Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
??
QUESTIONS
1. Where and why are slurry pipelines used? 2. What is a settling slurry? 3. What are the main features in pipeline flow? 4. Engineers are good at using theoretical and empirical best fit theories. Whats the problem? 5. What are the underlying equations and physical phenomena? 6. What are the theories of pipeline flow? 7. What do we know that is right, and can we easilly confirm that we have the right answer? 8. Whats the latest, and where to in future?
Slurry Pipelines
Slurry pipelines are used mostly for short haul duties, e.g. dredging (~300m ), process plants (~300m) and tailings (~3 km) In some long haul duties, minerals are pumped many hundreds of kilometres.
ENGINEERED BY PSI
Photos with permission of PSI Australia Pty. Ltd., 66 Kings Park Rd.,West Perth, WA 6005,Tel. no. (08) 9463-6606.
Slurry Pipelines
Each type of duty has its own best operation point, where the size of the particles and the tendency to settle has a strong impact on capital and operating cost.
ENGINEERED BY PSI
Photos with permission of PSI Australia Pty. Ltd., 66 Kings Park Rd.,West Perth, WA 6005,Tel. no. (08) 9463-6606.
Settling Slurries
Non Settling Slurries contain particles that remain in suspension for a long time
Settling Slurries contain particles that will fall and settle at the bottom of a container
NON-SETTLING
Particles < 40 m Viscosity modified by particles Increasingly non-Newtonian as concentration increases
SETTLING
Particles > 40 m Wide range of sizes from Small (suspensions) 40 m Medium (transition) 200 m Large (heterogeneous) 2 mm Very Large (hetero ) 5 mm ~ 200 m ~ 2 mm ~ 5 mm ~ >200 mm?
Settling Slurries
SETTLING
Particles > 40 m Wide range of sizes from Small (suspensions) 40 m Medium (transition) 200 m Large (heterogeneous) 2 mm Very Large (hetero ) 5 mm ~ 200 m ~ 2 mm ~ 5 mm ~ >200 mm?
Settling Slurries
SETTLING
Particles > 40 m Wide range of sizes from Small (suspensions) 40 m Medium (transition) 200 m Large (heterogeneous) 2 mm Very Large (hetero ) 5 mm ~ 200 m ~ 2 mm ~ 5 mm ~ >200 mm?
Dead Donkeys?
L V2 = f D 2g
(m) (dimensionless) (m) (m) (m /s) (m/s)
2
Darcy-Weisbach equation
head loss due to friction friction factor length of pipe internal diameter of pipe accelaration due to gravity mean Flow velocity
g V
Moody Diagram
HeadLoss HW H1= 1 +
g P 2 v 2g
+z1
H2= 2 +
g
2 v 2g
+z1
PipeFlow
V1
V2
V3 =Vdep
V4
Settling Slurry
Water Carrier
3. The system curve has a minimum that bounds different flow / friction processes
Solids
Concentration
Newitt et al (1955) described a range of flow flow/deposition phenomena after observing sand and coal particles in 25mm Perspex pipes. His classifications are still used today.
Newitt, D. M., J. F. Richardson, M. Abbott, and R. B. Turtle. 1955. Hydraulic Conveying of Solids in Horizontal Pipes. Trans. Institution of Chemical Engineers 33: 94-113.
450
400
H M = HW + H S
Water Settling Slurry Deposition Point
Since we understand the behaviour of water (the carrier) we can calculate the frictional head losses caused by wall friction - HW The remainder must be friction losses between (a) particles and fluid
100
Frictional Head Loss due to wall friction of carrier fluid with pipe- HW
50
0 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00
FlowVelocity(m/s)
= 82.1.5
V 2 iM iW CD = 82. CV .iW gD S
1.5
Durand, R. 1952. The Hydraulic Transportation of Coal and Other Materials in Pipes. Colloq. of National Coal Board, London.
H M = HW + H S
Frictional Head Loss due to solids - Hs
1. Durands Theory is purely correlative. 2. The curve fit was for 305 points, for sand and coal running between 200 m and 25 mm.
Water Settling Slurry Deposition Point
3. The results are in Head of Carrier Fluid usually water. 4. As transport velocity becomes large, the slurry curve converges to water head loss from above.
Frictional Head Loss due to wall friction of carrier fluid with pipe- HW
0 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00
FlowVelocity(m/s)
i M iW C V .iW
V 2 = 8 2. gD S
CD
1 .5
= 8 2 . 1 .5
Nothing proves that such a formula is rigorously exact. Doubtless exists a more accurate and more complex means of notation, but the one given above groups quite favourably
= H W (1 + C V . 8 2 . 1 .5 )
More Theories
(To name a Few)
Correlation
1. Durand 1952 2. Homogeneous Mixture Theory 3. Newitt et. Al - 1955 4. Rose and Duckworth 1969 5. Heyden and Stelson - 1971 6. Volcado and Charles 1972 7. Wasp et al - 1977 8. Lazarus Neilson 1978 9. Wilson - 1992 10. Wilson Addie & Clift 1997
In Current Use Not in Use
Answers Using commonly accepted theories can vary by several hundred percent AND MORE!
FlowVelocity(m/s)
Depends on density , particle diameter, shape, Reynolds number and surface effects
Drag coefficient as a function of Reynolds number for smooth spheres and cylinders (Munson et al. 2002, 582)
Known correlations to correction CD based on shape effect Slip Velocity to Produce drag force FD
450
400
= H
+ H
H M = HW (1 + CV .82.1.5 )
Hs
HW
100 50
Frictional Head Loss due to wall friction of carrier fluid with pipe- HW
14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 Flow Velocity(m/s)
P HW = g
L V2 = f D 2g
In the limit the slip velocity is roughly constant as the average velocity of particles in direction of flow equals approaches the velocity of the liquid i.e.Vsolid = Vliquid the homogeneous limit . In other words Hs << Hw In Durand Theory in the limit Hs zero
Comparison of Theories
H e a d Lo s s , 5 m m gra ve l,C v= 1 0 % , D N 4 0 0 P ip e x 1 0 0 0 m
800
700
600
200
100
0 0 2 4 6 8 10 F lo w V e lo cit y (m / s) 12 14 16 18 20
Location of The Deposition Velocity and Head Loss at Deposition is the Key to having an accurate Theory. Clearly the state of the art is not good
Comparison of Theories
Head Loss, 100m particle, Cv=10%, DN100 pipe x 1000m
500 450 400 ) 350 m ( 300 s s o l 250 d a 200 e H 150 100 50 0 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00
Velocity m/s
Slope M
Determined in tests on 400 m sand. Pressure gradient = 0.5 x sliding fr friction factor
Began by describing the equations of drag and pressure loss due to solids at the deposition point. Assumes : All particles fluidised at the minimum in the pressure gradient curve
Fixed Bed Fluidised Fluidise d Bed Heterogeneous Heterogeneou s Flow Homogeneous Homogeneou s Flow
V1
V2
V3 =Vdep
V4
Settling Slurry
Water Carrier
4 10 5
200 Virtual data points (deposition velocity, and pressure at the deposition point) obtained using Durand equation to
4 10 5
4 10 5
Head Loss
4 10 5
Conclusions
1. Not all is well with the theory of slurry transport. 2. There is considerable disagreement amongst theories regarding 1. Deposition velocity 2. Head Loss at Deposition
3. There is no clear agreement on the forces and friction associated with various mechanisms, (e.g. fluidised bed, heterogeneous flow, homogeneous flow etc) or the velocities at which they occur. 4. Many of the theories blow up when large particles are involved. Say > 2mm. Comparison between calculations at these sizes indicates a need for model studies in future developments. 5. Where possible dont pump at sizes > 150 m.