A pipeline transport correlation for slurries with small but dense particles

Poloski, Adam P.; Etchells, Arthur W.; Chun, Jaehun; Adkins, Harold E.; Casella, Andrew M.; Minette, Michael J.; Yokuda, Satoru T.

doi:10.1002/cjce.20260

Cited by 23 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The pipe diameter D p : The LDV is proportional to the pipe diameter D p to a power between 1/3 and 1/2 (about 0.4) for small to large particles (Thomas (1979), Wasp et al (1977), Lahiri (2009) and Jufin and Lopatin (1966)) and a power of about 0.1 for very small particles (Thomas (1979), Wilson and Judge (1976), Sanders et al (2004) and Poloski et al (2010)). …”

Section: Conclusion Literaturementioning

confidence: 98%

“…The data points of the very small particle diameters, Thomas (1979) and Poloski (2010), were carried out in very small to medium diameter pipes, while the two curves are constructed for a 0.1524 (6 inch) pipe, resulting in slightly lower curves. Data points above the DHLLDV curve are in general for pipe diameters smaller than 0.1524 m. Some special attention is given to the relation between the Durand Froude F L number and the pipe diameter D p .…”

Section: Experimental Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The particle diameter d: The LDV has a lower limit for very small particles, after which it increases to a maximum at a particle diameter of about d = 0.5 mm (Thomas (1979), Thomas (2014), Durand and Condolios (1952), Gillies (1993) and Poloski et al (2010)). For medium sized particles with a particle size d > 0.5 mm, the F L value decreases to a minimum for a particle size of about d = 2 mm (Durand and Condolios, 1952;Gillies, 1993;Poloski et al, 2010). Above 2 mm, the F L value will remain constant according to Durand and Condolios (1952) and Gillies (1993).…”

Section: Conclusion Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because there are numerous data and equations for the critical velocity (LSDV, LDV or MHGV), some equations based on physics, but most based on curve fitting, a selection is made of the equations and methods from literature. The literature analysed are from Wilson (1942), Durand and Condolios (1952), Newitt et al (1955), Jufin and Lopatin (1966), Zandi and Govatos (1967), Charles (1970), Graf et al (1970), Wilson and Judge (1976), Wasp et al (1977), Wilson and Judge (1977), Thomas (1979), Oroskar and Turian (1980), Parzonka et al (1981), Turian et al (1987), Davies (1987), Schiller and Herbich (1991), Gogus and Kokpinar (1993), Gillies (1993), Berg (1998), Kokpinar and Gogus (2001), Shook et al (2002), Wasp and Slatter (2004), Sanders et al (2004), Lahiri (2009), Poloski et al (2010) and Souza Pinto et al (2014.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Lahiri (2009) reported a maximum at about 17.5%, while Poloski et al (2010) derived 15%. This maximum LDV results from on one hand a linear increase of the sedimentation with the concentration and on the other hand a reduced sedimentation due to the hindered setting.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The Limit Deposit Velocity model, a new approach

Miedema

Ramsdell

2015

Journal of Hydrology and Hydromechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In slurry transport of settling slurries in Newtonian fluids, it is often stated that one should apply a line speed above a critical velocity, because blow this critical velocity there is the danger of plugging the line. There are many definitions and names for this critical velocity. It is referred to as the velocity where a bed starts sliding or the velocity above which there is no stationary bed or sliding bed. Others use the velocity where the hydraulic gradient is at a minimum, because of the minimum energy consumption. Most models from literature are one term one equation models, based on the idea that the critical velocity can be explained that way.Here the following definition is used: The critical velocity is the line speed below which there may be either a stationary bed or a sliding bed, depending on the particle diameter and the pipe diameter, but above which no bed (stationary or sliding) exists, the Limit Deposit Velocity (LDV). The way of determining the LDV depends on the particle size, where 5 regions are distinguished.These regions for sand and gravel are roughly; very small particles up to 0.014-0.040 mm (d < δ v ), small particles from δ v -0.2 mm, medium particles in a transition region from 0.2-2.00 mm, large particles > 2 mm and very large particles > 0.015·D p . The lower limit of the LDV is the transition between a sliding bed and heterogeneous transport. The new model is partly based on physics and correlates well with experiments from literature.

show abstract

Section: Conclusion Literaturementioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Experimental Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Conclusion Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The Limit Deposit Velocity model, a new approach

Miedema

Ramsdell

2015

Journal of Hydrology and Hydromechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A multispecies 1D concentration distribution model for coarse‐particle slurries

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coarse-particle (settling) slurry pipelines are key process units in many industries. In Canada's oil sands operations, such pipelines represent hundreds of millions of dollars of infrastructure investment and transport thousands of tonnes of solids every hour. The ability to determine key design/operating parameters of a settling slurry, such as frictional pressure gradient and deposition velocity, is dependent on the accuracy of the concentration distribution model used to determine the local concentration of coarse solids as a function of vertical position within the pipe. Accurate predictions of the concentration profile are also required for physics-based models of particle-impact erosion in slurry pipelines. In this study, an improved concentration distribution model was developed. The classic Schmidt-Rouse turbulent diffusion equation forms the basis for the model. The improvements made here include the use of a more suitable, high-concentration hindered settling velocity correlation, and a simple semi-empirical correlation for the particle diffusivity, which is shown to be dependent only upon the terminal particle settling velocity and the Kolmogorov turbulent velocity scale. The model is applicable to slurries with broad size distributions and/or species with different densities. The performance of the model is tested against numerous slurry flow conditions, including particles from 70 μm to 8 mm in diameter, pipe diameters of 76 mm ≤ D ≤ 500 mm, and in situ solids volume concentrations from 0.10 to 0.45. The concentration distribution predictions are shown to be in excellent agreement with the measurements.

show abstract

Constraints on the functional form of the critical deposition velocity in solid–liquid pipe flow at low solid volume fractions

Rice

Fairweather

Peakall

et al. 2015

Chemical Engineering Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Of the various transition velocities that delineate flow regimes in multiphase pneumatic and hydraulic conveying, the critical deposition velocity is important because it separates depositing and non-depositing flows. However, no distinction has been made between the dependence of the critical deposition velocity on physical parameters and flow conditions at low solid volume fractions and in the limit of zero volume fraction, which are distinct mathematically. Here, the two cases are analysed separately, and a general functional form in terms of the particle Reynolds number and Archimedes number is proposed that is valid up to volume fractions of several per cent. An ultrasonic method for determining the critical value of the particle Reynolds number is presented, and results for four particle types at several nominal volume fractions (0.5, 1 and 3 % by volume) are combined with a number of data from the literature. The resulting expressions are found to compare well with several similar correlations for the critical deposition velocity and other transition velocities, and, unlike a recent best-fit approach for the pick-up velocity, incorporate an explicit dependence on volume fraction, to which the critical deposition velocity is most sensitive at very low volume fractions. Lastly, it is found that the functional forms for the critical deposition velocity in the literature are unable to reproduce the available data at higher volume fractions, and a number of suggestions are made for resolving this issue.

show abstract

A pipeline transport correlation for slurries with small but dense particles

Cited by 23 publications

References 13 publications

The Limit Deposit Velocity model, a new approach

The Limit Deposit Velocity model, a new approach

A multispecies 1D concentration distribution model for coarse‐particle slurries

Constraints on the functional form of the critical deposition velocity in solid–liquid pipe flow at low solid volume fractions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About