SLURRIES
P.T. Slatter*
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
(4)
Higher turbulence inbensities in the wall region re- #-!r,, (*) +B-37b (6)
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:
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-
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.
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
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
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.
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
[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.
Viel mehr als nur Dokumente.
Entdecken, was Scribd alles zu bieten hat, inklusive Bücher und Hörbücher von großen Verlagen.
Jederzeit kündbar.