2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.powtec.2011.09.020
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Open-source MFIX-DEM software for gas-solids flows: Part II — Validation studies

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

11
72
0
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 167 publications
(84 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
11
72
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…5 compares the time-averaged porosity profiles with both experiments and CFD-DEM results reported in Muller et al [52] at two heights above the distributor plate: 16.4 and 31.2 mm. In general, the present results are comparable with the experimental data but slightly over-predict the porosity especially in the vicinity of the side walls, similar findings are also reported in other validation tests of CFD-DEM methods [54,55]. At the height of 16.4 mm, the maximum difference between the predicted values and the experimental values is within 20% relative to the experimental value.…”
Section: Cfd Solversupporting
confidence: 92%
“…5 compares the time-averaged porosity profiles with both experiments and CFD-DEM results reported in Muller et al [52] at two heights above the distributor plate: 16.4 and 31.2 mm. In general, the present results are comparable with the experimental data but slightly over-predict the porosity especially in the vicinity of the side walls, similar findings are also reported in other validation tests of CFD-DEM methods [54,55]. At the height of 16.4 mm, the maximum difference between the predicted values and the experimental values is within 20% relative to the experimental value.…”
Section: Cfd Solversupporting
confidence: 92%
“…fully coupled TFM-DEM). Details of the governing equations along with the numerical implementation, including the coupling procedure, tests and validations, can be found in Garg et al (2010Garg et al ( , 2012 and Li et al (2012).…”
Section: Numerical Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The voidage near the walls is over-predict at the height of 31.5 mm by current and previous DEM simulations ( [29,71]). Li et al [72] have also simulated this bed and investigated the influence of sphericity and rolling friction on voidage profiles and have obtained similar deviations. Fig.…”
Section: Bubbling Bed Simulationmentioning
confidence: 71%
“…The current study, DEM simulation reported by Müller et al [70], and by Gopalakrishnan and Tafti [29] shows relative deviation from the experimental data, as we can see close to the walls and in the centerline velocity at heights 15 mm and 35 mm above the distributor. Li et al [72] investigated the influence of various simulation parameters, as spring constant, wall friction, sphericity, and rolling friction on vertical solid velocity profiles. These authors also obtained similar deviations in the DEM results.…”
Section: Bubbling Bed Simulationmentioning
confidence: 99%