4.6 Article

Fully resolved simulations of the flow through a packed bed of cylinders: Effect of size distribution

期刊

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING SCIENCE
卷 129, 期 -, 页码 180-192

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ces.2015.01.070

关键词

Packed bed; Catalyst reactor; Granular dynamics; Particulate flow; Parallel computing

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fully resolved simulations of the flow through a fixed bed of pellets are performed to better understand the effect of the local microstructure on the energy loss, i.e., pressure drop through the bed. Both mono-disperse and poly-disperse systems as well as spherical and cylindrical pellets (solid particles) are investigated. Using a DEM-DLM/FD simulation method inspired by Wachs, A. (2009). A DEM-DLM/FD method for direct numerical simulation of particulate flows: sedimentation of polygonal isometric particles in a Newtonian fluid with collisions. Comput. Fluids 38(8), 1608-1628 and implemented here in a Finite Volume context with second order reconstruction of the particle boundary as in Rahmani, M., Wachs, A. (2014). Free falling and rising of spherical and angular particles. Phys. Fluids 26, 083301, we evidence that the computed solution converges nicely with mesh refinement and provide guidelines on the grid size to guarantee a satisfactory level of accuracy. Based on these trustworthy simulation results, we investigate the impact of the particle shape as well as the degree of poly-dispersity in the system on the pressure drop over the fixed bed in the viscous regime. Unprecedented simulation results on the flow through a bed of poly-disperse cylinders indicate that the correlation for poly-disperse spheres suggested in Van der Hoof, MA, Beetstra, R, Kuipers, J.AM. (2005). Lattice-Boltzmann simulations of low-Reynolds-number flow past mono- and bidisperse arrays of spheres: results for the permeability and drag force. J. Fluid Mech. 528, 233-254 may still be valid for cylinders of moderate aspect ratio. (C) 2015 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