2018
DOI: 10.1007/s10035-017-0782-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Numerical simulation of 2D granular flow entrainment using DEM

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Fig. 9a through c show that for all particle types, the displacements of particles in surface layers (1,2,5,6) are larger than those of in inner layers (3,4,7,8,9). The displacement of particle 10, located in a high-strength inner layer, is almost 0.…”
Section: The Velocity Vector Diagrammentioning
confidence: 92%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Fig. 9a through c show that for all particle types, the displacements of particles in surface layers (1,2,5,6) are larger than those of in inner layers (3,4,7,8,9). The displacement of particle 10, located in a high-strength inner layer, is almost 0.…”
Section: The Velocity Vector Diagrammentioning
confidence: 92%
“…DEM was an important tool for modeling the failure behavior of granular geological materials through the time-stepping algorithms that have been developed over the past decade [15,16,17]. Particle flow code (PFC 2D ) makes possible for the modeling of granular flow [8,17,22], fracture of intact rock, transitional block movements, dynamic response to blasting or seismic, and deformation between particles caused by shear or tensile forces, as described by Cundall and Strack [1]. The elements interact with each other via a force displacement law and can be of arbitrary shape, rectangular blocks and spheres being the most common ones.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To simulate a cohesive granular material we use the parallel-bond model, originally developed for rock modeling [ 22 ]. This contact model has also proven to be suitable to simulate other cohesive geomaterials, such as sand [ 23 ], debris [ 24 ] and snow [ 20 , 25 27 ].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Third, mass exchange with the bed has not been fully accounted for by discrete models. Specifically, sediment erosion has not been modelled by these models except for a few cases by a single DEM model [39], while the static sediment layer is regarded as sediment deposit during the simulation [29].…”
Section: Discrete Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%