A critical comparison of the implementation of granular pressure gradient term in Euler-Euler simulation of gas-solid flows

Yige Liu,Mingming He,Jianhua Chen,Wen Li,Bidan Zhao,Ji Xu,Junwu Wang

2024-05-31

Abstract:Numerical solution of Euler-Euler model using different in-house, open source and commercial software can generate significantly different results, even when the governing equations and the initial and boundary conditions are exactly same. Unfortunately, the underlying reasons have not been identified yet. In this article, three methods for calculating the granular pressure gradient term are presented for two-fluid model of gas-solid flows and implemented implicitly or explicitly into the solver in OpenFOAM: Method I assumes that the granular pressure gradient is equal to the elastic modulus plus the solid concentration gradient; Method II directly calculates the gradient using a difference scheme; Method III, which is proposed in this work, calculates the gradient as the sum of two partial derivatives: one related to the solid volume fraction and the other related to the granular energy. Obviously, only Methods II and III are consistent with kinetic theory of granular flow. It was found that the difference between all methods is small for bubbling fluidization. While for circulating fluidization, both methods II and III are capable of capturing non-uniform structures and producing superior results over Method I. The contradictory conclusions made from the simulation of different fluidization regimes is due to the different contribution of the term related to the granular energy gradient. Present study concludes that the implementation method of granular pressure gradient may have a significant impact on hydrodynamics and is probably a key factor contributing to the observed differences between different simulation software.

Fluid Dynamics

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The paper primarily explores the impact of different methods for implementing the particle pressure gradient term on numerical results when using the Euler-Euler model to simulate gas-solid two-phase flow. Specifically, the study focuses on the following issues:

1. **Different methods for implementing the particle pressure gradient term**: The paper proposes three methods for calculating the particle pressure gradient and implements these methods in the open-source software OpenFOAM. These three methods include:
- Method I: Assumes that particle pressure is only related to solid concentration;
- Method II: Directly calculates the gradient of particle pressure through a difference scheme;
- Method III: A new method that decomposes the particle pressure gradient into the sum of two partial derivatives: solid volume fraction and particle temperature.

2. **Consistency and physical significance of the methods**: The paper points out that only Method II and Method III are consistent with the kinetic theory of granular flow, while Method I is an incomplete assumption.

3. **Performance under different flow conditions**: For bubbling fluidization, the differences between all methods are small; however, for circulating fluidization, Method II and Method III can better capture the non-uniform structures and provide better results compared to Method I. This difference is mainly due to the different contributions of the particle temperature gradient term.

4. **Importance of the implementation method**: The paper emphasizes that the method of implementing the particle pressure gradient term has a significant impact on the fluid dynamics characteristics and may be one of the key factors causing differences in results between different numerical simulation software.

In summary, this paper aims to reveal the mechanism of the impact of different methods for implementing the particle pressure gradient term on the simulation results of gas-solid two-phase flow through research, and to provide a theoretical basis and technical guidance for further improving simulation accuracy.