Performance of drag models for simulation of fluidized beds with Geldart D particles

Koralkar, Naval; Bose, Manaswita

doi:10.1016/j.apt.2016.11.008

Cited by 34 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As U in increases from 2 to 4U mf , the measured Ūp diverges from all presented numerical results. Similar observations have been reported previously [44,45,46], again making the seemingly bad validation result a success in terms of code-to-code benchmarking the preliminary MFiX-Exa code. We note that the disagreement with experiment is not quite as poor as indicated in Fig.…”

Section: Sscp-i Fluidized Bedsupporting

confidence: 87%

Benchmarking of a preliminary MFiX-Exa code

Fullmer¹,

Almgren²,

Rosso³

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

MFiX-Exa is a new code being actively developed at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and the National Energy Technology Laboratory as part of the U.S. Department of Energy's Exascale Computing Project. The starting point for the MFiX-Exa code development was the extraction of basic computational fluid dynamic (CFD) and discrete element method (DEM) capabilities from the existing MFiX-DEM code which was refactored into an AMReX code architecture, herein referred to as the preliminary MFiX-Exa code. Although drastic changes to the codebase will be required to produce an exascale capable application, benchmarking of the originating code helps to establish a valid start point for future development. In this work, four benchmark cases are considered, each corresponding to experimental data sets with history of CFD-DEM validation. We find that the preliminary MFiX-Exa code compares favorably with classic MFiX-DEM simulation predictions for three slugging/bubbling fluidized beds and one spout-fluid bed. Comparison to experimental data is also acceptable (within accuracy expected from previous CFD-DEM benchmarking and validation exercises) which is comprised of several measurement techniques including particle tracking velocimetry, positron emission particle tracking and magnetic resonance imaging. The work concludes with an overview of planned developmental work and potential benchmark cases to validate new MFiX-Exa capabilities.

show abstract

Section: Sscp-i Fluidized Bedsupporting

confidence: 87%

Benchmarking of a preliminary MFiX-Exa code

Fullmer¹,

Almgren²,

Rosso³

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This element is critical for reliable predictions, and its selection is often based on trial and error. 43,44 Many drag models were developed and can be found in the review papers. 45 In this study, Geldart group B particle was investigated, and the grid is relatively fine.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…The drag forces represent the interphase exchange between the solids and the fluid and are associated with particle size, shape, and density. This element is critical for reliable predictions, and its selection is often based on trial and error. , Many drag models were developed and can be found in the review papers . In this study, Geldart group B particle was investigated, and the grid is relatively fine.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coarse-Grained DEM–CFD Simulation of Fluidization Behavior of Irregular Shape Sand Particles

Gao

2022

Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accurate modeling and simulation of irregular shape sand particle fluidization are challenging as particle shape-resolved simulation is complex and time-consuming. In this study, the coarse-grained discrete element model (CG-DEM)-computational fluid dynamics (CFD) was adopted to improve the computational feasibility of traditional CFD−DEM and simplify the mathematical modeling by lumping a certain amount of physical particles into a numerical parcel. 3D CGDEM−CFD simulated the fluidization behavior of irregular shape sand particles in a fluidized bed, and several key parameters or model settings were assessed to identify critical model factors. Moreover, the impact of the model parameters on hydrodynamics was quantified by comparing the simulation results with the experimental data. The results demonstrate that applying a rolling friction model can increase the simulation accuracy of the fluidization behavior of non-spherical sand particles.

show abstract

“…It seems that the observed slugging regime becomes more difficult to predict with a simple drag model and particle–wall interactions. Koralkar and Bose compared the simulation results from six different drag models and concludes that it is difficult to select a single drag model to match all the studied cases. Ayeni et al proposed a new drag model which was claimed to reduce errors due to heterogeneous structures in fluidized beds.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Different Discrete Particle Methods Ability To Predict Gas-Particle Flow in a Small-Scale Fluidized Bed

Gopalan

Benyahia

2017

Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several discrete particle methods exist in the open literature to simulate fluidized bed systems, such as discrete element method (DEM), time-driven hard sphere (TDHS), coarse-grained particle method (CGPM), coarse grained hard sphere (CGHS), and multiphase particle-in-cell (MP-PIC). The main difference between these methods is in the treatment of particle–particle interactions: by calculating collision forces (DEM and CGPM), using momentum conservation laws (TDHS and CGHS), or based on the particle stress model (MP-PIC). Here, these methods are compared by simulating the same small-scale fluidized bed with the same open-source code MFIX. The results indicate that both modeling the particle–particle collision by TDHS and lumping a few particles in a parcel increase the computation speed with little loss in accuracy. However, the MP-PIC method predicts an unphysical particle–particle overlap, which results in incorrect overall bed hydrodynamics. These results suggest using the CGHS method for fluidized bed simulations owing to its accuracy and efficiency.

show abstract

Performance of drag models for simulation of fluidized beds with Geldart D particles

Cited by 34 publications

References 53 publications

Benchmarking of a preliminary MFiX-Exa code

Benchmarking of a preliminary MFiX-Exa code

Coarse-Grained DEM–CFD Simulation of Fluidization Behavior of Irregular Shape Sand Particles

Assessment of Different Discrete Particle Methods Ability To Predict Gas-Particle Flow in a Small-Scale Fluidized Bed

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About