Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
www.elsevier.com/locate/ijhmt
Abstract
A fractal model for resistance of flow through porous media is developed based on the fractal characters of porous media and on the
pore–throat model for capillary. The proposed model is expressed as a function of the pore–throat ratio, porosity, property of fluid,
pore/capillary and particle sizes, fluid velocity (or Reynolds number) and fractal dimensions of porous media. There is no empirical con-
stant and every parameter has clear physical meaning in the proposed model. The model predictions are compared with experiment data,
and good agreement is found between them.
Ó 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
0017-9310/$ - see front matter Ó 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2007.02.009
3926 J. Wu, B. Yu / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 50 (2007) 3925–3932
p Dp1 Df
¼ L1DT k3þD T
ð11Þ
128l L0 3 þ DT Df 0 max
Thus, the total cross area A is DT) affecting the flow resistance are not revealed. Eq. (17)
" 2Df # also indicates that the maximum pose size significantly
Ap pDf 2 kmin
A¼ ¼ k 1 ð13Þ influences the pressure drop. However, Blake-Kozeny
e 4eð2 Df Þ max kmax equation does not show this dependence. The following is
devoted to deriving a simple model for the maximum pore
Due to [27] size.
2Df Based on the idealized pore–throat model as shown in
kmin
e¼ ð14Þ Fig. 1 for flow through porous media, the area of the unit
kmax
cell is
So, the total cross sectional area A of a unit cell perpendic-
pD2p
ular to the flow direction is S¼ ð18Þ
4ð1 eÞ
p Df 1 e 2
A¼ kmax ð15Þ The area of the pore is
4 2 Df e
Thus, the superficial velocity is pD2p pD2p 1
S p; max ¼S ¼ 1 ð19Þ
4 4 ð1 eÞ
1 Dp1 2 Df e
vs ¼ Q=A ¼ L1DT k1þD T
ð16Þ
32l L0 3 þ DT Df 1 e 0 max The irregular geometry of the macro-pore area is approxi-
mated as a circular pore as
According to Eq. (16), we can get the pressure drop across
p
the length L0 along the macroscopic pressure gradient as S p; max ¼ k2max ð20Þ
4
Dp1 32lvs 3 þ DT Df 1 e 1
¼ 1DT ð17Þ From Eqs. (19) and (20), kmax can be obtained as
L0 L0 2 Df e k1þD
max
T
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
e
Eq. (17) depicts the pressure drop caused by the viscous en- kmax ¼ Dp ð21Þ
1e
ergy loss along the flow path. This pressure drop is linearly
proportional to the superficial velocity. Eq. (17) is similar Eq. (21) is a simple model for the maximum pore size,
to Blake-Kozeny equation, which represents the viscous which is related to porosity and the equivalent mean diam-
energy loss. Note that the empirical constant 150 in eter Dp. It is evident that if porosity e = 0, kmax = 0; if
Blake-Kozeny equation has no physical meaning and is porosity e = 1, kmax is infinity. This is consistent with the
independent of porosity. Whereas every parameter in Eq. practical situations. Eq. (21) also indicates that the maxi-
(17) has clear physical meaning, and the viscous energy loss mum pore size kmax is proportional to the mean particle
expressed by Eq. (17) depends on fluid viscosity, pore size, diameter Dp. This is also consistent with the physical situ-
fluid velocity, porosity, pore area dimension Df and the tor- ation. In Eq. (17), kmax is determined by Eq. (21).
tuosity fractal dimension DT. However, Blake-Kozeny Eq. (17) can also be written as the dimensionless form:
equation only depends on fluid viscosity, particle size, fluid 3
Dp1 qDp e3 32 3 þ DT Df Dp
2
2 r
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2 3
Dp qD3p e3
G2 ¼ 2 pffiffiffiffiffi
1 ffi
1 þ 47 1
l l2 ð1 eÞ3 16 1 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 1e
s¼ 6 1 þ 1 e þ 1 e p ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 7 ð46Þ
2DT 2 24 2 1 1e 5
3 1 5 Dp e 2 L0
¼ þ D Re2p ð41Þ
2 b4 2b2 2l ð1 eÞ T
k
Interested readers may consult reference [30] for the gen-
eral behavior of the fractal dimension DT, and for the sen-
3.3. Total pressure drop sitivity analyses of DT on the flow resistance/permeability,
readers may consult Ref. [21].
The total pressure drop per unit length is the sum of the Eq. (43) is now rewritten as the dimensionless form,
viscous energy loss and kinetic/local energy loss along the G ¼ G1 þ G2
flow path, i.e. 2
1 32 3 þ DT Df Dp
Dp1 Dp2 32lvs 3 þ DT Df 1 e 1 ¼ Rep
þ ¼ 1DT /s L1D
0
T 2 Df k1þD
max
T
L0 l L0 2 Df e k1þD
max
T
2DT 2
2DT 2 1 3 1 5 Dp e 2 L0
3 1 5 qv2s 1 2 L0 þ 2 þ DT Re2p
þ þ 4 2 D ð42Þ /s 2 b4 2b2 2l ð1 eÞ k
2 b 2b 2e2 l
T
k
ð47Þ
Eq. (42) is similar to Ergun equation (1), which has two
and Ergun equation is also be rewritten as the dimension-
empirical constants, 150 and 1.75. Whereas there is no
less form, i.e.
empirical constant in Eq. (42) and every parameter in Eq.
3
(42) has the clear physical meaning, and more physical DP qDp e3
principles are revealed in Eq. (42). ¼ 150Rep þ 1:75Re2p ð48Þ
L0 l2 ð1 eÞ3
However, in reality, not all the pores/capillaries are
spherical, so Eq. (42) is modified by introducing /s, called Fig. 2 compares the dimensionless flow resistances pre-
sphericity of particles [7], then the modified equation is dicted respectively by Eqs. (22) and (47) versus Reynolds
expressed as numbers when Rep < 10 for the spherical particles. The
results show that when Reynolds numbers Rep < 2.75, the
Dp1 Dp2 1 32lvs 3 þ DT Df 1 e 1
þ ¼ relative error between the predicted values by the two equa-
L0 l /s L1D
0
T 2 Df e k1þD
max
T
tions is less than 10%, This means that the pressure drop is
2 2DT 2
1 3 1 5 qvs 1 2 L0 mainly determined by the viscous energy loss Eq. (22) at
þ 2 þ 4 2 DT low Reynolds numbers, and Eq. (22) can be a good approx-
/s 2 b 2b 2e2 l k
imation to the flow resistance at low Reynolds numbers.
ð43Þ However, at higher Reynolds numbers, Eq. (47) should
1=3 be used.
where /s ¼ ð36pV 2P =S 3P Þ [8], here VP and SP are volume
Fig. 3 compares the dimensionless flow resistances pre-
and surface area of particles, with /s = 1 for spherical par-
dicted respectively by Eqs. (41) and (47) versus the modi-
ticles and /s < 1 for other shaped particles.
fied Reynolds numbers as Rep > 220. The results show
that when the modified Reynolds numbers Rep > 220, the
4. Results and discussion
400
lnð1 eÞ 0.00
0 1 2 3 4
D ¼ dE ; ð44Þ Rep
lnðd min =d max Þ
200
and the fractal dimension DT for tortuous capillaries can be Eq. (47)
obtained from Eq. (9) as Eq. (22)
ln s 0
DT ¼ 1 þ ð45Þ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
lnðL0 =kÞ Rep
where
k is determined by Eq. (37), and the tortuosity s is Fig. 2. A comparison on the dimensionless flow resistance versus Rep at
defined by s = Lt/L0 and is expressed as [30] Rep < 10, e = 0.40, Dp = 10 mm.
3930 J. Wu, B. Yu / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 50 (2007) 3925–3932
0.20 5
6
2.4x10
2.5x10 Present model Eq. (47)
0.15
5
Relative error
Relative error
2.0x10 Ergun equation (48)
6 0.10 Experiment data
2.0x10
5
0.05 1.6x10
6
G2, G
1.5x10 0.00 5
200 400 600 800 1000 1.2x10
G
Rep
6
1.0x10 4
8.0x10
5
5.0x10 Eq. (47) 4
4.0x10
Eq. (41)
0.0 0.0
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 0 40 80 120 160 200
Rep Re p
Fig. 3. A comparison on the dimensionless flow resistance versus Rep at Fig. 5. A comparison among the present model Eq. (47), Ergun equation
Rep > 100, e = 0.40, Dp = 10 mm. (48) and experiment data for Trilobes particles [8] at e = 0.511, /s = 0.63
and Dp = 1.41 mm.
4
8.0x10 particles of Dp = 10 mm and L = 0.5 m [31], L is the real
length of a porous sample. From Figs. 4–6, it can be seen
4
4.0x10 that the model predictions are in good agreement with
the experiment data with non-sphericity particles. How-
0.0 ever, Ergun equation underestimates the resistance, and
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
this may be explained that Ergun equation may only be
Re p suitable for spherical particles and for his experimental
Fig. 4. A comparison among the present model Eq. (47), Ergun equation data.
(48) and experiment data for Quadralobes particles [8] at e = 0.471, If Eq. (42) is written as the other dimensionless form, we
/s = 0.593 and Dp = 1.26 mm. obtain
J. Wu, B. Yu / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 50 (2007) 3925–3932 3931
8000 Dp1 Dp2 Dp e3
Fk ¼ þ 2
7000
L0 l qv ð1 eÞ
2DT 2
6000 1 3 1 5 Dp e L0
¼ 2 þ 4 2 D2T
5000 /s 2 b 2b 2l ð1 eÞ k
2
1 32 3 þ DT Df Dp
fv
4000 1
þ 1DT ð1þD Þ
ð51Þ
3000 /s L0 2 Df kmax Rep
T
2000 Present model Eq. (49) Fig. 8 compares the present model predictions by Eq. (51)
Ergun equation (50)
1000
Experiment data
with the experiment data [6] for cylindrical particles. From
0 Fig. 8 it can be found that the model predictions also pres-
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 ent good agreement with the experimental data.
Re p
5. Conclusions
Fig. 7. A comparison among the present model Eq. (49), Ergun equation
(50) and experiment data for ball particles [32] at e = 0.364, /s = 1, and
Dp = 12 mm. We have shown an analytical model for resistance of
fluid flow in porous media based on the capillary model
and pore–throat model as well as the fractal characters of
Dp1 Dp2 D2p e3 pores and capillaries. The proposed model is expressed as
fv ¼ fv1 þ fv2 ¼ þ
L0 l lvs ð1 eÞ2 a function of the pore–throat ratio, porosity, fluid prop-
2 erty, pore/capillary and particle size, fluid velocity (or Rey-
32 3 þ DT Df Dp 3 1 5 Dp
¼ 1DT þ þ nolds number) and fractal characters (Df and DT) of pores
L0 2 Df ð1þDT Þ
kmax 2 b4 2b2 2l and capillaries in porous media. There is no empirical con-
2DT 2 stant and every parameter has clear physical meaning in the
e L0
D2T Rep ð49Þ proposed model. The physical principles of the viscous
ð1 eÞ k
energy loss along the flow path and the kinetic energy loss
Similarly, if Ergun equation (1) is written as the other are clearly revealed. The model predictions are compared
dimensionless form, we have with experiment data, and good agreement is found
between them. The validity of the propose model is thus
DP D2p e3 verified.
¼ 150 þ 1:75Rep ð50Þ
L0 lvs ð1 eÞ2 It should be pointed out that the accuracy of the present
fractal model may crucially depends on the correct determi-
Fig. 7 compares the present model predictions by Eq. (49) nation of sphericity /s of particles, the maximum pore or
with those by Ergun equation (50) and the experiment data particle size, the ratio of kmin/kmax, and the ratio of pore
[32] for beds packed with spherical particles of to throat. Therefore, the correct determination of these
Dp = 12 mm, e = 0.364. From Fig. 7, it can be found that parameters is critical for successfully predicting the resis-
the model predictions also present much better agreement tance of flow in porous media.
with the experimental data than those by Ergun equation.
If Eq. (43) is written as Acknowledgement
10
4 This work was supported by the National Natural Sci-
Eq. (51), ε=0.41 Dp=2.82mm ence Foundation of China through Grant Number
Eq. (51), ε=0.414 Dp=2.24mm 10572052.
3
10 Experiment, ε=0.41 Dp=2.82mm
Experiment, ε=0.414 Dp=2.24mm References
log10Fk
2
10 [1] S. Ergun, Fluid flow through packed columns, Chem. Eng. Prog. 48
(1952) 89–94.
[2] R.B. Bird, W.E. Stewart, E.N. Lightfoot, Transport Phenomena,
10
1 Wiley, New York, 1960 (Chapter 6).
[3] R.E. Hicks, Pressure drop in packed beds of spheres, Ind. Eng. Chem.
Fund. 9 (1970) 500–502.
[4] R.D. Bradshaw, J.E. Myers, Heat and mass transfer in fixed and
-1 0 1 2 3
fluidized beds of large particles, AIChE. J. 9 (1963) 590–598.
10 10 10 10 10 [5] D. Handly, P.J. Heggs, Momentum and heat transfer mechanisms in
log10Rep regular shaped packings, Trans. Inst. Chem. Eng. 46 (1968) 251–259.
[6] F. MacDonald, M.S. Ei-Sayed, K. Mow, F.A.L. Dullien, Flow
Fig. 8. A comparison of the model predictions with the experimental data through porous media—the Ergun equation revised, Ind. Eng. Chem.
by Pahl (1975) [6] at e = 0.41, /s = 0.862 and e = 0.414, /s = 0.872. Fundam. 18 (1979) 199–208.
3932 J. Wu, B. Yu / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 50 (2007) 3925–3932
[7] D. Metha, M.C. Hawley, Wall effect in packed columns, Ind. Eng. [21] B.M. Yu, P. Cheng, A fractal permeability model for bi-dispersed
Chem., Proc. Des. Dev. 8 (1969) 280–286. porous media, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 45 (2002) 2983–2993.
[8] D. Nemec, J. Levec, Flow through packed bed reactors: 1. Single- [22] B.M. Yu, L.J. Lee, H.Q. Cao, A fractal in-plane permeability model
phase flow, Chem. Eng. Sci. 60 (2005) 6947–6957. for fabrics, Polym. Compos. 23 (2002) 201–221.
[9] Y. Endo, D-R. Chen, D.Y.H. Pui, Theoretical consideration of [23] C.O. Karacan, P.M. Halleck, A fractal model for predicting perme-
permeation resistance of fluid through a particle packed layer, Powder ability around perforation tunnels using size distribution of frag-
Technol. 124 (2002) 119–126. mented grains, J. Petroleum Sci. Eng. 40 (2003) 159–176.
[10] R.J. Hill, D.L. Koch, A.J.C. Ladd, Moderate-Reynolds-number flows [24] Y. Shi, J.S. Xiao, M. Pan, Z.R. Yuan, A fractal permeability model
in ordered and random arrays of spheres, J. Fluid Mech. 448 (2001) for the gas diffusion layer of PEM fuel cells, J. Power Sources 160
243–278. (2006) 277–283.
[11] B.B. Mandelbrot, The Fractal Geometry of Nature, W.H. Freeman, [25] Y. Shi, J.S. Xiao, M. Pan, Z.R. Yuan, Addendum to ‘‘A fractal
New York, 1982. permeability model for gas diffusion layer of PEM fuel cells”, J.
[12] J. Feder, A. Aharony, Fractals in Physics, North-Holland, 1989. Power Sources 165 (2007) 299.
[13] J. Feder, Fractals, Plenum Press, New York, 1988. [26] F.G. Meng, H.M. Zhang, Y.S. Li, X.W. Zhang, F.G. Yang,
[14] T.L. Warren, D. Krajcinovic, Random Cantor set models for the Application of fractal permeation model to investigate membrane
elastic–perfectly plastic contact of roughness surfaces, Wear 196 fouling in membrane bioreactor, J. Membr. Sci. 262 (2005) 107–
(1996) 1–15. 116.
[15] F.M. Borodich, A.B. Mosolov, Fractal roughness in contact prob- [27] B.M. Yu, J.H. Li, Some fractal characters of porous media, Fractals 9
lems, J. Appl. Math. 56 (1992) 681–690. (2001) 365–372.
[16] A. Majumdar, B. Bhushan, Role of fractal geometry in roughness [28] M.M. Denn, Process Fluid Mechanics, Prentice Hall, NJ, 1980.
characterization and contact mechanics of surfaces, J. Tribol. 112 [29] Y.Y. Zhang, Fluid Mechanics, Higher Education Press, 1999 (Chap-
(1990) 205–216. ters 3 and 6).
[17] A.J. Katz, A.H. Thompson, Fractal sandstone pores: implications for [30] B.M. Yu, Fractal character for tortuous streamtubes in porous
conductivity and pore formation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 54 (1985) 1325– media, Chin. Phys. Lett. 22 (2005) 158–161.
1328. [31] Z.L. Wang, Y.L. Ding, M. Ghadiri, Flow of a gas–solid two-phase
[18] C.E. Krohn, A.H. Thompson, Fractal sandstone pores: automated mixture through a packed bed, Chem. Eng. Sci. 59 (2004) 3071–3079.
measurements using scanning-electron-microscope images, Phys. Rev. [32] J. Yu, M.C. Zhang, W.D. Fan, Y.G. Zhou, G.F. Zhao, Study on
B 33 (1986) 6366–6374. performance of the ball packed-bed regenerator: experiments and
[19] B.B. Mandelbrot, D.E. Passoja, A.J. Paullay, Fractal character of simulation, Appl. Therm. Eng. 22 (2002) 641–651.
fracture surfaces of metals, Nature 308 (1984) 721–722.
[20] H. Xie, R. Bhaskar, J. Li, Generation of fractal models for
characterization of pulverized materials, Miner. Metall. Process.
(February) (1993) 36–42.