Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
D. Milojevic
B. SchSnung
Multiphase flows in general and two-phase flows in particu- ing, for example in connection with the transport of wheat,
lar, play an important Ir.U it many engineering applications coal or other products, but also in other fields such as
and in engineering research. Particulate solid-liquid, gas- chemical engineering, mechanical engineering, energy
liquid or solid-gas flows belong to a wide class of two-phase related fields etc. In these fields, it is well known that it is
flows, usually referred to as dispersed flows. These particu- possible, by introducing particles into a fluid, to increase
late flows occur not only in the field of transport engineer- drastically the ratio of active particle surface to particle
0307-904X/84/02101-15/$03.00
o 1984 Butterworth & Co. (Publishers) Ltd. Appl. Math. Modelling, 1984, Vol. 8, April 101
Eulerian and Lagrangian predictions of particulate two-phase flows: F. Durst et al.
volume, and in this way to increase the reaction rate are known, the mass, momentum and energy transfers of
between the different phases. This positive effect of the solid to the fluid phase and vice versa can be calculated.
particles in fluid flows can be utilized for heat transfer and Treating the particle phase as a continuum too, and
mass transfer as well as for chemical reactions. Erosion and solving the appropriate equations for the fluid and the
corrosion problems are also heavily controlled by the particle phases, makes up the basic feature of the Eulerian
particles in solid-liquid and solid-gas particulate flows. approach. The volume concentration of each phase has to
Last, but not least, there are many particulate flows in be introduced and the continuity equation for both phases
nature that are of far-reaching interest, as for example the solved. The back-influence of the solid particles to the fluid
sediment transport in rivers, and the falling of rain, snow, has then to be proportional to the void fraction of the solid
hail, etc. phase.
As long as the particles of a particulate two-phase flow It is the aim of the present paper to compare both
are small enough, they follow the fluid motion and the approaches for some very simple flow configurations. The
whole flow can be treated as a homogeneous flow with chosen numerical test cases take into account the particle-
appropriately changed physical properties. This kind of fluid interactions through the drag force, based on a single
particulate two-phase flow, which is basically a single-phase particle motion, and the gravity effect. The influence of
flow, will not be considered. In the present study it is fluid turbulence on the particles, and the influence of the
presumed that the particles are large enough for there to particles on fluid flow turbulence, are neglected. It is
exist a slip velocity between the two phases. assumed that there are no particle-particle interactions and
Most of the experimental work on particulate flows has that the interactions of the particles on the wall can be
dealt, on the one hand, with the flow of and around single neglected.
particles in gas or liquid, and on the other hand, with the In the following sections the basic equations and the two
flow of suspensions, where only integral parameters are solution procedures for both the approaches to predict
taken to characterize the flow properties. An example of particulate two-phase flows are presented. As the con-
the latter is the measurement of the pressure loss of a tinuous phase is treated in the same way for the two
particulate flow in a pipe and its correlation with the total methods, the fluid equations and their numerical solutions
mass-flow rate of the solid and fluid phase. This kind of will be explained first. The different treatments of the
investigation has been forced onto studies of particulate motion of the dispersed phase and its interaction with the
two-phase flows by lack of suitable measuring techniques fluid phase are then given, first for the Eulerian method
to yield more refined information. Only during the last and then for the Lagrangian method.
few years have new experimental techniques emerged that
permit local information on both the phases to be reliably Basic equations and solution procedures
obtained. Laser-Doppler anemometry, for example, allows
The basic equations for a single-phase Newtonian fluid
the velocities, sizes and concentration of particles to be
are well known (see, for example, reference 1) and are
locally measured as well as the fluid velocity. In this way,
local flow information can be obtained in the entire flow therefore only summarized here for the case of a stationary,
domain. two-dimensional, axially symmetric laminar or turbulent
flow. With these assumptions for the flow, the continuity
Such detailed information of many relevant parameters
equation can be written as follows:
of particulate two-phase flow is absolutely necessary to
improve the assumptions introduced into two-phase flow
prediction procedures. Through detailed experimental
studies, it is also possible to see whether information on the
flow around single particles can be transferred to particu- and the momentum equations for the u and v velocity
late flow systems. In addition to this, numerical models of components of the fluid phase as:
two-phase flow can only be developed if there exist reliable
local experimental data, against which theoretical results
can be compared.
In the last 10 years, the numerical treatment of single-
phase flow problems has reached a level which permits
calculations for laminar as well as turbulent flows. With the
increasing capacity of available computers, systems of
nonlinear, coupled, partial differential equations can be
solved for exceedingly complex flow problems. With two-
(2)
phase flows, it is necessary to solve additional transport
equations for the second phase and to handle those inter-
action terms which treat the mass, momentum and energy
exchanges between the two phases.
=_ap+2-a p-av
Particulate two-phase flows can be dealt with theoreti-
cally or numerically in two ways, and there are two
approaches to describe the transport equations for the
ay ay ay ( 1
particulate phase. The Lagrangim approach treats the fluid
phase as a continuum and predicts the trajectory of a single
+;[p(E+$)] +yt-p,
particle in the fluid flow as a result of various forces acting
For a turbulent flow, the laminar viscosity /J is replaced by
on the particle. By assuming different starting positions
an effective viscosity:
of the particles and following their trajectories, a solid-
fluid flow can be simulated. As the locations of the particles Peff = c1+ Pt (4)
and hence the present approach to compute the fluid In the Lagrangian approach, the gain or loss of particle
motion uses an eddy viscosity concept for the Reynolds momentum is calculated and included as a sink or source
shear stress. term in the fluid momentum equation. The drag force
Furthermore, to yield a local description of the turbu- between the two phases is calculated in the Eulerian
lent momentum transport in the fluid, the turbulent approach and added with opposite signs to the momentum
viscosity pt is described by the turbulence energy k and the equations of both the phases. Similarly, other terms that
turbulence dissipation rate e, for which transport equations describe interactions between the phases can be added to
have to be solved. Details of this so-called k-e model have the momentum equations.
been given by Rodi.’ The turbulence model formulated in Generally, in particulate two-phase flows, the particles
reference 2 for single-phase flow has not been changed for have a density different from that of the fluid. Therefore
the two-phase flow calculations presented in this report. the gravity term has to be included in the momentum
Hence, the present predictions assume that the particles do equations of the continuous phase. The resulting pressure
not change the turbulence structure of the fluid phase and in the fluid equations is the static pressure, which also takes
that there is no influence of the turbulent fluctuations on into account buoyancy effects. As the gravity term will be
the particles. This will be modified by the authors as soon dependent on the particle concentration, its magnitude
as they have more physical information from experimental changes with location in space.
studies of flow-particle interactions. The above-mentioned additional momentum terms in
For the calculation of a single-phase flow, the boundary the fluid momentum equations model the back-influence
conditions are normally specified in the following manner: of the particles on the fluid.
In the Lagrangian approach; Newton’s law of motion is
Inlet: u, v are prescribed used to find the velocity of every particle in the flow
domain. Integration of the velocity with time gives the
au av
Exit : -_=-_=() particle path, so that the particle velocities and locations
ax ax can be used to get the momentum transfer terms. In the
(5) Eulerian approach, the void fraction of the particles in
Wall: u=v=o
1 every point of the flow domain is solved from a particle
continuity equation, rather than the individual particle
Symmetry axis: E = 0, v=o locations being determined. Together with the particle
(pipe axis) velocities, which are known as a function of space, the
corresponding transfer terms can be derived in the Eulerian
These equations for single-phase flows are also taken as a method.
starting point for the transport equations of the continuous The numerical solution procedure of the extended trans-
phase of the particulate two-phase flows treated in this port equations of the continuous phase are the same for
report. In any continuation of the present study, they have both the approaches and the basic ideas are presented
to be changed in such a way that the presence of the below. The calculation procedure is based on the TEACH
particles are taken into account in a physically correct way. code, which has been developed at Imperial College,
In particulate two-phase flows the particle phase London, and which has been described in detail by Patanka
occupies a definite volume, and this has to be taken into and Spalding.374
account in formulating the transport equations for the fluid The partial differential equations for the mass and the
phase. Only the part of the incoming volume which is not momentum are solved by using finite differences, derived
taken by the particle phase enters the continuity and by integrating the differential equations over control
momentum equations for the fluid phase. In the Lagrangian volumes. For this an orthogonal grid is applied, where
approach the volume of the particles is neglected, so that the two velocities and the pressure are stored in staggered
the continuity equation of the fluid does not have to be positions (Figure I ). The necessary linearization of the
changed and the different terms in the fluid momentum nonlinear equations is performed by hybrid differences to
equations do not have to be weighted by the corresponding
volume concentrations. With this simplification, only the
momentum equations have to be solved for each particle
class in the Lagrangian approach. For the Eulerian method,
a volume concentration of the fluid and the particle phase
will be defined and a continuity equation solved for every
phase. In addition to this, the different terms in the
momentum equations are weighted by the volume concen- - u,up
tration.
In the equations for the continuity and momentum v, vp
t
transport of both phases, interaction terms occur. Since, in
the present predictions, it is assumed that there is no phase
change, only the momentum transfer between the phases
has to be considered. This transfer of momentum yields
additional terms that have to be included in the momentum
equation of the fluid phase. It is assumed here that they
will be dependent on the velocity difference between the
two phases. Of course, the momentum transfer from the
particle phase to the fluid phase has to be opposite to the
corresponding momentum transfer from the fluid to the
particles. Figure 7 Staggered grid and control volume
get an implicit finite difference scheme. Because of the account the fact that both the phases are flowing through
elliptic nature of the partial differential equations, an the control volume.
iterative solution procedure is employed. We start with As there is no mass exchange between the two phases,
distributions for the velocity and pressure fields, and two separate continuity equations exist:
calculate the fluid velocities from the momentum equations.
Thereafter, the solution of a pressure correction equation
(7)
(Poisson equation), which has been derived from the
continuity equation, yields corrected values for the velocity
and for the dispersed phase:
and the pressure fields so that the continuity equation is
satisfied. With the corrected values, the momentum
equations are solved again and the whole procedure is
repeated until convergence is achieved. This was assumed
to be the case when the normalized residuals at each point, The particles will have constant density, so that the
summed over the whole calculation domain, were each continuity equation of the dispersed phase can be written
smaller than 0.005. as:
The finite difference equations are solved using a tri-
diagonal matrix algorithm. The velocities and the location
or the ‘void fraction of the particles’ are obtained by
$ (qJ + 5$ (CqJ =0
Continuity equations
- flpg - 0.75 o$cD $2Re,(u - up) (10)
The Eulerian approach is based on the assumption that
there are two continua in two-phase flow. At one point
in the flow domain and at a specific time, however, only The fluid momentum equation in they direction is:
one fluid can be present. As with a numerical procedure,
it is not possible to resolve every point in time or space;
it is necessary to average over a specific time and space.
Definition of a volume concentration gives the fraction of a
control volume which is occupied by the first or the second
phase.
The void-fraction of the dispersed phase is:
2p/l av v
As stationary flow problems only are being dealt with, it is +_ -_- -0.75@3c~~Rep(v-Vn)(ll)
assumed that this variable is not changing with time and an r ( ay r1
integration with time is thus not necessary. In order to get
a physically reasonable meaning for the void-fraction, the The starting point for the momentum equations of the
ratio of the control volume and the particle volume should dispersed phase is Newton’s law of motion for a particle in
be much larger than unity; otherwise the concept that the a fluid, which is, for the x direction:
dispersed phase can be treated as a continuum is not
justified. The control volume over which the void-fraction
(12)
is averaged is the same as that for the numerical control
volume approach. The transport of mass or momentum has
now to be weighted by this void-fraction, to take into Changing the total by the substantial derivative and
Solution procedure
and the dispersed phase momentum equation in the _Y The numerical solution procedure is based on the same
direction is: ideas as for single-phase flow. Instead of three, six partial
differential equations have to be discretized and solved with
; @PPUPVP)
+ s
(cuppv;)
an implicit difference scheme. The location of the void-
fraction in the staggered grid is at the same nodes as is the
time increment At, and r is the particle characteristic time here that the second term on the right-hand side of equation
defined by : (29) is very often much larger than the first one.
4~p, i di’
7= (26) Void-fraction
31.1CDKen The void-fraction, which is used in the Eulerian
The particle position after the time interval At is determined approach, has to be calculated also by the Lagrangian
from : method, to compare the results of both the approaches.
For the arbitrary control volume V and a single particle
trajectory, the void-fraction is given by:
(27)
ti$(tOrrt - tin)
OLij= (32)
Note that equation (23) can be also solved using a Pp,i v
Runge-Kutta integration, as was suggested by Lockwood
et al. l6 For all the particle trajectories crossing the control
volume, the following equation is obtained:
Solution procedure
tin
For the calculation of the fluid-particle elliptic flow
field, a solution scheme modified from the TEACH
where tin and tout are the times when the particle enters program was used. The calculations for the particle veloci-
and leaves the control volume. However, the calculation of ties, trajectories and the source terms were incorporated
the source terms is more efficient if we multiply equation into the iteration loop after solving the equations for the
(23) by at dt and integrate it over the residence time of fluid. Large scatterings of the particle source terms during
the particle in the control volume Atn = tout - tin: the iterative calculations were damped by under-relaxation.
The solutions were assumed to have converged when the
S$ = fi$(Vfi,out- VJ,,in)-$g l -p normalized sums of all residuals for the axial and radial
( ) momentum equations and for the continuity equation
PP, i
were less than 5 x 1Oe3. The same convergence criterion was
X Ctout- tin) (29) also used for the Eulerian approach.
In the case of a liquid-solid two-phase flow, the back-
The mass flow rate of the particles along the trajectory influence of the particles on the fluid is small and the
is: convergence is reached as fast as for single-phase flow.
+=mq’.@ However, in the case of a gas-solid flow, especially when
(30) the particle loading is high, the back-influence can be so
The momentum source term resulting from all particle large that the solution diverges. This can be explained by
trajectories crossing the control volume is obtained from: the coupling of the Lagrangian with the Eulerian part of
the calculation, which is done by means of the particle
source terms. The particles travel along a finite number
%en = c c s$ (31)
i, cell j, cell of trajectories, leaving behind a field of source terms for
the fluid equations. This source term field must be con-
Inspection of equation (29) shows that the particle tinuous in a flow domain in order to obtain a converged
momentum source term is composed of two parts: the solution of the fluid equations. Hence, a sufficiently large
change of momentum of the particles, and the influence number of starting locations of the particles is necessary.
of all external forces acting on the particles. In our case, According to the present authors’ experience, it is almost
all other forces acting on particles, except gravity, are impossible to obtain a fully converged solution of the fluid
neglected. Some other authors using the Lagrangian equations with less than two starting locations for each
approach, such as Sharma,13 Crowe et al. l4 and Sharma grid node at the cross-section where particles are introduced
et al. l5 define the particle source term as the net efflux Most of the calculations in this paper were done with ten
of particle momentum represented by the first term on the particle starting locations per grid node in order to ensure
right-hand side of equation (29). This can lead to an convergence and to obtain a relatively continuous void-
erroneous solution of the equations for the fluid flow, fraction field.
because the interaction of particles and the fluid is realized In the Lagrangian approach presented here, the influence
through the drag force and not only through the change of the void-fraction on the fluid velocities was not taken
of the particle momentum. When particles reach their into account. Generally, this could be done, because the
settling velocities their momentum remains constant, but void-fraction field is calculated from known particle
the exchange of momentum with the surrounding fluid trajectories. It should be noted, however, that a rough
owing to the gravity force still exists. It has to be noted void-fraction field can cause convergence problems.
No. Pipe Pipe Fluid Fluid Reynolds Inlet inlet Particle Particle Particle Notes
diameter length density viscosity number void- particle loading density diameter
D Re fraction to fluid ratio d
PP
h) tin velocity y (kg/m31 (pm)
ratio
Pipe flows
1 0.2 10.0 1.0 1.6X10-' 3.525X104 5X1O-4 1.0 0.5 1000 100 upward
flow
2 0.2 10.0 1.0 1.6X10-' 5x104 2x lo-" 0.2 1.0 2500 100 upward
flow
3 0.1 15.0 1.0 1.6X1O-5 5x104 Non-uniform 1 .O 2.0 2000 100 upward
2.04 X lo-” flow
for y Q 0.7 R
4 0.1 5.0 1000 l.ox1o-3 5x104 0.1 1.0 0.1 100 upward
flow
5 0.2 1.0 1000 1.ox1o-3 8X104 0.2 0.1 0.025 500 upward
flow
6 0.1 5.0 10 1.6X10-' 5x104 Non-uniform 1 .O 2.0 Mixture: upward
2.04 X lo-” 100/300 flow
for y Q 0.7 R 50% mass
fraction each
size
Predictions of dispersed flows lated void-fraction profile at the distance 50 pipe diameters
The computer codes based on the Eulerian and Lagrangian from the inlet. The Eulerian approach gives a smooth and
equations have been used for the prediction of various almost uniform void-fraction profile, while the result of
two-dimensional particulate flows. Two simple flow con- the Iagrangian calculations depends on the number of
figurations were chosen for the comparison of the two starting locations. For 28 starting locations (two per grid
approaches: node in the inlet cross-section of the pipe), the scatter of
the points is very large. If the number of starting locations
(1) vertical pipe flow is increased to 140, the calculated points are very close to
(2) sudden expansion in a vertical pipe flow. the Eulerian solution. Because of this finding, all other
The specifications for the computer predictions carried out runs were carried out with 10 starting locations per grid
to compare the results are given in Tabk 1. node in the inlet cross-section of the pipe.
Run 2 represents a test case in which both programs
were employed to compute the steep acceleration of
Pipe j70 ws
Applications of the two computer codes to various flow
fields yielded those parameters that are most influential
on predictions of two-phase flows, for both the Eulerian
and Lagrangian approaches:
(1) choice of the number of particle starting locations in 0
t
the Lagrangian approach 0.6- 0
. . ’ b
(2) large particle accelerations or decelerations
0% OOaO .
(3) non-uniform void-fraction distributions in the Eulerian
approach
(4) high void-fractions
(5) polydispersed particle size distributions. -Euler
In Table 1 runs l-6 are used to show the advantages
and disadvantages of the two approaches with respect to
the problems stated above. Run 1 was performed with both
computer codes in order to see the influence of the number
of particle starting locations on the Lagrangian calculation
0.2
01
0
I ’
o
.
’
0.2
Lagrange NSL = 28
Lcgronge NSL = 140
’
04
I I I
0.6
I I
0.8
I I
1.0
of the void-fraction in a turbulent upward pipe flow with a Y/R
uniform void-fraction at the inlet. Figure 3 shows the calcu- Figure 3 Concentration of particles at x/D = 50
1
!
0 FluId velocity
Lagrangian approach.
Run 3 was performed to compute the influence of a
. Particle velocky
I Lagrange
x
non-uniform particle concentration in a turbulent upward
pipe flow. In the central part of the pipe inlet cross-section I
(70% of the diameter) the particle void-fraction was set to t
be 2.04 x 1Od3, while in the outer part there are no particles 01 ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 06 10
present. According to Figure 5, the two approaches predict Y/R
the same particle spreading and the same void-fraction Figure 6 Fluid and particle velocities at x/D = 150
profile at a cross-section which is located at x = 1SOD. A
comparison of the fluid and particle velocity profiles at
this cross-section (Figure 6) also shows that the two
approaches predict the same back-influence of the particles
on the fluid. The fluid velocity protile is completely
different from the one obtained for single-phase flow
calculations. Those represent a special case, i.e. (Y= 0, in
the present computations.
4.ok I
-Euler 0 20 40 60 00 100
10
- - Euler wth 10 ., smaller grid Spacing X/R
0 Lagrange
Figure 7 Pressure loss for high void-fractions
01 ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ I
0 2 4 6 8 10
X/R
Run 4 is a test case for a particulate two-phase flow with
Fjgure 4 Particle velocity along the axis a high particle void-fraction. However, a special case was
chosen for the predictions with the same density for
flurds and particles. According to Figure 7, less pressure
4.0-
drop is computed when the Eulerian approach is used.
This difference can be explained by the fact that, in the
Eulerian approach, the shear stress term is multiplied by
30- the fluid volume fraction fl= (1 - CY),in order to get con-
sistent momentum equations. This results in a decreasing
pressure loss for an increasing void-fraction of the particles,
at least in those cases where the shear stress is dominant for
the pressure drop (Ap = 0). However, in the Lagrangian
I approach, the local void-fraction information computed
- -- Inlet void fraction
l.O- - Euler
in the program is not transferred to the fluid momentum
0 Lagrange equation and, because of this, the pressure drop is the
same for the single-phase and two-phase pipe flows.
In order to obtain information on the performance of
I I I I , I I ^ I
0 the two computer codes under conditions of high particle
0 0.2 04 0.6 0.8 1.0
Y/R loadings, additional test runs were carried out for high
Figure 5 Concentration of particles at x/D = 150 particle void-fraction two-phase flows. These differed from
601 ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’
0 0.2 04 0.6 06 10
Y/R
-HH
10 IR Single phase
Euler
-
Lagrange
1
Pp+= 2500 --- o
I?
0
\i
\x
_ I!
- c
ib
Figure 73 Test geometry for separated flows
0 ‘k”“““” 10 3fl
Separated flows
As a test case of particulate two-phase flow in a sudden
expansion, the downward flow in a vertical pipe was
chosen. In this flow, streamline curvature occurs and this
influences the particle motion. Because of this, differences I
are to be expected between the results of the two compu- Figure 14 Shear-stress coefficient with x-distance
In Figure 17 it can be seen that the steep decrease in Figure 17 Normalized void-fraction at x/D = 1.02
the void-fraction resulting from the Eulerian approach is
at about the same y location as the particle nearest to the
wall which has been predicted by the Lagrangian approach. I 1
With decreasing density, the particles go nearer to the wall,
as they increasingly follow the fluid motion. As Figure 18
shows, this effect is predicted by both the methods. The
Eulerian approach, however, predicts a more distributed
particle phase, which results in a flatter fluid velocity
profile.
The differences described above between the results of
the two approaches should increase with decreasing particle
-.-
Y/R
I
0
---=T --
8 ___---------x2
--=-=-
-1 ’ I I I I
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 10
Y/R 6
Figure 75 Fluid velocity at x/D = 1 .I3
I 1
1 I I I I I I 1 I I
0’
\;; 0 500 1000 1500 2OQO 2500
5 LO- BP (kg/t+)
2 Euler Lagmnge Figure 79 Reattachment length
Single phase -
PP*=2500 --- o
r 1000 -.- x
density, in such a way that the predicted results of the two
01 I I I 1 approaches differ more and more. This is indicated in
0 0.25 0.5 0 75 1.0 Figure 19, which shows the reattachment length for
Y/R different particle densities, where the increasing disagree-
Figure 16 Fluid velocity at x/D = 24 ment between the two methods with decreasing particle
Conclusions
Since only a simple drag force interaction has been intro-
duced between the phases in both programs, and other
interaction effects have been neglected, the present study
has been more concerned with the numerics of the two
approaches than with the actual physics.
From a consideration of the equations employed to
predict particulate two-phase flows it is apparent that the
two approaches are very similar; the main difference is in
the treatment of the particle phase. This can easily be
shown by comparing how the momentum transfer terms
are handled in both computational schemes. In the program
based on the Eulerian approach, the momentum equation
of the dispersed phase is added to the continuous phase
I I I
0 025 05 0 75 10 momentum equation. In this way the introduced drag
Y/R term cancels, and instead of this two additional terms
Figure 20 Fluid velocity profiles at x/D = 24 for pp = 500 kg/m” are added. They are the mathematical description of the
back-influence of the particle motion onto the fluid, and 6 Rubinow, S. I. and Keller, J. B. ‘The transverse force on a
stem from the acceleration of the particles and the gravity spinning sphere moving in a viscous fluid’, J. Fluid Mech. 196 1,
11,447
influence. Considering the particle acceleration term, for 7 Roache, P. J. ‘On artificial viscosity’, J. Computational Phys.
example, and integrating this term over a control volume, as 1972,10,169
is done in the Eulerian approach, we obtain the momentum 8 Leonard, B. P. ‘A stable and accurate convective modelling
transfer by the difference in the inlet and outlet particle procedure based on quadratic upstream interpolation’, Comp.
Meth. Appl. Mech. Engng 1979, 19,59
momentum, quite the same as in the Lagrangian approach.
9 Leonard, B. P. ‘A stable, accurate, economical and compre-
It is for this reason that the back-influence is treated hensible algorithm for the Navier-Stokes and scalar transport
basically in the same manner in both computational equations’, 2nd International Conference on Numerical Methods
schemes. This clearly indicates that differences in the in Laminar and Turbulent Flow, Venice, 1981
results obtained cannot result from the physics of the 10 Leonard, B. P. ‘A survey of finite differences with upwinding
for numerical modelling of the incompressible convective-
interactions between fluid and particles, but rather are diffusion equation’, in ‘Recent advances in numerical methods
caused by the numerical treatments of the various terms. in fluids, 2’, Pentech Press, London, 1981
The results of the computations show that both 11 Pereira, J. C. ‘A comparison between hybrid and quadratic
approaches have their advantages, generally speaking. The upstream differencing for low and high Reynolds number
Lagrangian approach gives more detailed information on elliptic flows’, Institut fi.ir Hydromechanik, University of
Karlsruhe, to be published
the particle phase yielding the trajectories and the resi- 12 Migdal, D. and Agosta, D. V. ‘A source flow model for
dence times of the particles in certain flow regions. Owing continuum gas-particle flow’, Trans. AWE, J. Appl. Mech.
to the very small time increments used for the calculation 1967,34E, 860
of the particle velocities and trajectories, the Lagrangian 13 Sharma, M. P. ‘Numerical and experimental study of gas-particle
flows in orifices and venturis: application to flowmeter design’,
approach gives better predictions of the flow with high
Ph.D. Thesis, Washington State University, 1977
particle velocity gradients and is less subject to discretiza- 14 Crowe, C. T., Sharma. M. P. and Stock. D. E. ‘The particle
tion errors of the particles, even if a coarse grid for the source-inceIl (PSI-cell) model for gas droplet flows’, Trans.
fluid phase is used. A well-known advantage of the ASME, J. Fluids Engng 1977,325
15 Sharma, M. P., Cornelius, D. K., Rice, J. G. and Dougan, D. R.
Lagrangian approach, that the computer storage require-
‘Numerical computation of swirling g&-particle flows: applica-
ment does not increase with the number of particle size tion to pulverized coal classifiers’. ASME Winter Annual
groups l6 has been confirmed by the present study. The Meeting, Nov. 1980, Paper No. 8i)-WA/HT-31
back&luence of polydispersed particles on the fluid can 16 Lockwood, F. C., Salooja, A. P. and Syed, S. A. ‘A prediction
be satisfactorily predicted if the average diameter is used in method for coal-fired furnaces’, Cornbust. Flame 1980, 38, 1
17 Cliff, R. and Gauvin, W. H. ‘Motion of entrained particles in
the Eulerian approach; but to obtain more complete in- gas streams’, Canad. J. Chem. Eng. 1971,49,439
formation about the particulate phase, the equation of 18 Soo, S. L. ‘Fluid dynamics of multiphase systems’, Blaisdell
motion of each particle size has to be solved, as in the Publishing Co., 1967
Lagrangian approach. This would be very time-consuming
and the Lagrangian approach is therefore recommended for
polydispersed distributions. No tation
Convergence problems of the Lagrangian approach, in
cases where the particle loadings are high, are easily over- axial coordinate
come by the Eulerian approach, which is superior for radial coordinate
suspension flows with high void-fractions. The problem of radial coordinate
numerical diffusion in separated flows can be avoided by density of fluid
choosing a suitable higher order difference scheme. The axial velocity of fluid
main advantage of the Eulerian method is in its simulation radial velocity of fluid
of turbulent mixing processes of the particles. In a real pressure
flow the particle concentration distribution (as in test molecular dynamic viscosity of fluid
run 6) would spread according to the capacity of the effective viscosity @,ff = p + pt)
particles to follow the turbulent fluctuations. This would I4 turbulent viscosity
influence the momentum and energy transfer. To predict k turbulent energy
this, the transfers have to be modelled for the prediction E dissipation
of turbulent particulate flows. Such modelling attempts (2 void fraction of dispersed phase (CX*= cr/cyO)
require, however, numerically satisfactory computational V control volume
codes for particulate two-phase flows. volume occupied by dispersed phase
7 void fraction of fluid phase
PP density of particles (p,* = pp/p)
UP axial particle velocity
References VP
radial particle velocity
1 Hughes, W. F. and Gaylord, E. W. ‘Basic equations of engineering g,g acceleration due to gravity
science’, Schaum’s Outline Series, McGraw-Hill, New York, cD drag coefficient
1964 d particle diameter
2 Rodi, W. ‘Turbulence models and their application in hydraulics’, particle Reynolds number
IAHR-Section, Experimental and Mathematical Fluid Dynamics, Rep
mp mass of a particle
1980
3 Patankar, S. V. and Spalding, D. B. ‘A calculation procedure t time coordinate
for heat, mass and momentum transfer in three-dimensional Au velocity difference (AU = u -up)
parabolic flows’, Int J. Heat Mass Transfer 1972, 15, 1787 u constant for turbulent mixing of particles
4 Patankar, S. V. ‘Numerical heat transfer and fluid flow’,
McGraw-Hill, New York, 1980
rizp total mass flow rate of particles
5 Saffman, P. G. ‘The lift on a small sphere in a slow shear flow’, 4 general variable
J. Fluid Mech. 1965,22, 385 r exchange coefficient