4.6 Article

A simulation method of coupled model for a microwave heating process with multiple moving elements

期刊

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING SCIENCE
卷 231, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ces.2020.116339

关键词

Microwave heating; Mode stirring; Conveyor belt; Heating uniformity; Multiphysics simulation

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61971295, 61701049]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A stepping algorithm based on implicit function and level set method is proposed in this study to simulate the microwave heating process of multi-component with unequal moving speed, which has been verified for accuracy through discrete method and experiments. The model is effective in improving heating uniformity and efficiency by analyzing the heating process with different components at different positions and speeds, as well as comparing the effects of different materials of mode stirrers and shapes of heated sample on the heating process.
In practical chemical applications, in order to improve the microwave heating uniformity, moving elements, such as mode stirrers, turntables and conveyor belts, have been widely used as an easy way to implement. However, different moving elements may have different shapes, modes of motion and moving speed, which makes the simulation of the heating process very difficult. In this paper, a stepping algorithm based on implicit function and level set method is proposed to simulate the microwave heating process of multi-component with unequal moving speed. The accuracy of the algorithm is verified by discrete method and experiments. Moreover, the model was used to analyze the heating process with different components at different positions and speeds. The effect of different materials of mode stirrers and shapes of heated sample on heating process were also compared. The researches show that the proposed model can effectively improve the heating uniformity and heating efficiency. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据