0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

Numerical and Experimental Studies of the Flow Field in a Cyclone Dryer

[+] Author and Article Information
P. Bunyawanichakul

School of Engineering, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS, Australiaprachab@postoffice.sandybay.utas.edu.au

M. P. Kirkpatrick

School of Aerospace, Mechanical and Machatronics Engineering, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

J. E. Sargison, G. J. Walker

School of Engineering, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS, Australia

J. Fluids Eng 128(6), 1240-1250 (Mar 10, 2006) (11 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2354523 History: Received August 30, 2005; Revised March 10, 2006

The performance of a newly developed cyclone dryer is investigated using RANS-based single-phase computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and experimental model studies. The cyclone dryer is a cylindrical tower, divided by conical orifices into several chambers; recirculation of the flow within individual chambers ensures adequate retention time for drying of the transported solid material. Numerical calculations are performed using the commercial CFD code CFX5.7 for different mesh types, turbulence models, advection schemes, and mesh resolution. Results of the simulation are compared with data from experimental model studies. The RNG k-ε turbulence model with hexahedral mesh gives satisfactory results. A significant improvement in CFD prediction is obtained when using a second order accurate advection scheme. Useful descriptions of the axial and tangential velocity distributions are obtained, and the pressure drop across the cyclone dryer chamber is predicted with an error of approximately 10%. The optimized numerical model is used to predict the influence of orifice diameter and chamber height on total pressure drop coefficient.

Copyright © 2006 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Sketch of the cyclone dryer geometry in x-z and x-y plane. The configuration geometric ratio and measuring positions are also shown.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Details of the modified wedge three-hole probe head

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Measured radial variation of velocity components at different elevations: (a) Axial velocity, (b) tangential velocity

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Structured hexahedral and unstructured mixed element mesh of simulation geometry at center cutting plane 90deg from inlet (a) 58,780 element hexahedral mesh, (b) 103,579 element unstructured mixed element mesh

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Influence of turbulence model on predicted velocity profiles at 0.055m elevation: (a) axial velocity, (b) tangential velocity

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Influence of turbulence model on predicted velocity profiles at 0.255m elevation: (a) axial velocity, (b) tangential velocity

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Influence of advection scheme on predicted profiles at 0.055m elevation for standard k-ε turbulence model: (a) axial velocity, (b) tangential velocity

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Influence of advection scheme on predicted profiles at 0.255m elevation for standard k-ε turbulence model: (a) axial velocity, (b) tangential velocity

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Influence of advection scheme on predicted profiles at 0.055m elevation for RNG k-ε turbulence model: (a) axial velocity, (b) tangential velocity

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Influence of advection scheme on predicted profiles at 0.255m elevation for RNG k-ε turbulence model: (a) axial velocity, (b) tangential velocity

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Structured hexahedral meshes of different resolution (a) 278,976 elements, (b) 475,232 elements

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Influence of mesh resolution on velocity distribution predicted at 0.055m elevation by RNG k-ε turbulence model: (a) axial velocity, (b) tangential velocity

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Pressure drop characteristics from simulation and experiment

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Meridional velocity vector plot in different diametral planes (a) 0deg from inlet, (b) 90deg from inlet

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Radial variation of tangential velocity component at different elevations on 0deg cut plane from cyclone inlet

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Predicted influence of orifice diameter on total pressure drop coefficient for various chamber heights

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 17

Predicted influence of chamber height on total pressure drop coefficient or various orifice diameters

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In