CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > Software User Forums > OpenFOAM > OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD

2.3.x twoPhaseEulerFoam fluidized bed

Register Blogs Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   April 3, 2016, 19:44
Question 2.3.x twoPhaseEulerFoam fluidized bed
  #1
New Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 12
wkqwkqwkq is on a distinguished road
I tried the fluidized bed tutorial then changed the temperature to 300K everywhere to keep it isothermal. The tutorial case computes a much larger minimum fluidization velocity compared to the real value. Besides, the fluidization behaviour is completely different from Fluent two-fluid model. Have no clue where to start with.


Could anyone send me a correct twoPhaseEulerFoam fluidized bed case? Thank you.
wkqwkqwkq is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 4, 2016, 04:25
Default
  #2
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 34
Rep Power: 10
mnikku is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by wkqwkqwkq View Post
I tried the fluidized bed tutorial then changed the temperature to 300K everywhere to keep it isothermal. The tutorial case computes a much larger minimum fluidization velocity compared to the real value. Besides, the fluidization behaviour is completely different from Fluent two-fluid model. Have no clue where to start with.


Could anyone send me a correct twoPhaseEulerFoam fluidized bed case? Thank you.
Hi,
this is quite a difficult question. I assume you have measured your minimum fluidization velocity, as there are only (more or less suitable) correlations to estimate it (for differenct material-fluidization agent pairs!).

The next problem comes from trying matching the particle size distibution in your simulations to the material you used in your experiments. And yes, there is a particle size distribution, it is a narrow or a wide one, the average particle size doesn't tell you this.

Finally regarding the simulation setup: what models you used and what are your other settings. You don't give much details so it's pretty hard to say anything about your case.
mnikku is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 4, 2016, 08:44
Default Umf prediction
  #3
New Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 12
wkqwkqwkq is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by mnikku View Post
Hi,
this is quite a difficult question. I assume you have measured your minimum fluidization velocity, as there are only (more or less suitable) correlations to estimate it (for differenct material-fluidization agent pairs!).

The next problem comes from trying matching the particle size distibution in your simulations to the material you used in your experiments. And yes, there is a particle size distribution, it is a narrow or a wide one, the average particle size doesn't tell you this.

Finally regarding the simulation setup: what models you used and what are your other settings. You don't give much details so it's pretty hard to say anything about your case.
Thank you for the reply mnikku.

The particles I used is Geldart B group glass beads sizing from 425-450um. The Umf was measured around 0.14m/s and Fluent predicts this well using Gidaspow drag correlation. However, the 2.3.x twoPhaseEulerFoam predicts around 0.27m/s!!

I attached my case files, could you have a look if there is anything wrong.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_F...ew?usp=sharing


Many thanks
wkqwkqwkq is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 11, 2016, 06:30
Default
  #4
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 34
Rep Power: 10
mnikku is on a distinguished road
Hi,
I took a look at your files, but couldn't spot anything obviously wrong or strange (at least to my limited experience, so this doesn't confirm anything).

I ran a couple of tests with version 3.0.1 and couldn't get the bed clearly fluidized with your measured gas velocity 0.14 m/s (or with 0.15 or 0.2 m/s) (some trembling at the surface only). I currently don't have time to continue with this.

My only suggestion is to check and compare the model selection and settings between your Fluent and OpenFOAM cases to spot any differences.

Best of luck in your future endeavors!
mnikku is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Tags
fluidized bed, openfoam, twophaseeulerfoam

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
expansion of bed in fluidized bed achy7pch FLUENT 3 February 16, 2016 07:21
Gas-solid modeling (Fluidized Bed) nezam.aziz@gmail.com Fluent Multiphase 0 August 29, 2013 07:40
Fluidized bed modeling Kartus CFX 9 June 30, 2011 05:41
Fluidized bed simulation VS particle tracking windhair CFX 2 June 28, 2011 22:10
Problem with fluidized bed simulation using TwoPhaseEulerFoam matthias_schreiber OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 5 June 12, 2008 07:49


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 13:33.