Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T10:45:14.771Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Investigation of near-wall particle statistics in CFD-DEM simulations of dense fluidised beds and derivation of an Eulerian particle dynamic wall boundary condition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 February 2024

Dorian Dupuy Open the ORCID record for Dorian Dupuy [Opens in a new window] ,
Renaud Ansart Open the ORCID record for Renaud Ansart [Opens in a new window]  and
Olivier Simonin Open the ORCID record for Olivier Simonin [Opens in a new window]
Dorian Dupuy
Affiliation:
Laboratoire de Génie Chimique (LGC), Université de Toulouse, CNRS, INPT, UPS, 31400 Toulouse, France FR FERMAT, Université de Toulouse, CNRS, INPT, INSA, UPS, 31400 Toulouse, France
Renaud Ansart
Affiliation:
Laboratoire de Génie Chimique (LGC), Université de Toulouse, CNRS, INPT, UPS, 31400 Toulouse, France
Olivier Simonin*
Affiliation:
Institut de Mécanique des Fluides de Toulouse (IMFT), Université de Toulouse, CNRS, 31400 Toulouse, France
*
†Email address for correspondence: simonin@imft.fr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In two-fluid simulations of gas–solid fluidised beds, the gaseous phase and the particulate phase are modelled as continuous media. The stress exerted by the particulate medium on the container walls should be modelled to predict accurately the bed dynamics. This paper addresses the modelling of sliding particle–wall contacts in two-fluid simulations, based on reference simulations coupling computational fluid dynamics with the discrete element method (CFD-DEM), in which the individual movement of the particles is tracked. The analysis of the CFD-DEM highlights the complex near-wall behaviour of the particles, which is not reproduced by two-fluid models. Nevertheless, the particle–wall shear stress can be expressed based on the total granular pressure within the first cell off the wall. The model is validated for the two-fluid simulation of a bubbling gas–solid fluidised bed of olefin particles in the dense-fluidisation regime.

JFM classification

Multiphase and Particle-laden Flows: Fluidized beds Multiphase and Particle-laden Flows: Particle/fluid flow Boundary Layers: Boundary layer structure
Type
JFM Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 982 , 10 March 2024 , A2
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abreu, C.R.A., Macias-Salinas, R., Tavares, F.W. & Castier, M. 1999 A Monte Carlo simulation of the packing and segregation of spheres in cylinders. Braz. J. Chem. Engng 16, 395–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adnan, M., Sun, J., Ahmad, N. & Wei, J.J. 2021 Comparative CFD modeling of a bubbling bed using a Eulerian–Eulerian two-fluid model (TFM) and a Eulerian–Lagrangian dense discrete phase model (DDPM). Powder Technol. 383, 418–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agrawal, K., Loezos, P.N., Syamlal, M. & Sundaresan, S. 2001 The role of meso-scale structures in rapid gas–solid flows. J. Fluid Mech. 445, 151–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Almuttahar, A. & Taghipour, F. 2008 Computational fluid dynamics of high density circulating fluidized bed riser: study of modeling parameters. Powder Technol. 185 (1), 11–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, T.B. & Jackson, R.O.Y. 1967 Fluid mechanical description of fluidized beds. Equations of motion. Ind. Engng Chem. Fundam. 6 (4), 527–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrews, M.J. & O'Rourke, P.J. 1996 The multiphase particle-in-cell (MP-PIC) method for dense particulate flows. Intl J. Multiphase Flow 22 (2), 379–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ansart, R., García-Triñanes, P., Boissière, B., Benoit, H., Seville, J.P.K. & Simonin, O. 2017 Dense gas–particle suspension upward flow used as heat transfer fluid in solar receiver: PEPT experiments and 3D numerical simulations. Powder Technol. 307, 25–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Babic, M. 1997 Average balance equations for granular materials. Intl J. Engng Sci. 35 (5), 523–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennani, L., Neau, H., Baudry, C., Laviéville, J., Fede, P. & Simonin, O. 2017 Numerical simulation of unsteady dense granular flows with rotating geometries. Chem. Engng Res. Des. 120, 333–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benyahia, S., Syamlal, M. & O'Brien, T.J. 2005 Evaluation of boundary conditions used to model dilute, turbulent gas/solids flows in a pipe. Powder Technol. 156 (2–3), 62–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowen, R.M. 1971 Continuum Theory of Mixtures. US Army Aberdeen Research & Development Center.Google Scholar
Burtseva, L., Valdez, S.B., Werner, F. & Petranovskii, V. 2015 Packing of monosized spheres in a cylindrical container: models and approaches. Rev. Mex. Fís. E 61 (1), 20–27.Google Scholar
Buyevich, Y.A. & Shchelchkova, I.N. 1979 Flow of dense suspensions. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 18, 121–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, S. & Cowling, T.G. 1990 The Mathematical Theory of Non-Uniform Gases: An Account of the Kinetic Theory of Viscosity, Thermal Conduction and Diffusion in Gases. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Chen, X. & Wang, J. 2014 A comparison of two-fluid model, dense discrete particle model and CFD-DEM method for modeling impinging gas–solid flows. Powder Technol. 254, 94–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chorin, A.J. 1968 Numerical solution of the Navier–Stokes equations. Maths Comput. 22 (104), 745–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colin, O. & Rudgyard, M. 2000 Development of high-order Taylor–Galerkin schemes for LES. J. Comput. Phys. 162 (2), 338–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cundall, P.A. & Strack, O.D.L. 1979 A discrete numerical model for granular assemblies. Gèotechnique 29 (1), 47–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darelius, A., Rasmuson, A., van Wachem, B., Björn, I.N. & Folestad, S. 2008 CFD simulation of the high shear mixing process using kinetic theory of granular flow and frictional stress models. Chem. Engng Sci. 63 (8), 2188–2197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deng, Y., Ansart, R., Baeyens, J. & Zhang, H. 2019 Flue gas desulphurization in circulating fluidized beds. Energies 12 (20), 3908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dufresne, Y., Moureau, V., Lartigue, G. & Simonin, O. 2020 A massively parallel CFD/DEM approach for reactive gas–solid flows in complex geometries using unstructured meshes. Comput. Fluids 198, 104402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fede, P., Moula, G., Ingram, A., Dumas, T. & Simonin, O. 2009 3D numerical simulation and PEPT experimental investigation of pressurized gas–solid fluidized bed hydrodynamic. In Fluids Engineering Division Summer Meeting, vol. 43727, pp. 1833–1842. ASME.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fede, P. & Simonin, O. 2018 Direct simulation Monte Carlo predictions of coarse elastic particle statistics in fully developed turbulent channel flows: comparison with deterministic discrete particle simulation results and moment closure assumptions. Intl J. Multiphase Flow 108, 25–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fede, P., Simonin, O. & Ingram, A. 2016 3D numerical simulation of a lab-scale pressurized dense fluidized bed focussing on the effect of the particle–particle restitution coefficient and particle–wall boundary conditions. Chem. Engng Sci. 142, 215–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Février, P., Simonin, O. & Squires, K.D. 2005 Partitioning of particle velocities in gas–solid turbulent flows into a continuous field and a spatially uncorrelated random distribution: theoretical formalism and numerical study. J. Fluid Mech. 533, 1–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gobin, A., Neau, H., Simonin, O., Llinas, J.-R., Reiling, V. & Sélo, J.-L. 2003 Fluid dynamic numerical simulation of a gas phase polymerization reactor. Intl J. Numer. Meth. Fluids 43 (10–11), 1199–1220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gu, Y., Ozel, A., Kolehmainen, J. & Sundaresan, S. 2019 Computationally generated constitutive models for particle phase rheology in gas-fluidized suspensions. J. Fluid Mech. 860, 318–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van der Hoef, M.A., Ye, M., van Sint Annaland, M., Andrews, A.T., Sundaresan, S. & Kuipers, J.A.M. 2006 Multiscale modeling of gas-fluidized beds. Adv. Chem. Engng 31, 65–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hui, K., Haff, P.K., Ungar, J.E. & Jackson, R. 1984 Boundary conditions for high-shear grain flows. J. Fluid Mech. 145, 223–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, J.T. 1992 Boundary conditions for rapid granular flow: flat, frictional walls. J. Appl. Mech. 59 (1), 120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, J.T. & Louge, M.Y. 1997 On the flux of fluctuation energy in a collisional grain flow at a flat, frictional wall. Phys. Fluids 9 (10), 2835–2840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, J.T. & Savage, S.B. 1983 A theory for the rapid flow of identical, smooth, nearly elastic, spherical particles. J. Fluid Mech. 130, 187–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, P.C. & Jackson, R. 1987 Frictional–collisional constitutive relations for granular materials, with application to plane shearing. J. Fluid Mech. 176, 67–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, P.C., Nott, P. & Jackson, R. 1990 Frictional–collisional equations of motion for participate flows and their application to chutes. J. Fluid Mech. 210, 501–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Komiwes, V., Mege, P., Meimon, Y. & Herrmann, H. 2006 Simulation of granular flow in a fluid applied to sedimentation. Granul. Matt. 8, 41–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Konan, N.A., Simonin, O. & Squires, K.D. 2006 Rough wall boundary condition derivation for particle continuum equations: validation from LES/DPS of gas–solid turbulent channel flow. In Fluids Engineering Division Summer Meeting, vol. 47500, pp. 1723–1732. ASME.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kraushaar, M. 2011 Application of the compressible and low-Mach number approaches to large-eddy simulation of turbulent flows in aero-engines. PhD thesis, Université de Toulouse, France.Google Scholar
Li, T. & Benyahia, S. 2012 Revisiting Johnson and Jackson boundary conditions for granular flows. AIChE J. 58 (7), 2058–2068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, T., Grace, J. & Bi, X. 2010 Study of wall boundary condition in numerical simulations of bubbling fluidized beds. Powder Technol. 203 (3), 447–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Louge, M.Y. 1994 Computer simulations of rapid granular flows of spheres interacting with a flat, frictional boundary. Phys. Fluids 6 (7), 2253–2269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lubachevsky, B.D. 1991 How to simulate billiards and similar systems. J. Comput. Phys. 94 (2), 255–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lun, C.K.K. & Savage, S.B. 1986 The effects of an impact velocity dependent coefficient of restitution on stresses developed by sheared granular materials. Acta Mech. 63 (1), 15–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Méchitoua, N., Boucker, M., Laviéville, J., Pigny, S. & Serre, G. 2003 An unstructured finite volume solver for two phase water/vapour flows based on an elliptic oriented fractional step method. In NURETH 10, Seoul, South Korea.Google Scholar
Morioka, S. & Nakajima, T. 1987 Modeling of gas and solid particles 2-phase flow and application to fluidized-bed. J. Theor. Appl. Mech. 6 (1), 77–88.Google Scholar
Moureau, V., Domingo, P. & Vervisch, L. 2011 Design of a massively parallel CFD code for complex geometries. C. R. Méc. 339 (2–3), 141–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mueller, G.E. 1992 Radial void fraction distributions in randomly packed fixed beds of uniformly sized spheres in cylindrical containers. Powder Technol. 72 (3), 269–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mueller, G.E. 1997 Numerical simulation of packed beds with monosized spheres in cylindrical containers. Powder Technol. 92 (2), 179–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neau, H., Pigou, M., Fede, P., Ansart, R., Baudry, C., Mérigoux, N., Laviéville, J., Fournier, Y., Renon, N. & Simonin, O. 2020 Massively parallel numerical simulation using up to 36 000 CPU cores of an industrial-scale polydispersed reactive pressurized fluidized bed with a mesh of one billion cells. Powder Technol. 366, 906–924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicot, F., Hadda, N., Guessasma, M., Fortin, J. & Millet, O. 2013 On the definition of the stress tensor in granular media. Intl J. Solids Struct. 50 (14–15), 2508–2517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nigmetova, A. 2019 DEM-CFD simulation of dilute and dense particle laden flows: application to a lab-scale pressurized dense fluidized bed. PhD thesis, Université de Toulouse, France.Google Scholar
Nigmetova, A., Masi, E., Simonin, O., Dufresne, Y. & Moureau, V. 2022 Three-dimensional DEM-CFD simulation of a lab-scale fluidized bed to support the development of two-fluid model approach. Intl J. Multiphase Flow 156, 104189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ocone, R., Sundaresan, S. & Jackson, R. 1993 Gas–particle flow in a duct of arbitrary inclination with particle–particle interactions. AIChE J. 39 (8), 1261–1271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Popoff, B. & Braun, M. 2007 A Lagrangian approach to dense particulate flows. In International Conference on Multiphase Flow, Leipzig, Germany (ed. M. Sommerfield).Google Scholar
Radenkovic, D. & Simonin, O. 2018 Stochastic modelling of three-dimensional particle rebound from isotropic rough wall surface. Intl J. Multiphase Flow 109, 35–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reeks, M.W. 1991 On a kinetic equation for the transport of particles in turbulent flows. Phys. Fluids A 3 (3), 446–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rocke, F.A. 1971 The cylindrically ordered packing of equal spheres. Powder Technol. 4 (4), 180–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sabatier, F., Ansart, R., Zhang, H., Baeyens, J. & Simonin, O. 2020 Experiments support simulations by the NEPTUNE_CFD code in an upflow bubbling fluidized bed reactor. Chem. Engng J. 385, 123568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sakiz, M. & Simonin, O. 1998 Continuum modelling and Lagrangian simulation of the turbulent transport of particle kinetic stresses in a vertical gas–solid channel flow. In 3rd International Conference on Multiphase Flows, Lyon, France, vol. 66, pp. 70–91.Google Scholar
Sakiz, M. & Simonin, O. 1999 Development and validation of continuum particle wall boundary conditions using Lagrangian simulation of a vertical gas–solid channel flow. In Proc. ASME Fluids Engineering Division Summer Meeting, FEDSM99-7898. ASME.Google Scholar
Schaeffer, D.G. 1987 Instability in the evolution equations describing incompressible granular flow. J. Differ. Equ. 66 (1), 19–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneiderbauer, S., Schellander, D., Löderer, A. & Pirker, S. 2012 Non-steady state boundary conditions for collisional granular flows at flat frictional moving walls. Intl J. Multiphase Flow 43, 149–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Seckendorff, J. & Hinrichsen, O. 2021 Review on the structure of random packed-beds. Can. J. Chem. Engng 99, S703–S733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharma, A., Wang, S., Pareek, V., Yang, H. & Zhang, D. 2014 CFD modeling of mixing/segregation behavior of biomass and biochar particles in a bubbling fluidized bed. Chem. Engng Sci. 106, 264–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shu, Z., Peng, G., Wang, J., Zhang, N., Li, S. & Lin, W. 2014 Comparative CFD analysis of heterogeneous gas–solid flow in a countercurrent downer reactor. Ind. Engng Chem. Res. 53 (8), 3378–3384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Si, P., Shi, H. & Yu, X. 2019 A general frictional–collisional model for dense granular flows. Landslides 16, 485–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simonin, O. 2000 Statistical and Continuum Modelling of Turbulent Reactive Particulate Flows. Part I: Theoretical Derivation of Dispersed Phase Eulerian Modelling from Probability Density Function Kinetic Equation. VKI for Fluid Dynamics, Lecture Series, vol. 6. Von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics.Google Scholar
Sinclair, J.L. & Jackson, R. 1989 Gas–particle flow in a vertical pipe with particle–particle interactions. AIChE J. 35 (9), 1473–1486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soleimani, A., Pirker, S. & Schneiderbauer, S. 2015 a Solid boundary condition for collisional gas–solid flows at rough walls. Powder Technol. 281, 28–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soleimani, A., Schneiderbauer, S. & Pirker, S. 2015 b CFD study of the gas–particle flow in a horizontal duct: the impact of the solids wall boundary conditions. Procedia Engng 102, 1026–1037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soleimani, A., Schneiderbauer, S. & Pirker, S. 2015 c A comparison for different wall-boundary conditions for kinetic theory based two-fluid models. Intl J. Multiphase Flow 71, 94–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sommerfeld, M. & Huber, N. 1999 Experimental analysis and modelling of particle–wall collisions. Intl J. Multiphase Flow 25 (6–7), 1457–1489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Srivastava, A. & Sundaresan, S. 2003 Analysis of a frictional-kinetic model for gas–particle flow. Powder Technol. 129 (1–3), 72–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thonglimp, V., Hiquily, N. & Laguerie, C. 1984 Vitesse minimale de fluidisation et expansion des couches fluidisées par un gaz. Powder Technol. 38 (3), 233–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tingate, G.A. 1973 Some geometrical properties of packings of equal spheres in cylindrical vessels. Nucl. Engng Des. 24 (2), 153–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, J. 2020 Continuum theory for dense gas–solid flow: a state-of-the-art review. Chem. Engng Sci. 215, 115428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wen, C.-Y. & Yu, Y.H. 1966 Mechanics of fluidization. In Fluid Particle Technology, Chem. Eng. Progress. Symposium Series, vol. 62, pp. 100–111. American Institute of Chemical Engineers.Google Scholar
Wensrich, C.M. 2012 Boundary structure in dense random packing of monosize spherical particles. Powder Technol. 219, 118–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wensrich, C.M. 2014 Stress, stress-asymmetry and contact moments in granular matter. Granul. Matt. 16 (4), 597–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaichik, L.I., Oesterlé, B. & Alipchenkov, V.M. 2004 On the probability density function model for the transport of particles in anisotropic turbulent flow. Phys. Fluids 16 (6), 1956–1964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, W., Thompson, K.E., Reed, A.H. & Beenken, L. 2006 Relationship between packing structure and porosity in fixed beds of equilateral cylindrical particles. Chem. Engng Sci. 61 (24), 8060–8074.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, Y., Ding, T., Zhu, L. & Zhong, Y. 2016 A specularity coefficient model and its application to dense particulate flow simulations. Ind. Engng Chem. Res. 55 (5), 1439–1448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Dupuy et al. supplementary material 1

Dupuy et al. supplementary material
Download Dupuy et al. supplementary material 1(File)
File 279.3 KB
Supplementary material: File

Dupuy et al. supplementary material 2

Dupuy et al. supplementary material
Download Dupuy et al. supplementary material 2(File)
File 105.7 KB