Effect of particle viscosity in two-fluid model on homogeneous liquid-solid fluidization under Euler-Euler framework

doi:10.11949/0438-1157.20240347

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to probe into the effect of particle viscosity on homogeneous liquid-solid fluidization, three types of two-fluid models including inviscid TFM Gidaspow A (ITFM), TFM based on KTGF (KTFM) and Brandani and Zhang simplified TFM (STFM) are used for CFD simulations in this study. The numerical results are compared with the typical experimental data from the literature and calculated values by Gibilaro formula, which shows that all three two-fluid models can reasonable predict the overall solid holdup together with all relative deviations between each two-fluid model and the experimental data are less than 3%. The solid holdup obtained by ITFM or STFM is more consistent with the characteristics of homogeneous fluidization. The three two-fluid models all show the inherent properties of the overall ring-core structure for the prediction of the time-averaged particle axial velocity. Among them, the average relative deviations of the simplified two-fluid model under the two groups of low and high liquid velocity conditions are 0.277 and 1.028 respectively. STFM is slightly closer to calculated value by Gibilaro formula than the other two models in predicting the response time of contraction process. However, the predictions of all three models deviate from the ideal process, mainly due to the extended stability time caused by the instability of the low concentration interface and the transitional stage from dense to dilute regions of particles in expansion process. In expansion process, the differences among the three models are not obvious at low operating velocity, while the result of STFM is slightly closer to calculated value by Gibilaro formula at high operating velocity. KTFM takes the longest elapsed time for simulating dynamic processes in this study.

Key words: fluidization, CFD, hydrodynamics, two-fluid model, liquid-solid two-phase flow, particle viscosity

摘要：

采用无黏性双流体模型、基于颗粒动理学的双流体模型以及Brandani和Zhang简化双流体模型探究了颗粒黏性对液固散式流化特性的影响规律。经与文献中实验数据和Gibilaro公式计算值对比后发现：3种双流体模型均能较好地预测整体固含率，与实验值相对偏差在3%以内，其中无黏性双流体模型和简化双流体模型对固含率预测更符合散式流态化特点；3种双流体模型对时均颗粒轴向速度预测均呈现整体环核结构的固有属性，其中简化双流体模型在较低和较高两组液速工况下预测的相对偏差平均值分别为0.277和1.028；当入口液速突然变化后，收缩过程中简化双流体模型对响应时间预测准确度略高，而膨胀过程中因低浓度区界面不稳定以及膨胀过程中床内颗粒形成的由浓到稀过渡段延长了稳定时间，3种模型预测均与理想过程存在一定偏差，其中液速较低时三者差异不明显，但液速较高时简化双流体模型准确性略高。基于颗粒动理学的双流体模型对动态过程模拟的计算耗时最长。

关键词: 流态化, 计算流体力学, 流体动力学, 双流体模型, 液固两相流, 颗粒黏性

CLC Number:

TQ 021.1

He ZHU, Yi ZHANG, Nana QI, Kai ZHANG. Effect of particle viscosity in two-fluid model on homogeneous liquid-solid fluidization under Euler-Euler framework[J]. CIESC Journal, 2024, 75(9): 3103-3112.

祝赫, 张仪, 齐娜娜, 张锴. 欧拉-欧拉双流体模型中颗粒黏性对液固散式流态化的影响[J]. 化工学报, 2024, 75(9): 3103-3112.

Figures/Tables 11

Table 1 Operating conditions of cases 3—case 6

参数	收缩过程		膨胀过程
参数	案例3	案例4	案例5	案例6
突变前操作液速(u_l_,0)/(m/s)	0.046	0.056	0.021	0.031
突变后操作液速(u_l_,1)/(m/s)	0.021	0.031	0.046	0.056
突变前床层高度/m	0.543	0.663	0.338	0.408
突变前固含率	0.275	0.224	0.443	0.367

Fig.1 Schematic of simulated structure

Table 2 Comparisons of overall solid holdup predicted by three two-fluid models

操作液速/(m/s)	实验	ITFM		KTFM		STFM
操作液速/(m/s)	实验	数值	偏差/%	数值	偏差/%	数值	偏差/%
0.07	0.440	0.443	0.6	0.435	1.1	0.443	0.6
0.13	0.260	0.265	1.9	0.254	2.3	0.266	2.3

Fig.2 Comparisons of contour maps of solid holdup predicted by three two-fluid models

Fig.3 Comparisons of radial profiles of time-averaged particle axial velocity predicted by three two-fluid models with experimental data

Fig.4 Relative deviation of time-averaged particle axial velocity between predicted by three two-fluid models and experimental data

Fig.5 Comparisons of bed height variation predicted by three two-fluid models with Gibilaro formula in dynamic contraction process of liquid-solid fluidized bed

Fig.6 Enlarged view of local area in dynamic contraction process of liquid-solid fluidized bed predicted by three two-fluid models

Fig.7 Comparisons of bed height variation predicted by three two-fluid models with Gibilaro formula in dynamic expansion process of liquid-solid fluidized bed

Fig.8 Enlarged view of local area in dynamic expansion process of liquid-solid fluidized bed predicted by three two-fluid models

Fig.9 Elapsed time of dynamic process

References 46

1	刘明言, 马永丽, 白丁荣, 等. 多相流态化[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2022.
	Liu M Y, Ma Y L, Bai D R, et al. Heterogeneous Fluidization[M]. Beijing: Science Press, 2022.
2	Epstein N. Applications of liquid-solid fluidization[J]. International Journal of Chemical Reactor Engineering, 2003, 1: 1-16.
3	郭慕孙, 李洪钟. 流态化手册[M]. 北京: 化学工业出版社, 2008.
	Guo M S, Li H Z. Handbook of Fluidization[M]. Beijing: Chemical Industry Press, 2008.
4	李洪钟, 郭慕孙. 气固流态化的散式化[M]. 北京: 化学工业出版社, 2002.
	Li H Z, Guo M S. Particulation of Gas-Solids Fluidization[M]. Beijing: Chemical Industry Press, 2002.
5	金涌, 祝京旭, 汪展文, 等. 流态化工程原理[M]. 北京: 清华大学出版社, 2001.
	Jin Y, Zhu J X, Wang Z W, et al. Fluidization Engineering Principles[M]. Beijing: Tsinghua University Press, 2001.
6	Limtrakul S, Chen J, Ramachandran P A, et al. Solids motion and holdup profiles in liquid fluidized beds[J]. Chemical Engineering Science, 2005, 60(7): 1889-1900.
7	Cornelissen J T, Taghipour F, Escudié R, et al. CFD modelling of a liquid-solid fluidized bed[J]. Chemical Engineering Science, 2007, 62(22): 6334-6348.
8	Peng J, Sun W, Xie L, et al. An experimental study of pressure drop characteristics and flow resistance coefficient in a fluidized bed for coal particle fluidization[J]. Minerals, 2022, 12(3): 289.
9	尤东光, 雍玉梅, 杨超, 等. 流量变化对液固流化床瞬态流化特性的影响[J]. 化工学报, 2012, 63(8): 2356-2364.
	You D G, Yong Y M, Yang C, et al. Effect of fluidizing flux change on liquid-solids fluidization characteristics[J]. CIESC Journal, 2012, 63(8): 2356-2364.
10	Asif M, Petersen J N, Kaufman E N, et al. A dynamic model of the hydrodynamics of a liquid fluidized bed[J]. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 1994, 33(9): 2151-2156.
11	Liu D, Fu Y. Dynamics of fine particles in liquid-solid fluidized beds[J]. Particuology, 2007, 5(6): 363-375.
12	Liu D, Jin G. Modeling two-phase flow in pulsed fluidized bed[J]. Particuology, 2003, 1(3): 95-104.
13	Huang X. CFD modeling of liquid-solid fluidization: effect of drag correlation and added mass force[J]. Particuology, 2011, 9(4): 441-445.
14	张仪, 李兵, 白玉龙, 等. 液固流态化动态过程中相间作用力的数值模拟及实验验证[J]. 化工学报, 2020, 71(11): 5129-5139.
	Zhang Y, Li B, Bai Y L, et al. Numerical simulation and experimental validation of inter-phase forces in dynamic process of liquid-solid fluidization[J]. CIESC Journal, 2020, 71(11): 5129-5139.
15	张仪, 白玉龙, 骆丁玲, 等. 液固散式流态化CFD模拟中曳力模型的影响[J]. 化工学报, 2019, 70(11): 4207-4215.
	Zhang Y, Bai Y L, Luo D L, et al. Effect of drag models on CFD simulations for homogeneous liquid-solid fluidization[J]. CIESC Journal, 2019, 70(11): 4207-4215.
16	Zhang K, Guan Y, Yao X, et al. Two- and three-dimensional computational studies of liquid-solid fluidization[J]. Powder Technology, 2013, 235: 180-191.
17	Zhang K, Wu G, Brandani S, et al. CFD simulation of dynamic characteristics in liquid-solid fluidized beds[J]. Powder Technology, 2012, 227: 104-110.
18	Maestri M, Salierno G, Piovano S, et al. CFD-DEM modeling of solid motion in a water-calcium alginate fluidized column and its comparison with results from radioactive particle tracking[J]. Chemical Engineering Journal, 2019, 377: 120339.
19	Liu G, Yu F, Wang S, et al. Investigation of interstitial fluid effect on the hydrodynamics of granular in liquid-solid fluidized beds with CFD-DEM[J]. Powder Technology, 2017, 322: 353-368.
20	Liu G, Yu F, Lu H, et al. CFD-DEM simulation of liquid-solid fluidized bed with dynamic restitution coefﬁcient[J]. Powder Technology, 2016, 304: 186-197.
21	Gao Z, Liu G, Guo X, et al. A dynamic coefﬁcient of restitution applied to two-fluid model in liquid-solid fluidized bed[J]. Powder Technology, 2022, 402: 117335.
22	Molaei E A, Yu A, Zhou Z. CFD-DEM modelling of mixing and segregation of binary mixtures of ellipsoidal particles in liquid fluidizations[J]. Journal of Hydrodynamics, 2019, 31(6): 1190-1203.
23	Han Q, Yang N, Zhu J, et al. Onset velocity of circulating fluidization and particle residence time distribution: a CFD-DEM study[J]. Particuology, 2015, 21: 187-195.
24	Hua L, Lu L, Yang N. Effects of liquid property on onset velocity of circulating fluidization in liquid-solid systems: a CFD-DEM simulation[J]. Powder Technology, 2020, 364: 622-634.
25	Michaelides E E, Sommerfeld M, Wachem B. Multiphase Flows with Droplets and Particles[M]. 3rd ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2023.
26	李静海, 欧阳洁, 高士秋, 等. 颗粒流体复杂系统的多尺度模拟[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2005.
	Li J H, Ouyang J, Gao S Q, et al. Multi-scale Simulation of Particle-fluid Complex Systems[M]. Beijing: Science Press, 2005.
27	Gidaspow D, Ettehadieh B. Fluidization in two-dimensional beds with a jet. 2. Hydrodynamic modeling[J]. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Fundamentals, 1983, 22(2): 193-201.
28	Kuipers J A M, Prins W, Van Swaaij W P M. Theoretical and experimental bubble formation at a single orifice in a two-dimensional gas-fluidized bed[J]. Chemical Engineering Science, 1991, 46(11): 2881-2894.
29	Gidaspow D. Multiphase Flow and Fluidization: Continuum and Kinetic Theory Descriptions[M]. Boston: Academic Press, 1994.
30	Ding J, Gidaspow D. A bubbling fluidization model using kinetic theory of granular flow[J]. AIChE Journal, 1990, 36(4): 523-538.
31	Brandani S, Zhang K. A new model for the prediction of the behaviour of fluidized beds[J]. Powder Technology, 2006, 163: 80-87.
32	祁海鹰, 戴群特, 陈程. 大型流态化多相流数值模拟的关键科学问题——曳力模型的理论分析[J]. 力学与实践, 2014, 36(3): 269-277.
	Qi H Y, Dai Q T, Chen C. The key scientific problems in the Eulerian modeling of large-scale multi-phase flows— drag model[J]. Mechanics in Engineering, 2014, 36(3): 269-277.
33	Wang J. Continuum theory for dense gas-solid flow: a state-of-the-art review[J]. Chemical Engineering Science, 2020, 215: 115428.
34	Di Felice R. Hydrodynamics of liquid fluidisation[J]. Chemical Engineering Science, 1995, 50(8): 1213-1245.
35	Beetstra R, van der Hoef M A, Kuipers J A M. Drag force of intermediate Reynolds number flow past mono- and bidisperse arrays of spheres[J]. AIChE Journal, 2007, 53(2): 489-501.
36	Di Felice R. The voidage function for fluid-particle interaction systems[J]. International Journal of Multiphase Flow, 1994, 20(1): 153-159.
37	Syamlal M, O’Brien T J. Simulation of granular layer inversion in liquid fluidized beds[J]. International Journal of Multiphase Flow, 1988, 14(4): 473-481.
38	Wen C Y, Yu Y H. Mechanics of fluidization[J]. Chemical Engineering Progress Symposium Series, 1966, 62: 100-111.
39	Gidaspow D, Bezburuah R, Ding J. Hydrodynamics of circulating fluidized beds: kinetic theory approach[C]//Potter O E, Nicklin D J. Fluidization Ⅶ, Proceedings of the 7th Engineering Foundation Conference on Fluidization. New York: Engineering Foundation, 1992: 75-82.
40	Lun C K K, Savage S B, Jeffrey D J, et al. Kinetic theories for granular flow: inelastic particles in Couette flow and slightly inelastic particles in a general flowfield[J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 1984, 140: 223-256.
41	Gibilaro L G. Fluidization-dynamics[M]. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2001.
42	Latif B A J, Richardson J F. Circulation patterns and velocity distributions for particles in a liquid fluidised bed[J]. Chemical Engineering Science, 1972, 27(11): 1933-1949.
43	Ozel A, Brändle de Motta J C, Abbas M, et al. Particle resolved direct numerical simulation of a liquid-solid fluidized bed: comparison with experimental data[J]. International Journal of Multiphase Flow, 2017, 89: 228-240.
44	Gibilaro L G, Waldram S P, Foscolo P U. A simple mechanistic description of the unsteady state expansion of liquid fluidised beds[J]. Chemical Engineering Science, 1984, 39(3): 607-610.
45	高晓根, 刘文东, 魏耀东, 等. 液固流化床内床层动态特性的CFD模拟[J]. 燃料化学学报, 2006, 34(4): 492-498.
	Gao X G, Liu W D, Wei Y D, et al. CFD simulation for the kinematic characteristics of liquid-solid flow in fluidized beds[J]. Journal of Fuel Chemistry and Technology, 2006, 34(4): 492-498.
46	邱小平, 王利民, 杨宁. 耦合EMMS曳力与简化双流体模型的气固流动模拟[J]. 化工学报, 2018, 69(5): 1867-1872.
	Qiu X P, Wang L M, Yang N. Simplified two-fluid model coupled with EMMS drag for simulating gas-solid flow[J]. CIESC Journal, 2018, 69(5): 1867-1872.

[1]	Hao TANG, Dinghua HU, Qiang LI, Xuanchang ZHANG, Junjie HAN. Numerical and visualization study on dynamic behavior of bubbles in anti-acceleration double tangent arc channel [J]. CIESC Journal, 2024, 75(9): 3074-3082.
[2]	Zhengliang HUANG, Mingrui FENG, Qi SONG, Congjing REN, Yao YANG, Jingyuan SUN, Jingdai WANG, Yongrong YANG. Inhibitory effect of premixed feedstock on particle agglomeration in fluidized pyrolysis reaction of waste resin [J]. CIESC Journal, 2024, 75(9): 3094-3102.
[3]	Zhenghang LUO, Jingyu LI, Weixiong CHEN, Daotong CHONG, Junjie YAN. Numerical simulation of heat transfer characteristic and bubble force analysis of low flow rate vapor condensation under rolling motion [J]. CIESC Journal, 2024, 75(8): 2800-2811.
[4]	Gang ZENG, Lin CHEN, Dong YANG, Haizhuan YUAN, Yanping HUANG. Visualization of local boundary thermal flow field of supercritical CO₂ inside a rectangular channel [J]. CIESC Journal, 2024, 75(8): 2831-2839.
[5]	Banghan WU, Dingbiao LIN, Haifeng LU, Xiaolei GUO, Haifeng LIU. Pipe pressure drop and transfer bottle conveying characteristics in vertical pipe pneumatic logistics transmission system [J]. CIESC Journal, 2024, 75(7): 2465-2473.
[6]	Juan WANG, Xiuming LI, Weitao SHAO, Xu DING, Ying HUO, Lianchao FU, Yunyu BAI, Di LI. Numerical simulation of flow and mass transfer characteristics in porous plate bubbling column reactor [J]. CIESC Journal, 2024, 75(3): 801-814.
[7]	Yaowen TAN, Panxing JIANG, Qing DU, Wanqiu YU, Xiaofei WEN, Zhigang ZHAN. Numerical study of the effects of operating voltage on the degradation of membrane electrodes of PEMFC [J]. CIESC Journal, 2024, 75(3): 974-986.
[8]	Wenjun LI, Zhongyang ZHAO, Zhen NI, Can ZHOU, Chenghang ZHENG, Xiang GAO. CFD numerical simulation of wet flue gas desulfurization:performance improvement based on gas-liquid mass transfer enhancement [J]. CIESC Journal, 2024, 75(2): 505-519.
[9]	Xueyi MA, Keqin LIU, Jijiang HU, Zhen YAO. CFD studies on the mixing and reaction in a solution polymerization reactor for POE production [J]. CIESC Journal, 2024, 75(1): 322-337.
[10]	Mingkun XIAO, Guang YANG, Yonghua HUANG, Jingyi WU. Numerical study on bubble dynamics of liquid oxygen at a submerged orifice [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(S1): 87-95.
[11]	Kaijie WEN, Li GUO, Zhaojie XIA, Jianhua CHEN. A rapid simulation method of gas-solid flow by coupling CFD and deep learning [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(9): 3775-3785.
[12]	Yue YANG, Dan ZHANG, Jugan ZHENG, Maoping TU, Qingzhong YANG. Experimental study on flash and mixing evaporation of aqueous NaCl solution [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(8): 3279-3291.
[13]	Chao NIU, Shengqiang SHEN, Yan YANG, Bonian PAN, Yiqiao LI. Flow process calculation and performance analysis of methane BOG ejector [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(7): 2858-2868.
[14]	Xuanzhi HE, Yongqing HE, Guiye WEN, Feng JIAO. Ferrofluid droplet neck self-similar breakup behavior [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(7): 2889-2897.
[15]	Xin DONG, Yongrui SHAN, Yinuo LIU, Ying FENG, Jianwei ZHANG. Numerical simulation of bubble plume vortex characteristics for non-Newtonian fluids [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(5): 1950-1964.