LABORATORY TESTING OF PIPE FLOWS OF BIMODAL COMPLEX SLURRIES

Similar documents
5. MODELING OF NON-STRATIFIED MIXTURE FLOWS (Pseudo-homogeneous flows)

DEPOSITION LIMIT VELOCITY: EFFECT OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION

FLOW OF HETEROGENEOUS SLURRY IN HORIZONTAL AND INCLINED PIPES. Pavel Vlasák, Zdeněk Chára, Jiří Konfršt, Bohuš Kysela

CONVEYING OF COARSE PARTICLES IN INCLINED PIPES. Pavel Vlasak, Zdenek Chara, Jiri Konfrst

Flow behaviour and structure of heterogeneous particles-water mixture in horizontal and inclined pipes

COMPARISON OF TRANSPORT AND FRICTION OF MONO- SIZED AND TWO-SPECIES SEDIMENT IN UPPER PLANE BED REGIME

Effect of additives on suspension pipe flow

A MODIFICATION OF THE WILSON & JUDGE DEPOSIT VELOCITY EQUATION, EXTENDING ITS APPLICABILITY TO FINER PARTICLES AND LARGER PIPE SIZES.

EFFECT OF GRAIN DENSITY ON PLANE BED FRICTION. Václav Matoušek, Vojtěch Bareš, Jan Krupička, Tomáš Picek, Štěpán Zrostlík

Modelling of dispersed, multicomponent, multiphase flows in resource industries Section 4: Non-Newtonian fluids and rheometry (PART 1)

WASTEWATER SLUDGE PIPELINE PREDICTIONS USING CONVENTIONAL VISCOMETRY AND ULTRASOUND BASED RHEOMETRY

D.R. Rector, M.L. Stewart and A.P. Poloski Pacific Northwest National Laboratory P.O. Box 999, Richland, WA

Intermezzo I. SETTLING VELOCITY OF SOLID PARTICLE IN A LIQUID

Experimentally determined distribution of granular-flow characteristics in collisional bed load transport

Direct numerical simulation (DNS) investigation of turbulent open channel flow of a Herschel Bulkley fluid

OE4625 Dredge Pumps and Slurry Transport. Vaclav Matousek October 13, 2004

CHARACTERISTICS OF SILICA SLURRY FLOW IN A SPIRAL PIPE. Keywords: Drag reduction; Particle concentration; Pitch ratio; Silica slurry flow; Spiral pipe

THE INFLUENCE OF LOCAL HINDERED SETTLING ON THE CONCENTRATION DISTRIBUTION IN SLURRY TRANSPORT. Sape Andries Miedema 1

A DEPOSIT VELOCITY EQUATION FOR OPEN CHANNELS AND PIPES. T. G. Fitton

Chapter 3 Non-Newtonian fluid

Calculation of Power and Flow Capacity of Rotor / Stator Devices in VisiMix RSD Program.

Colloquium FLUID DYNAMICS 2012 Institute of Thermomechanics AS CR, v.v.i., Prague, October 24-26, 2012 p.1

Minicourse in Industrial Mathematics

J. Matthew Treinen & Justin Jacobs. Paterson & Cooke USA, 221 Corporate Circle Suite D, Golden CO, 80401, USA.

Numerical modelling of the slurry flow in pipelines and prediction of flow regimes

The Pumping Characteristics and Rheology of Paste Fills

Modelling of dispersed, multicomponent, multiphase flows in resource industries. Section 3: Examples of analyses conducted for Newtonian fluids

Concentration Distribution of Solid Particles Transported by a Pseudoplastic Fluid

6. Basic basic equations I ( )

Chapter 6 Pneumatic Transport

A Calculator for Sediment Transport in Microchannels Based on the Rouse Number. L. Pekker Fuji Film Dimatix Inc., Lebanon NH USA.

Mechanistic model for four-phase sand/water/oil/gas stratified flow in horizontal pipes

Effect of radius ratio on pressure drop across a 90 bend for high concentration coal ash slurries

Hydraulics. B.E. (Civil), Year/Part: II/II. Tutorial solutions: Pipe flow. Tutorial 1

Steven Burian Civil & Environmental Engineering September 25, 2013

MECHANICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF STARCH BASED ELECTRORHEOLOGICAL FLUIDS

Online Estimation of Key Parameters for Settling Slurries. Dana Rose Moon

Towards prediction of fines captures

EXAMPLES (SEDIMENT TRANSPORT) AUTUMN 2018

Fluid Mechanics II Viscosity and shear stresses

INTRODUCTION TO MULTIPHASE FLOW. Mekanika Fluida II -Haryo Tomo-

1. Introduction, fluid properties (1.1, 2.8, 4.1, and handouts)

INFLUENCE OF CONCENTRATION AND ADDITIVES ON RHEOLOGICAL PROPERTIES OF COAL WATER SLURRY

15. Physics of Sediment Transport William Wilcock

THE IMPORTANCE OF RHEOLOGY SHEAR RATE RANGE FOR DNS OF TURBULENT FLOW OF YIELD STRESS FLUIDS

Applied Fluid Mechanics

WEF Residuals and Biosolids Conference 2017

Numerical analysis of fluid flow and heat transfer in 2D sinusoidal wavy channel

Sedimentation Scour Model Gengsheng Wei, James Brethour, Markus Grünzner and Jeff Burnham August 2014; Revised October 2014

CENTRIFUGAL PUMPS PERFORMANCE ESTIMATION WITH NON- NEWTONIAN FLUIDS: REVIEW AND CRITICAL ANALYSIS

APPENDIX A USEFUL EQUATIONS (METRIC AND IMPERIAL SYSTEMS) THE DEFINITION OF VISCOSITY RHEOLOGICAL (VISCOUS BEHAVIOR) PROPERTIES OF FLUIDS

FORMULA SHEET. General formulas:

Shear settling in laminar open channel flow: analytical solution, measurements and numerical simulation

Improving the Accuracy of Computational Fluid Dynamics Simulations of Nuclear Waste Mixing using Direct Numerical Simulations

LECTURE 1 THE CONTENTS OF THIS LECTURE ARE AS FOLLOWS:

FLOW OF SLURRIES OF PARTICLES WITH DENSITY CLOSE TO THAT OF WATER ABSTRACT

Hydraulics and hydrology

2, where dp is the constant, R is the radius of

Introduction to Marine Hydrodynamics

Introduction 3. Basic Mine Fill Materials 13

WATER TREATMENT PLANT OPTIMIZATION BY CONTROLLING THE SUSPENDED SOLIDS PHYSICOCHEMICAL ENVIRONMENT

Erosion of sand under high flow velocities

REE 307 Fluid Mechanics II. Lecture 1. Sep 27, Dr./ Ahmed Mohamed Nagib Elmekawy. Zewail City for Science and Technology

MM303 FLUID MECHANICS I PROBLEM SET 1 (CHAPTER 2) FALL v=by 2 =-6 (1/2) 2 = -3/2 m/s

EXAMPLE SHEET FOR TOPIC 3 AUTUMN 2013

ESTIMATING PRODUCTION AND BOOSTER PUMP LOCATION FOR LONG DISTANCE PUMPING

Disruptive shear stress measurements of fibre suspension using ultrasound Doppler techniques

Study of the Rheological Behavior of the Phosphate- Water Slurry and Search for a Suitable Model to Describe its Rheological Behavior

Non-Newtonian Turbulent and Transitional Pipe Flow

RHEOLOGICAL STUDY OF KAOLIN CLAY SLURRIES. A Thesis Submitted to the College of. Graduate studies and Research. for a Degree of Masters of Science

compare to Mannings equation

The role of a movable sandy-bed in modelling open-channel flow

V/ t = 0 p/ t = 0 ρ/ t = 0. V/ s = 0 p/ s = 0 ρ/ s = 0

Non Newtonian Fluid Dynamics

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Detroit District. Sediment Trap Assessment Saginaw River, Michigan

SELECTING THE BEST RHEOLOGICAL AND PIPE TURBULENT FLOW PREDICTION MODELS FOR NON- NEWTONIAN FLUIDS USE OF RMSE and R 2 vs. AIC

arxiv: v1 [physics.flu-dyn] 27 Aug 2016

LECTURE 6- ENERGY LOSSES IN HYDRAULIC SYSTEMS SELF EVALUATION QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

PART 2:! FLUVIAL HYDRAULICS" HYDROEUROPE

Dynamic (absolute) Viscosity

AGITATION/GAS-LIQUID DISPERSION. CHEM-E Fluid Flow in Process Units

C C C C 2 C 2 C 2 C + u + v + (w + w P ) = D t x y z X. (1a) y 2 + D Z. z 2

What s important: viscosity Poiseuille's law Stokes' law Demo: dissipation in flow through a tube

LEAKLESS COOLING SYSTEM V.2 PRESSURE DROP CALCULATIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS

CFD Simulation in Helical Coiled Tubing

ESE TOPIC WISE OBJECTIVE SOLVED PAPER II

Lectures on Applied Reactor Technology and Nuclear Power Safety. Lecture No 6

Coal Water Slurry technology: problems and modeling solutions

PROPERTIES OF FLUIDS

Analysis of Frictional Pressure Drop based on Flow Regimes of Oil-water Flow in Pipeline

PUMP SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND SIZING. BY JACQUES CHAURETTE p. eng.

CHAPTER EIGHT P U M P I N G O F L I Q U I D S

On-line measurement of rheological parameters for feedback control of thickeners

CHAPTER 3. CONVENTIONAL RHEOMETRY: STATE-OF-THE-ART. briefly introduces conventional rheometers. In sections 3.2 and 3.

Q1 Give answers to all of the following questions (5 marks each):

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

Transactions on Engineering Sciences vol 18, 1998 WIT Press, ISSN

Water Circuit Lab. The pressure drop along a straight pipe segment can be calculated using the following set of equations:

AGITATION AND AERATION

Lesson 6 Review of fundamentals: Fluid flow

Transcription:

18th International Conference on TRANSPORT AND SEDIMENTATION OF SOLID PARTICLES 11-15 September 2017, Prague, Czech Republic ISSN 0867-7964 ISBN 978-83-7717-269-8 LABORATORY TESTING OF PIPE FLOWS OF BIMODAL COMPLEX SLURRIES Kesely Mikoláš 1, Matoušek Václav 1 1. Czech Technical University in Prague, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Department of Hydraulics and Hydrology, Prague, Thákurova 7, 166 29 Praha 6, Czech republic; e-mail: mikolas.kesely@fsv.cvut.cz This paper deals with pipe flow of coarse solids in non-newtonian carrier. In industrial practise, such complex flows occur for instance in transportation of thickened tailings. We study transport characteristics of such flows using a laboratory analogue in the form of different fractions of glass beads in Carbopol carrier. We test a possibility to use a multi-component model developed originally for slurries with Newtonian carrier to predict frictional head loss in the non-newtonian based turbulent flow of complex slurry in pipe. KEY WORDS: non-newtonian, rheological properties, suspension, component model, tailings. NOTATION C v volumetric concentration [-] D pipe diameter [m] d h particle diameter [m] du/dy strain rate [s -1 ] K coefficient of consistency [-] k scaling coefficient [-] n flow index [-] S relative density [-] V 50 reference velocity [m s -1 ] V m mean velocity [m s -1 ] V sm deposition limit velocity [m s -1 ] μ eq equivalent (secant) viscosity [Pa s] ν r kinematic viscosity ratio [-] ρ density [kg m -3 ] τ shear stress [Pa] τ y yield stress [Pa] 161

1. INTRODUCTION Pipeline hydraulic transport has been considered a progressive technology for conveying large quantities of bulk materials for almost one century. Hydrotransport has been associated with long distance hauling of coal, minerals, ore and other solids commodities, as well as with dredging and mineral processing like backfilling, collection and disposal of solids wastes. Compared to mechanical transport, the hydraulic transport through a slurry pipeline ensures a dust free environment, demands substantially less space, makes full automation possible, while minimum number of operating staff is required. On the other hand, high quality of pumping equipment and control systems is demanded. Some high-concentrated fine-grain slurries of industrial interest exhibit a viscoplastic behavior and if a coarse solids fraction is present in the mixture as well, its contribution to the frictional head loss must be taken in account. An aim of the work presented in this paper is to examine suitability of the four-component model originally by Sellgren and Wilson (2007) to predict transport properties of complex slurries once the non-newtonian carrier is incorporated as in the model modification by Pullum et al. (2015). 2. MODELLING APPROACH For turbulent flow of complex slurries with broad spectrum of particle sizes, Pullum et al. (2015) suggested to modify the four-component model originally presented by Sellgren and Wilson (2007). The original four-component model is based on well-established semiempirical formulas for Newtonian turbulent flows of each of the components. A total pressure gradient predicted by the component model is given as the sum of pressure gradients predicted for each component (fraction). Pullum et al. (2015) modified the model so that it considered three components in non-newtonian carrier fluid (carrier-equivalent, heterogeneous, fully-stratified). The frictional head loss of the turbulent flow of the carrier was calculated by the Wilson-Thomas (1985) method. The method provided fairly accurate predictions for tested Carbopol solutions and thus laid a solid basis for the non-newtonian three-component model. To apply the component model, a special attention must be paid to a determination of two characteristic velocities employed in formulae for two components (heterogeneous component, stratified component). A formula for the heterogeneous component considers a reference velocity V 50. By its definition, the reference velocity V 50 represents a value of the mean velocity, at which one half (by volume) of particles of the heterogeneous component is transported as suspended load and the other half as contact load. Therefore, it expresses the effect of particle suspension mechanisms as carrier turbulent diffusion and hydrodynamic lift and it is given by equation: æ è ö ø 0.45 S - S V = 44.1d n 50 h ç r 1.65 0.35 s e 0.25 (1) 162

where S s and S e are relative densities of solids and carrier fluid respectively and d h (m) is the particle size. ν r is the ratio of the kinematic viscosity of the carrier fluid to that of water at 20 C. A formula for the stratified component employs the deposition limit velocity V sm, which is the mean velocity of mixture flow at which solid particles start to form a stationary deposit at the bottom of a pipe. To authors knowledge, there is no method available for a prediction of V sm in slurry flows with non-newtonian carrier (the non-newtonian slurry deposition method by Poloski et al., 2009, predicts threshold velocities different from the deposition-limit velocity). In fully stratified flows, it is possible to calculate V sm using a non-newtonian two-layer model (e.g. Matoušek et al. 2015). For a determination of V sm in the non-newtonian three component model, it seems appropriate to look at the possibility to apply/modify the V sm method (Wilson 1986) used in the original Newtonian four-component model. We test the option to implement non-newtonian effects on V 50 and V sm through applying the equivalent viscosity μ eq in calculations of the velocities. The equivalent viscosity parameter μ eq is defined as: t m = (2) eq ( du / dy) For carrier fluid obeying the Herschel-Bulkley rheological model, the equivalent viscosity reads: m eq t + K V ( / D) / D n y m = (3) V m where τ y is yield stress, V m is mean velocity and D is pipe diameter. 3. EXPERIMENTAL WORK 3.1. EXPERIMENTAL RIG Series of experiments were carried out in Water Engineering Laboratory of the Czech Technical University in Prague. A pipe loop (Fig. 1) was used to study the slurry flow behaviour. The loop was composed of pieces of a PE pipe (I.D. 51.4 mm, blank pipe in Fig. 1) and a piece of transparent acrylic pipe (I.D. 50.0 mm, grey pipe in Fig. 1). The total length of the loop was 22.96 m and its volume was 45.08 liter. The length of the horizontal section was 6.20 m. The pump EBARA 3M 40-200/7.5 kw was driven by an electric motor with a variable frequency converter TECO GD100-011G-4 11 kw. Pump parameters were: power 7,5 kw, impeller diameter 200 mm, maximum flow 11.67 l/s, total head from 58 m to 44 m (valid for water for maximum flow). Differential pressures were measured over vertical Sections 1, 2 (1.3 m long) and the horizontal Section 3 (1 m long) using the differential pressure transducers Fischer Rosemount DP1151 (Sections 1 and 2) and the transducer Siemens Sitrans P DSIII 163

(Section 3). An electromagnetic flow meter Krohne Optiflux 5000 was used to measure the flow rate in the vertical pipe mounted to the discharge outlet of the centrifugal pump. The temperature of the flowing medium was measured in the vertical invert pipe. The rheology of fluids was determined in the rotational viscometer HAAKE VT550. Fig. 1 Test pipe loop in Water Engineering Laboratory of CTU in Prague 3.2. CHARACTERIZATION OF MATERIALS Tested mixtures were composed of Carbopol (Ultrez 10) carrier and fractions of glass bead. Carbopol is an acidic powder of particle size from 2 to 7 microns. After solution in water and neutralization, it forms a non-newtonian (viscoplastic) fluid of Herschel- Bulkley type (rheology typical for thickened tailings). Values of the rheological parameters (τ y, K, n) depend on a concentration of the powder in the solution. An advantage of Carbopol is its transparency and a quite simple preparation of solutions of various concentrations. Table 1. Solids parameters Solids fraction d 18 [mm] d 50 [mm] d 84 [mm] ρ s [kg.m -3 ] B134 0.16 0.18 0.24 2460 B7 0.58 0.64 0.69 2452 TK1.5 1.52 1.55 1.59 2488 Three fractions of glass beads were used as conveyed solids (Table 1). The finest particle fraction B134 consisted of particles of sizes from 0.1 to 0.2 mm with the median size d 50 = 0.18 mm and density ρ s = 2460 kg/m 3. The B7 fraction was narrow graded (grain 164

sizes from 400 to 750 microns) with d 50 = 0.64 mm. The coarse fraction TK1.5 was virtually monodisperse with d 50 = 1.55 mm, the sieving test showed that all grains were finer than 1.61 mm and coarser than 1.49 mm. 3.3. TYPICAL EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS Pipe friction curves were measured for flows of slurries of different liquid and solids properties. Fig. 2 compares measured curves for the Carbopol carrier alone, for slurry of Carbopol and a coarse glass bead fraction (TK1.5), and for Carbopol-based slurry composed of three fractions of glass beads (B134+B7+TK1.5), each representing one component (carrier-equivalent-fluid, heterogeneous, stratified) of the 3-component slurry. Total volumetric concentration of solid fractions is 20 per cent for both slurries. The shape of the curves indicates that flow was laminar up to approximately 3 m/s. The depositionlimit velocity was 0.15 m/s for the TK1.5-slurry and 0.2 m/s for the 3-component slurry. Fig. 2 Pipe friction curves measured in CTU test loop 4. DISCUSSION OF EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS We use the three-component model by Pullum et al. (2015) to calculate frictional head losses for the sake of comparison with experimental results. Friction loss predictions are fitted to experimental data in turbulent flow regime and evaluated on the basis of the rootmean square error. The experimental database contains 15 test series with a volumetric solids concentration between 0.1 and 0.3. More detailed information about the test series, specified flow conditions and rheological properties is published elsewhere (Kesely 2016). 165

Fig. 3 Parity plot comparing observed and predicted friction loss gradients for variety of suspensions using the three component model and fixed values of scaling constants k1 for carrierequivalent component, k2 for heterogeneous component, and for k3 stratified component. For all experimental data subjected to a comparison with the three-component model, values of Reynolds number are determined to check on the validity of turbulent flow regime. In the component model, the relative densities are calculated as in Sellgren et al. (2016). The measured parameters (τ y, K, n, d h, ρ s, C v ) and calculated parameters (μ eq by Eq. 3, V 50 by Eq. 1, and V sm by Wilson method as in the program VSCALC in Wilson et al. 1997) are used to calculate the frictional hydraulic gradient. The scaling constants for the three fractions contributing to the overall hydraulic gradient are set to: k 1 = 1.08 (B134- fraction), k 2 = 3.63 (B7-fraction), k 3 = 2.16 (TK1.5-fraction) (Fig. 3). Although the model predictions of the frictional hydraulic gradient exhibit a very reasonable agreement with the experimental results for all types of tested slurries (for the different types of slurries see Legend of Fig. 3), a prediction of the deposit velocity V sm used in calculating the hydraulic-gradient contribution by the stratified component is very unsatisfactory. The values of V sm calculated by VSCALC using the equivalent viscosity are considerably larger than the observed values (Fig. 4). The disagreement is not surprising if we realize that the observed deposition limit velocity actually occurred in laminar flow and way below the transition velocity. Hence, the use of VSCALC (originally for turbulent Newtonian flows) to calculate V sm proved to be inappropriate for our conditions. In the component model, the pressure loss due to the stratified component is quite sensitive to V sm. Just to get some sense for values, if visually observed values of the deposition limit velocity were increased with 1 m/s, the resulting values of predicted pressure gradient from stratified load fraction increased with approximately 50%. On the other hand, a contribution of the stratified component to the total hydraulic gradient tends to be relatively low while the viscous contribution of the carrier dominates (see Fig. 2). 166

Fig. 4 Parity plot comparing observed and predicted deposition limit velocities The use of μ eq in a V 50 calculation using Eq. 1 leads to both over prediction and under prediction of the hydraulic gradient by the heterogeneous component. The hydraulic gradient by the heterogeneous component is sensitive to V 50, hence an appropriate modification of Eq. 1 or a use of an alternative approach is suggested. 5. CONCLUSIONS The results of experimental investigation of predicting frictional pressure drop in turbulent flows of slurries composed of mixtures of different solids fractions and viscoplastic carrier showed that the three-component model by Pullum et al. (2015) is suitable and reasonably accurate. However, caution is required in predicting the reference velocities V 50 and V sm in the model. Modifications of formulae calculating both reference velocities are required and are subject to further research. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The research has been supported by Faculty of Civil Engineering of the Czech Technical University in Prague through the student grant project No. SGS17/063/OHK1/1T/11. REFERENCES 1. Kesely M., 2016, Evaluation of Settling Velocity of Coarse Particles in Visco-plastic Fluid and Frictional Loss in Complex Slurry Flow (MSc thesis at Czech Technical University in Prague) 2. Matoušek, V., Pěník, V., Pullum, L., Chryss, A., 2015, Experimental study of bed friction in 167

stratified flow with viscoplastic carrier in pipe. International Conference on Transport and Sedimentation of Solid Particles, Delft, The Netherlands. 3. Poloski, A.P. et al., 2009, Deposition Velocities of Non-Newtonian Slurries in Pipelines: Complex Simulant Testing. Report PNNL-18316, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA, USA. 4. Pullum, L., Chryss, A., Graham, L., Matoušek, V., Pěník, V., 2015, Modelling turbulent transport of solids in non-newtonian carrier fluids applicable to tailings disposal. International Conference on Transport and Sedimentation of Solid Particles, Delft, The Netherlands. 5. Sellgren A., Wilson, K.C., 2007, Validation of a four-component pipeline friction-loss model, 17th International Conference on Hydraulic Transport of Solids in Pipes - Hydrotransport 17, Cape Town, Republic of South Africa. 6. Sellgren, A., Visintainer, R., Furlan, J., Matoušek, V., 2016, Pump and pipeline performance when pumping slurries with different particle gradings. The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering 94(6), pp 1025-1031. 7. Wilson, K. C., Thomas, A. D., 1985, A new analysis of the turbulent flow of non-newtonian fluids. The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, 63(4). 8. Wilson, K. C., 1986, Effect of solids concentration on deposit velocity, Journal of Pipelines, Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., 1986, pp: 251-257. 9. Wilson, K.C., Addie, G.R., Sellgren, A., Clift, R., 1997. Slurry Transport Using Centrifugal Pumps, 2 nd Edition, Blackie Academic & Professional, London. 168