This article was downloaded by: [University of Wollongong]

On: 21 June 2010

Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 907697606]
Publisher Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-
41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Particulate Science and Technology

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713774907

Axial and Radial Pressure Drops of Dense Phase Plugs

D. McGlincheya; A. Cowella; J. R. Pugha; E. A. Knighta; J. Xianga; J. Lia
a
School of Engineering, Science and Design Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, United
Kingdom

To cite this Article McGlinchey, D. , Cowell, A. , Pugh, J. R. , Knight, E. A. , Xiang, J. and Li, J.(2005) 'Axial and Radial
Pressure Drops of Dense Phase Plugs', Particulate Science and Technology, 23: 3, 215 — 227
To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/02726350590955877
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02726350590955877

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
 Particulate Science and Technology, 23: 215–227, 2005
Copyright # Taylor & Francis Inc.
ISSN: 0272-6351 print/1548-0046 online
DOI: 10.1080/02726350590955877

Axial and Radial Pressure Drops of Dense

Phase Plugs

D. MCGLINCHEY
A. COWELL
J. R. PUGH
E. A. KNIGHT
J. XIANG
J. LI
Downloaded By: [University of Wollongong] At: 15:32 21 June 2010

School of Engineering, Science and Design

Glasgow Caledonian University
Glasgow, United Kingdom

An experimental technique to measure various characteristics of plug flow in dense

phase pneumatic conveying systems based on the unique characteristics of plug flow,
i.e., the fluctuation of axial pressure drop along a pipeline and pressure difference in
the radial direction at the back of a plug, was developed by Li et al. (2002). Based
on this work, a further experimental study combined with numerical modeling was
carried out to describe the structure of plugs through the analysis of the measure-
ments of pressure difference in both axial and radial directions. A theoretical expla-
nation of these pressure differences was proposed and agrees very well with the
recorded signals of pressure difference from differential transducers. This expla-
nation will prove useful in understanding plug structures in industrial applications.

Keywords Pneumatic conveying, dense phase, plug flow, pressure measurement,

CFD, DEM

Introduction
Dense-phase pneumatic transport of bulk materials has become an important tech-
nology in many industries, from pharmaceuticals to petrochemicals and power gen-
eration. In such a gas-solids conveying system, system performance is largely
dependent upon the flow patterns of solids in the pipeline. As a result, there has
been increasing interest from academia and industry in solids flow behaviors in
the system.
In past decades, a number of researchers have developed various techniques to
measure solids flow in the pipe: the acoustic method (Tallon & Davies, 1998), elec-
trostatic sensor measurement (Yan, 1998), capacitance displacement sensors (Green
et al., 1998), optical sensors (Morikawa et al., 1986), and tomographic imaging
(Williams et al., 1998). Although these methods have been successfully applied in
laboratory tests, their application in industry has been limited either by difficulties

Address correspondence to D. McGlinchey, School of Engineering, Science and Design,

Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, G4 0BA, United Kingdom. E-mail: d.mcglinchey@
gcal.ac.uk

215
 216 D. McGlinchey et al.

in practical implementation or simply by cost. Li et al. (2002) developed a novel

experimental technique to measure various characteristics of plug flow in dense-
phase pneumatic conveying systems. This method is based on the unique character-
istics of plug flow, i.e., the fluctuation of axial pressure drop along pipelines and
pressure difference in the radial direction at a plug. Although this measuring tech-
nique has been found effective in detecting solids plugs traveling through horizontal
pipes and will distinguish various flow regimes, further analysis of plug structure has
been restricted due to the influence of transducer response time; it also has been dif-
ficult to fully explain the pressure drop time history. The results presented by Li et al.
(2002) mainly relate to the analysis of axial pressure distribution, and little consider-
ation was given to analysis of the radial pressure distribution.
An analysis of pressure difference in a moving plug is described in this article
and explains both axial and radial pressure differences in a pipeline with the aid
of a comparison between experimental results and results from a numerical model.
Downloaded By: [University of Wollongong] At: 15:32 21 June 2010

Pressure Distributions in Plug Flows

Axial Pressure Differences

As Li et al. (2002) indicate, in any low-velocity pneumatic conveying, the pressure
drop along the pipeline is always fluctuating. The driving potential of a moving plug
is the pressure difference between the front and the back of the plug. The total press-
ure drop between the inlet and the outlet of a pneumatic conveying line is the sum of
all the pressure drops across each plug plus the pressure losses between plugs, due to
air only flow.
Through analyzing different measuring distances, Li et al. (2002) chose 50 mm as
a suitable measuring distance of axial differential pressure. Based on a theoretical
analysis, Li et al. drew a diagram to describe pressure drop along the pipeline when
a plug is moving through a pressure transducer. All real pressure transducers have a
finite response time. It is therefore necessary to consider the effect of this on the
measurement. Two cases are illustrated in Figure 1. The trapezoidal shape represents
the shape of the pressure drop trace from an ideal transducer (zero response time) to
the passing of an ideal plug (constant velocity and density) as a function of time and
is taken as an ‘‘input’’ to the real measuring port. The faster the response of the
transducer, the closer the output matches the input. As the response time increases,
the output of the transducer lags the input on the rising slope and leads the input on
a falling slope. If the response time increases further, the output signal may not reach
the maximum pressure attained, i.e., due to slow response. This illustrates the impor-
tance of considering the instrument performance in any subsequent data analysis.

Analysis of Axial Pressure Drop from a CFD=DEM Model

In order to analyze the pressure drop more easily, Li et al. (2002) assumed that both
the length and shape of the plugs and the air gaps do not change between measuring
ports; both front and back of the plug are flat and vertical. However, it has been
observed experimentally that plugs generally change their shape and length and do
not keep a constant velocity and both front and back faces of the plugs are not ver-
tical. A gas-solids two-dimensional mathematical model was developed for plug flow
of cohesionless particles in a horizontal pipeline in dense-phase pneumatic conveying
 Axial and Radial Pressure Drops of Dense Phase Plugs 217
Downloaded By: [University of Wollongong] At: 15:32 21 June 2010

Figure 1. Signals from fast and slow response pressure transducers.

(Xiang & McGlinchey, 2003). The model was developed based on the discrete
element method (DEM). For the gas phase, the Navier–Stokes equations were
integrated by the semi-implicit method for pressure-linked equations (SIMPLE)
scheme of Patankar employing the staggered grid system. For the particle motion
the Newtonian equations of motion of individual spherical particles were integrated,
where repulsive and damping forces for particle collision, the gravity force, and the
drag force were taken into account. For particle contact, a nonlinear spring and dash
pot model for both normal and tangential components was used to aid the analysis
of the pressure drop in the plugs by adapting the parameters to conform to the
experimental geometry given in the following section. Figures 2 and 3 illustrate
the results of the model prediction of the pressure drop associated with the plugs.
Figure 2 shows a fully developed plug traveling through the measuring ports of
transducers. There are two virtual differential pressure transducers installed 4.8 m
from the feeding point labeled by the bold line in Figure 2. One transducer measures
the axial pressure drop and the measuring length is 50 mm (i.e., measuring points at
4.8 m and 4.85 m). The recorded axial pressure drop along the pipeline is presented in
Figure 3. Another transducer records the radial pressure difference across the pipe
section; these results will be discussed in the next section.
With reference to Figure 2, the axial pressure drop against the position of the
plug is illustrated in Figure 3 and six distinct stages were found:
1. From 7.92 to 8.00 s: at 7.92 s the ‘‘suspension’’ phase of the plug reaches the mea-
suring ports, and the pressure drop along the pipeline starts to fluctuate.
2. From 8.00 to 8.08 s: Figure 2 shows the front of the plug traveling through the
measuring ports during this period and the pressure drop rises quickly.
3. From 8.08 to 8.16 s: during this period the middle of the plug passes through the
measuring ports. Due to the higher concentration of solids in the middle of the plug
the pressure drop increases further.
 218 D. McGlinchey et al.
Downloaded By: [University of Wollongong] At: 15:32 21 June 2010

Figure 2. A plug moving through the pipeline (DEM).

 Axial and Radial Pressure Drops of Dense Phase Plugs 219
Downloaded By: [University of Wollongong] At: 15:32 21 June 2010

Figure 3. Recorded pressure trace of one plug calculated by DEM.

4. From 8.16 to 8.20 s: the pressure drop keeps approximately constant and forms
the top of the trapezoid due to the constant solids concentration in this section
of the plug.
5. From 8.20 to 8.26 s: Figure 2 shows that during this period the back of the plug is
passing through the measuring ports, and due to the looseness of solids, the press-
ure drop starts to decrease.
6. From 8.26 to 8.28 s: the plug is moving out of the measuring ports and due to the
steeper slope of the back face of the plug, the trace of pressure drop decreases
very rapidly. So this forms an unequal trapezoidal shape, unlike that presented
in Figure 1 (fast response isosceles trapezoid).

Characteristic Cases for Radial Pressure Distribution

In horizontal dense-phase flows, due to the high concentration of solids in the pipe
cross section (in plug flow mode the bulk solid material occupies the whole pipe
cross-sectional area), gas flow actually becomes mainly interstitial flow through
voids between particles. Gas flow is severely altered, especially in the gap between
two solids plugs, where the gap is usually filled partially by the gas at the top and
the solids at the bottom as a moving or stationary layer. The altered gas flow field
results in a redistribution of the static pressure in the pipe cross section, and a radial
pressure difference between the top and bottom has been observed at the back of the
solids plug in both experiments and numerical simulations (Cairns et al., 1997; Li,
2000). It was concluded that ‘‘when the front of a wave arrives at the transducer
the pressure in the top half of the pipe increases, and as the rear of the wave reaches
the transducer the pressure has reached a maximum.’’ In this article, the authors pro-
pose an alternative explanation to describe the radial pressure drop theoretically and
experimentally.
 220 D. McGlinchey et al.
Downloaded By: [University of Wollongong] At: 15:32 21 June 2010

Figure 4. Pressure along a plug (a) and radial pressure drop along a plug (b).

A Simple Model of Radial Pressure Drop

With reference to Figure 4 it was assumed that:

1. P1 is equal to P3, and P2 is equal P4 due to the very small air-only pressure drop.
2. The axial pressure drop along the plug is linear.

The pressure along a plug in the top and bottom half of the pipe are shown in
Figure 4(a). Due to the sloping shape in the front and back faces of the plug, the
pressure at the top and bottom is unequal. This causes a negative peak in the front
of plug and a positive peak in the back of plug (Figure 4(b)). With reference to
Figure 4(b), the behavior of radial pressure drop versus time can be drawn.
 Axial and Radial Pressure Drops of Dense Phase Plugs 221
Downloaded By: [University of Wollongong] At: 15:32 21 June 2010

Figure 5. Recorded radial pressure drop trace from the model.

Analysis of Radial Pressure Drop Results from the CFD=DE Model

With reference to Figure 2, Figure 5 describes the associated radial pressure drop
distribution. Figure 5 shows that the radial pressure drop decreases until the top half
of the plug reaches the top of the measuring port. Then due to the uneven concen-
tration of solids in the plug, the shape of the signal is wave-like and fluctuating, which
may be explained in part by the 2-D nature of the model. As the rear of the plug
reaches the top of the measuring port the pressure drop increases to a maximum.

Axial and Radial Pressure Drop Measurement and Analysis

A granular material (3 mm spherical nylon pellets) was conveyed through a
pneumatic conveying system shown schematically in Figure 6. This material in bulk

Figure 6. Layout of conveying pipeline.

 222 D. McGlinchey et al.
Downloaded By: [University of Wollongong] At: 15:32 21 June 2010

Figure 7. Pressure transducer layout.

has a high permeability, which ensures that experiments can be performed over a
wide range of flow conditions without pipeline blockage.
In these experiments, axial pressure drop was measured at different locations
along the conveying line. A layout of pressure transducers in the conveying line is
shown in Figures 6 and 7. Most transducers were located towards the end of the
pipeline, just after a 3 m long sight-glass section. The transducers were smart differ-
ential devices ranging between 0 and 25 mbar, with an accuracy of 0.1% and a
response time of 280 ms.

Results and Discussion

Axial Pressure Drops

The results presented in this article relate mainly to the measurements of pressure
drop over short distances (50 mm, axial, and 80 mm, radial), as well as comparison
of pressure signals from two pairs of measuring ports, 500 mm apart. The main flow
parameters of the tests described, which were also filmed, are given in Table 1.

Table 1. Test flow parameters

Conditions of plug flow, test 1 Value

Solids flow rate (kg=s) 1.49

Airflow rate (kg=s) 0.0261
Solids loading ratio 57
Superficial air velocity (m=s) 4.26
 Axial and Radial Pressure Drops of Dense Phase Plugs 223
Downloaded By: [University of Wollongong] At: 15:32 21 June 2010

Figure 8. Recorded pressure traces for DP2 and DP3 in experimental test.

Recorded data for an experimental test are presented in Figure 8, which shows
the recorded axial pressure drop signal from differential transducers DP2 and DP3
(the layout of these two transducers is shown in Figure 7) for 12 plugs. According
to the theory of the novel technique of Mason and Li (2000) and Li et al. (2002)
the velocity of the plugs can be calculated from this data. The delay Dtp can be
estimated from Figure 9 (180–260 ms), and as the distance between ports 11 and 21
(see Figure 7) was Lm ¼ 500 mm, this gives plug velocity Vp ¼ 1:9
2:8 m=s. This

Figure 9. Recorded pressure trace of DP2 and DP3 for experimental test.
 224 D. McGlinchey et al.

value was confirmed by examining video footage of the test. It has to be also noted
that plugs travel at slightly different velocities during the same test, depending on
plug length and bulk density and the pressure difference across the plug. An interest-
ing plug structure is illustrated in Figure 9 where for the second plug there was no
corresponding signal from the upstream transducer. It is likely that in this case
the plug was formed between the two sets of pressure ports. This illustrates the
potential for more complex analysis that can be undertaken from signals acquired
from a series of pressure measurements along the pipeline length. Figure 9 suggests
that it took between 1 and 2.5 seconds for a plug to travel through the measuring
ports, which would give the length of plugs between 2.5 and 6.25 m. Obviously, such
values of plug length are unrealistic and are a consequence of the response time of
the measuring instrument. The results agree with the earlier work of Li et al.
(2002), i.e., the technique can effectively measure the velocity of a plug but further
analysis is limited by the influence of transducer response time.
Figure 10 shows the recorded pressure trace of one plug for DP2 during an
Downloaded By: [University of Wollongong] At: 15:32 21 June 2010

experimental test. It can be seen that the real case (Figure 10) is quite different from
the ‘‘ideal’’ case described in Figure 1.
It can be seen that the shape of the pressure drop trace for each plug (Figure 10)
has some similarity to that presented in the analysis of Figure 2. As with the analysis
of Figure 2, the pressure trace can be divided into several parts. Four stages were
also found and are compared with those from Figure 2:
1. From 18.04 to 18.2 s—comparable with stages, 1 and 2 in Figure 2;
2. From 18.2 to 18.6 s—comparable with stage 3 in Figure 2;
3. From 18.8 to 18.98 s—comparable with stage 5 in Figure 2;
4. From 18.98 to 20.62 s—comparable with stage 6 in Figure 2.
It can be seen that there is no period that can be matched with stage 4 in Figure 2;
also it takes a longer time to decrease to zero after the plug leaves the transducer
measurement port. This is most likely due to the transducers that were used in the

Figure 10. Recorded pressure trace of one plug for DP2 in experimental test.
 Axial and Radial Pressure Drops of Dense Phase Plugs 225
Downloaded By: [University of Wollongong] At: 15:32 21 June 2010

Figure 11. Recorded radial pressure drop trace for experimental test; (a) whole test run, (b)
one plug only.

tests having a relatively slow response time and so are not able to fully record the
pressure fluctuations due to plug structure in detail.

Radial Pressure Drop

The range of differential transducer DP1 was set from
5 mbar to þ5 mbar and
connected to measuring ports 11 and 11b. Recorded data for an experimental test
are presented in Figure 11(a) (the whole test run) and Figure 11(b) (one plug only).
 226 D. McGlinchey et al.

These two figures show the recorded pressure drop signal from differential trans-
ducer DP1 (the layout of this transducer is shown in Figure 7), which measured
the radial pressure drop in the pipe cross section. In Figure 11(a), it can be seen that
some plugs cause negative signals when they arrive at DP1, then the pressure rises
from a negative value to a maximum as the rear of the plug arrives. This agrees with
the modeled results. There also appears to be an interesting effect possibly due to
increasing plug length throughout the test, which requires further analysis. However,
in comparing the pressure drop trace for one plug shown in Figure 5 with Figure
11(b) which shows a different shape of pressure trace for one plug, unlike the
wave-like shape in Figure 5, Figure 11(b) shows a near linear signal increasing with
a constant rate from minimum to maximum value. This is because every fluctuation
lasts only a very short period, about 0.04 second (Figure 5), but the response time of
the differential transducer is about 0.28 second. Therefore the transducer cannot
respond accurately to signals of such short duration and so only shows the same
trend of pressure trace as the results from the model.
Downloaded By: [University of Wollongong] At: 15:32 21 June 2010

Conclusion
A theory has been proposed to explain the pressure drop in both axial and radial
directions and to describe the behavior of plug flow through the analysis of the signal
of pressure drop in both axial and radial directions. The theory has been found
useful in explaining the shape of the signal of pressure drop and will describe the
structure of the plug.
However, compared with analysis of the model’s results, it has been found that
further analysis of plug structure from the signal from real pressure transducers is
restricted due to the influence of transducer response time. Further experiments will
be carried out using pressure transducers of significantly faster response time to
verify the theory.

References
Cairns, C., A. Levy, & D. J. Mason. 1997. Three dimensional effects of wave-like flows in
horizontal pipelines. In Proceedings of 2nd Israeli Conference for Conveying and Handling
of Particulate Solids. Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Jerusalem, Israel. pp. 4.49–54.
Green, G., J. R. Pugh, D. J. Mason, & A. McNaughtan. 1998. A novel measurement of solids
mass flow rate in pneumatic conveying systems. In Proceedings of 1st International
Symposium on On-Line Flow Measurement of Particulate Solids. Organized by School
of Engineering, University of Greenwich, UK. pp. 109–117.
Li, J. 2000. Heat transfer in gas-solids flows through pipes. Ph.D. diss., Glasgow Caledonian
University, United Kingdom.
Li, J., S. S. Pandiella, C. Webb, D. McGlinchey, A. Cowell, J. Xiang, E. A. Knight, J. R.
Pugh. 2002. An experimental technique for the analysis of slug flows in pneumatic pipe-
lines using pressure measurements. Part. Sci. Technol. 20: 1–21.
Mason, D. J. & J. Li. 2000. A novel experimental technique for the investigation of gas-solids
flow in pipes. Powder Technol. 112(3): 203–212.
Morikawa, Y., Y. Tsuji, & T. Tanaka. 1986. Measurement of horizontal air-solid two-phase
flow using an optical fibre probe (particle velocity and concentration). Bull. JSME
29(249): 802.
Tallon, S. & C. E. Davies. 1998. Velocity measurements in dense down flow of bulk solids
using a non-restrictive acoustic method. In Proceedings of 1st International Symposium
 Axial and Radial Pressure Drops of Dense Phase Plugs 227

on On-Line Flow Measurement of Particulate Solids. Organized by School of Engineering,

University of Greenwich, UK. pp. 19–28.
Williams, R. A., S. P. Luke, K. Ostrowski, & T. Dyakowski. 1998. Real time imaging of dense
phase particulate flows in conveying and fluidization. In Proceedings of 1st International
Symposium on On-Line Flow Measurement of Particulate Solids. Organized by School of
Engineering, University of Greenwich, UK. pp. 172–181.
Xiang, J. & D. McGlinchey. 2003. Numerical simulation of particle motion in dense phase
pneumatic conveying. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference for Conveying
and Handling of Particulate Solids. 27–30 May 2003, Budapest, Hungry. pp. 11.1–6.
Yan, Y. 1998. On-line velocity measurement of particulate solids using electrostatic sensors. In
Proceedings of 1st International Symposium on On-Line Flow Measurement of Particulate
Solids. Organized by School of Engineering, University of Greenwich, UK. pp. 56–65.
Downloaded By: [University of Wollongong] At: 15:32 21 June 2010