtaining the rheology of the Final conclusiorrs
slurries is critical in the smooth wall turbulent region
Despite the fact that the new theoretical analysis is
and assumptions regarding rheological model should be
based on qualitative interpretations of physical be-
kept as gerleral as possible. The method employed herel4
haviour, it remains, to some significant extent, &r em-
has yielded consistently accurate rheological characteri-
pirical description.
sations. Accurate rheology is particularly important for
turbulent flow predictions in the smooth wall turbulent In the absence of any exact theoretical analysis, it is
important, from an engineering perspective, to develop
reglon.
models which satisfactorily interpret experimental data
and which provide a competent basis for design. The as-
The effect of solid particles sumptions, approxirnations and simplifications present
The preserlce of solid particles present in a rlon- in t,he new analysis will doubtless prove controversial,
Newtonian slurry affects both quantitatively and quali- btrt this is to be seen as healthy debate which, it is
tatively the turbulent, pipe flow behaviour of the slurrl'. hoped, will ftrrther both the science and practice which
Particle roughness effect comprises engineering t,echnology.

R & D Jountal, 1996, I2f 2) 78


The ultimate test of the new analysis is whether it is an lI2l Dodge DW & Metzner AB 1959. Turbulent flow
improvement on existing analyses and models. The evi- of non-Newtonian systems. AICHE Journal, 5,
dence presented in this paper shows that the new anal- 189 -204.
ysis does provide a significant improvement and can'be
[13] Kemblowski Z k Kolodziejski J 1973. Flow
used as a basis for practical design. resistances of non-Newtonian fluids in transi-
tional and turbulent flow. Int. Chem. Eng., 13,
265-27 ,9.

Acknowledgements
[14] Lazarus JH Er Slatter PT 1988. A method for
the rheological characterisation of tube viscome-
The author wishes to acknowledge the support of Prof. ter data. ,Ioumal of pipelines, 7 , 165 -L76.
M.O. de Kock of the Department of Civil Engineering,
University of Cape Town and the Council of the Cape [15] Wilson KL,- 1986. Modelling the effects of
Technikon, without whom this work would not have been non-Newtonian and time-dependent slurry be-
possible. haviour. 1?th Int. Conf. on the hydraulic trans-
port of solids in pipes, Hydrotransport 10, Paper
J 1, 283-289.
RBFERENCES [16] Thornas AD 8r Wilson KC 1987. New analysis
[1] Mun R 1988 . Turbulent pipe flo,
of yield stress of non-Newtouiatr flow- yield- power-law fluids.
fl,uids. MEngS thesis, University of Melbourne. Can J C'hem, 8r,9,65, 335-338.

I2l Hamis J k Quader AKMA I97I. Design proce- [1i] Claldwell DH k Babbitt HE I94I. The flow of
dures for pipelines transporting non-Newtonian muds, sludges and suspensions in circular pipes.
fluids and solid liquid systems. Brit. Chem. En- Trans. Am. Inst. Chem. Eng., 37,237-266.
grg., 16 , 307 -3 1 1 .
[18] Hedstriim BOA 1952. Flow of plastics materials
t3] Shook CA U Roco MC 1991. Slurry fow: prin- in pipes . Industrial and engineering chemistry,
ciples and practice. Butterworth Heinemann. 44^ 651-656.

[a] Xu J, Gillies R, Small M & Shook CA 1993. Lam- [19] Metzner AB k Reed JC 1955. Flow of non-
inar and turbulent flow of kaolin slurries, 1?th Newtonian fluids correlation of the latninar,
Int. Conf. on slurcy handling and pipeline trans- transition and turbulent flow regions. AICH E
port. Hydrotransport 12, BHR Group, 595-613. J ourna,l, L. 434-440.

PT 1994. Transitional and turbulent flow [20] Tomita Y 1959. A study on non-Newtonian flow
[5] Slatter
of non-Newtonian slurries in pipes. PhD thesis, in pipes. Bull. JSME, 2, 10- 16.
University of Cape Town. [21] Michiyoshi I, Matsumoto R, Mizuno K & Nakai
k Clift R 1992. Slurry M 1966. Flow of slurry through a circular tube.
t6l Wilson KC, Addie GR
v r S i-ie c
Friction factor for tubes. Part II, Int Chem.
:::"";::"5 J* T:!,"#;:: ;:{,;" f]'" Eng.,, 6, 382-388.

[7] Schlichting H 1960. Chapter XX in Boundary l22l Edwards MF k Smith R 1980. The turbu-
layer theory, 4th edn, McGraw-Hill, New York. lent flow of non-Newtonian fluids in the ab-
sence of anomalous wall effects. Journal of non-
[8] Colebrook CF 1939. Turbulent flow in pipes, with Newtonian fl,uid mechanics, 7, 77 -90.
particular reference to the transition region be-
tween the smooth and rough pipe laws. ,I. Instn. [23] Sive AW 1988. An analytical and experirnental
investigation of the hydraulic transport of high
Ciuil Engrs., No. 4, Paper 5204, 133-156.
concentration mixed regime slurries. PhD thesis,
tgl Torrance BMcK 1963. Friction factors for tur- University of Cape Town.
bulent non-Newtonian flow in circular pipes. SA
124) Govier GW 8. Azrz K 1972. The Flow of Com-
Mechanical Engineer, 13, 89-91.
pler Midures in Pipes. van Nostrand Reinhold
[10] Wilson KC & Thomas AD 1985. A new analysis Co.
of the turbulent flow of non- Newtonian fluids.
Can. J. Chem. Eng., 63, 539-546. [25] Abbas MA k Crowe CT 1986. The effect of
particle size and concentration on the flow prop-
[1 1] Bowen RIB 1961. Designing turbulent flow sys- erties of a homogeneous slurry. In International
tems. CheTn. Eng., 68, I43-150. symposium on, slurry flous, MC Roco & W

R & D Journal, 1996, I 2(2) 79


Wiedenroth (eds). New York: ASME Vol FED- flows. MC Roco & W Wiedenroth, (eds). New
38 109- rr2. York: ASME Vol FED-38, 9-15.
JT, Mannheimer RJ, Grimley TA & Mor-
126l Park [32] Knight J 1993. Private communication, Physics
row TB 1989. Pipe flow measurements of a trans- Department, University of Cape Town.
parent non-Newtonian slurry. fournal of fluids
[33] Slatter PT 1986. The rheological characterisa-
engineering, 1L1, 331-336. tion of non-Newtonian slurries using a novel bal-
anced beam tube viscometer, MSc dissertation,
l27l Janna WS 1983 . Introduction to fl,uid mechan-
ics.,Brooks/Cole Engineering Division. University of Cape Town.
[34] Slatter PT k Lazarus JH 1988. The applica-
[2S] Lumley JL 1978. In Topics in applied physics, tion of viscometry to the hydraulic transport of
Vol. 12; Turbulence, (.d.) P Bradshaw ,2nd edn,
backfill material . Conf. Backfi,ll in South African
Springer-Verlrg, New York.
mines. (SAIMM).
[29] Hanks RW & Dadia BH L971. Theoretical anal- [35] Hanks RW 1981. Course notes. Hydraulic desigrt
ysis of the turbulent flow of non-Newtonian slur-
for flow of compler fl,uids. Richard W Hanks As-
ries in pipes. AICHE Journal, L7, 554-557 .
sociates, Inc. Orem, Utah. USA.

[30] Slatter PT & Lazarus JH 1993. Critical flow in [36] Neill RIG 1988. The rheology and flow be-
slurry pipelines. 12th Int. Conf. on slurcy han- haviour of high concentration mineral slurries.
dling and pipeline transport, Hydrotransport 12, MSc dissertation, University of Cape Town.
BHR Group, 639-654. RE 1994. Private Communication,
[37] Loewenthal
[31] Dedegil MY 1986. Drag coefficient and settling
University of Cape Town.
velocity of particles in non-Newtonian suspen- [38] Moody LF 1944. Friction factors for pipe flow.
sions. In International symposium on slurry Trans ASME, 67I- 684.

R & D Journal, 1996, 12(2) 80