Improving particle flow in liquid-solid countercurrent extraction tower by
insert structure optimization: A combined study on experiments and DEM
simulations

Chunxi Qin, Xiaoyi Qiu, Jie Tang, Zhenhao Xi, Ling Zhao

PII: S0032-5910(18)30014-7
DOI: doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2018.01.015
Reference: PTEC 13101

To appear in: Powder Technology

Received date: 16 June 2017

Revised date: 12 November 2017
Accepted date: 9 January 2018

Please cite this article as: Chunxi Qin, Xiaoyi Qiu, Jie Tang, Zhenhao Xi, Ling Zhao,
Improving particle flow in liquid-solid countercurrent extraction tower by insert struc-
ture optimization: A combined study on experiments and DEM simulations, Powder
Technology (2018), doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2018.01.015

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication.
As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript.
The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof
before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process
errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that
apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Improving Particle Flow in Liquid-Solid Countercurrent Extraction Tower

by Insert Structure Optimization: A Combined Study on Experiments and

PT
DEM Simulations

RI
Chunxi Qin a, Xiaoyi Qiu a, Jie Tang a, Zhenhao Xi a, b* and Ling Zhao a, b

SC
a
Shanghai Key Laboratory of Multiphase Materials Chemical Engineering, East China

NU
University of Science and Technology, Shanghai 200237, China.

b
MA
State Key Laboratory of Chemical Engineering, East China University of Science and

Technology, Shanghai 200237, China.

D
TE

Correspondence: Zhenhao Xi (zhhxi@ecust.edu.cn)

P
CE
AC

1
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Abstract

The particle velocity distributions in the liquid-solid countercurrent nylon 6 extraction

PT
tower equipped with different types of inserts were investigated by both cold-model

experiments and 2D-DEM simulations. The cold-model experiment results near the insert

RI
were well interpreted by the distribution of the particle contact force acquired from the

SC
DEM simulation. Compared with the disordered particle flow caused by a conventional

NU
single-funnel insert, the uniform particle flow could be realized by a special combination
MA
of single-funnel inserts with 53° and 35° dip angles of the upper and lower parts,

respectively. In addition, a new type of insert, the multi-funnel insert, was found to be
D

more beneficial in improving the uniformity of the particle velocity distribution because
TE

it made the particle contact force near the insert uniform. Furthermore, the mass flow
P

state could be maintained in a wider range of discharge rate, which implied an

CE

enhancement of the operating flexibility of the tower equipped with the multi-funnel
AC

insert. These developed inserts have the potential to be applied in large-scale liquid-solid

countercurrent extraction processes.

Keywords: cold model; DEM simulation; moving bed; particle flow; velocity

distribution

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 Introduction

Particle flow has attracted great interest because it commonly exists in chemical

PT
apparatus such as fluidized beds [1], hoppers [2], and moving beds [3]. In a moving bed,

particles often move downward by gravity as the liquid or gas phase moves upward [4]. A

RI
nylon 6 extraction tower is a typical liquid-solid countercurrent moving bed in which

SC
several inserts are often installed to improve the extraction efficiency. The most

NU
commonly used insert is the single-funnel insert with a 45° dip angle designed by
MA
Zimmer (GEA Group, Germany) [5]. However, the inserts affect the particle flow state

[6]. Generally, the particle flow state has two types: the mass flow state and the funnel
D

flow state. In the mass flow state, all particles have a “first in, first out” behavior,
TE

whereas for the funnel flow state, particles at some positions move fast and have a “later
P

in, first out” behavior [7]. For nylon 6 extraction tower, it is of great importance to ensure
CE

the particle flow state approaching to the mass flow state because the mass flow state can
AC

improve the extraction efficiency and production quality. Thus, it is significant to

investigate the particle flow behavior influenced by inserts.

In a nylon 6 extraction tower, the particles move very slowly, which results in porosity

of particle phase close to the packing bed. In this dense particle phase, the particle flow

behavior is often investigated using particle tracking methods such as radioactive particle

tracking [8-11] and particle tracking in a thin-3D or semi-3D apparatus [4, 12, 13]. By

neglecting the wall effect, particle velocities measured by particle tracking in a thin-3D or

semi-3D apparatus may deviate from practical situations [14]. Simultaneously, the
3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

radioactive particle tracking method is often used with a small-scale apparatus [15]. In

contrast, a fiber optical probe is supposed to be an efficient measurement technique to

PT
study the particle flow behavior in a large-scale dense particle bed [16]. Moreover,

researchers often focus on particle flows that are affected by the geometries of the

RI
particles and tower. Wu [14] investigated particle flow influenced by the bed geometries

SC
as well as particle size distributions and found that the bed geometries are more important

NU
to the particle flow state. Yang [6] compared the particle flow behavior in flat-bottomed
MA
and wedge-shaped hoppers. However, although particle flow in a non-insert tower has

been investigated in detail [17], the influence of multilevel inserts on particle flow is still
D

unclear.
TE

In addition to the experimental method, a discrete element method (DEM) first

P

proposed by Cundall and Strack [18] is regarded as an appropriate approach to optimize

CE

the industrial equipment where the particle flow plays an important role, such as in a
AC

nuclear reactor or hopper [12, 19-21]. However, although many authors have used the

DEM method to design and optimize the particle flow, they mainly focused on the effects

of multi-phase [22, 23]. Few studies have focused on the distribution of the particle

contact force influenced by inserts, which has an important impact on the particle flow

state.

In this work, in order to improve the particle flow behavior, the cold-model

experimental and DEM methods were set up to investigate the particle flow behavior in a

large-scale liquid-solid countercurrent nylon 6 extraction tower with different

4
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

multilayered inserts. An optical fiber probe was applied to obtain local particle velocities

at different positions in the liquid-solid countercurrent extraction tower. The particle

PT
velocity distribution was then regulated by the optimization of an insert structure.

2 Experimental method

RI
2.1 Apparatus

SC
A schematic of the cold-model system is shown in Fig. 1a. The cold-model system

NU
consists of two parts: 1) a cylinder moving bed of Plexiglas column (A) with a 0.35 m
MA
diameter and 3.0 m height, where particles move downward with an adjustable mass flux

(the definition of particle flux can be seen in Part 2.2) of 3629–8749 kg/(m2·h) controlled
D

by a rotary valve, and water flows upward with a superficial velocity (u) of 1.06–4.39
TE

m/h as controlled by a water pump; and 2) a circulation system including a regulator tube
P

(B) and a rise pipe (C). With a gas phase introduced to the riser and the stability of the
CE

liquid phase in the moving bed maintained by a regulator tube, particle circulation is then
AC

realized continuously. The particles used in the cold-model experiments were nylon 6

particles supplied by Fangyuan Polymer Fiber Co. Ltd. (Zhejiang, China). Details of the

apparatus geometries and particle parameters are listed in Table 1.

2.2 Inserts

Fig. 1b shows a scaled-down single-funnel insert that was designed by Zimmer (GEA

Group, Germany). The single-funnel insert was composed of a middle conical part and a

wall-side hopper-like part. The structure of the single-funnel insert was significantly

influenced by two angles: α1 and α2. In the following parts, α2 represents the dip angle
5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

of a single-funnel insert. The gap height (Hf) and insert height (H) were fixed to

investigate the effect of the dip angle on the particle flow behavior in detail. Thus, α1

PT
varies correspondingly with changes in α2. In addition to the single-funnel insert, a new

multi-funnel insert was developed. The structure parameters (including the insert height

RI
and dip angle) are shown in Fig. 1c. Because the structure of the multi-funnel insert is

SC
mainly affected by the gap height, its parameters were studied in the range of 32–54 mm

NU
with a fixed dip angle of 45°.
MA
Near the inserts, particles could flow only through the annular space area that was the

lateral area of cylinder enclosed by a dotted line, as displayed in Fig. 1b. The particle flux
D

mentioned above was defined as the particle mass discharged rate divided by this annular
TE

space area.
P

2.3 Particle velocity detection method

CE

Particle velocities were measured by an optical probe system (PV 6D) supplied by the
AC

Institute of Process Engineering, Chinese Academy of Science (Beijing, China). The

probe tip of the velocity analyzer with a diameter of 6 mm had a spacing calibration value

of 1.5 mm. The details of the PV 6D were described in the work of Zhu [24] and Zhang

[25]. A total of 25 measuring points located at the radial and axial positions illustrated in

Fig. 2 were applied to investigate the particle velocity distributions. The interval between

two adjacent axial positions (such as A2 and A3) was about 11.0 cm. Meanwhile, A1 and

A5 were located at 4.0 cm below and above the insert, respectively. In radial direction,

five measuring points R1–R5 corresponded to the dimensionless radial positions of

6
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

0.0267, 0.293, 0.493, 0.740 and 0.973, respectively. Obviously, in our work, the

dimensionless radial position of 0 represented the wall of moving bed A, while the

PT
dimensionless radial position of 1 meant the center axis of moving bed A. To insure the

effectiveness of data gathered by PV 6D, PV 6D should detect the voltage fluctuation

RI
caused by the particle motion. Since the particle velocity in the liquid-solid

SC
countercurrent nylon 6 extraction tower was smaller than 1.5 mm/s, PV 6D should be

NU
operated at a very small pulse frequency (25.6 Hz) with a long measuring time (27.3 min).
MA
Moreover, every experiment is conducted at least three times to eliminate the

uncertainties of the measurements.

D

In summary, the operation parameters, including particle mass flux, liquid superficial
TE

velocity and other detail parameters in the cold-model experiments with different insert
P

types have been listed in table 2.

CE

3 DEM simulation
AC

A DEM simulation was used to investigate the particle behavior near the inserts.

Because the structure of the moving tower was centrosymmetric and repetitive, the 2D

geometric model display in Fig. 1d was focused on.

A DEM simulation is based on the so-called soft sphere approach, which allows

particles to be deformed with an appropriate overlap [26]. The shape of particles

influenced by the deformation is neglected. In the DEM simulations, the trajectory, spin,

and orientation of particles are acquired through solving Newton’s second law and

force-displacement law [27, 28]. Assuming that particle i interacts with a number of
7
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

adjacent particles at time t, two momentum conservation equations are utilized to

describe the translation and rotation of this particle, as shown in Eq. (1) and Eq. (2). A

PT
simple linear-spring dashpot model is used to describe the contact force of the particles

[29-31]. Furthermore, the particle discharge rate is limited by utilizing the velocity

RI
boundary condition.

SC
 Fi  mi g  1i fij
dvi k
(1)
mi
dt

NU
Ii i  1i Tij
dw k
(2)
dt
MA
where mi, Ii, vi, and wi are the mass, moment of inertia, and translational and rotational

velocities of particle i, respectively. ki represents the number of particles that interact with
D

particle i, fij and Tij are the contact force and torque of particle j acting on particle i, and
TE

Fi represents the applied force.

P

Table 3 lists the particle properties used in the DEM simulation, in which the normal
CE

spring coefficients, tangential critical damping ratios and tangential spring coefficients
AC

are all quoted from literature [32]. Owing to different materials, Plexiglas, and stainless

steel of moving bed A and the inserts, the corresponding friction coefficients which are

acquired from a Jenike shear tester (FT-3000, supplied by Rooko, China) are listed in

Table 4.

During the simulation, the particle velocity is calculated by a velocity-displacement

equation, shown in Eq. (3).

n Si
1 1
vi  (3)
n tnstep Nstep

8
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

where Si is the particle displacement, n and Nstep represent the particle numbers in the

measuring zone and measured internal steps (106, recommended by Yang and Hsiau [6]),

PT
respectively. In the dense phase particle flow, due to the particle collision, the particles

move fluctuant, generating a fluctuantion velocity [33]. Oda pointed out that the average

RI
velocity may yield less reliable values because of local fluctuation [34]. Xu put forward

SC
that the measuring zone should be large enough to avoid the fluctuation and to produce

NU
the reliable results [32]. The sensitivity of the measuring zone width to the calculated
MA
velocity was inspected with the fixed height (0.05 m), as shown in Fig. 3. It is clear that

at the width less than 0.01, the calculated velocity is unstable. With the width larger than
D

0.015, the calculated velocity is insensitive to the measuring zone width. Thus, to
TE

eliminate the particle velocity fluctuation, the measuring zone was a rectangle of 0.05 m
P

in height and 0.02 m in width.

CE

In the nylon 6 extraction tower, the liquid phase can be regarded as a plug flow
AC

because the liquid flows upward and the particle phase acts as a liquid distributor.

According to Hunt [35], the contribution of virtual mass force becomes negligible for a

column diameter greater than 0.15 m. Thus, in this work, only the buoyancy and drag

force are considered [36]. To describe the drag force, a single-function correlation (Eq.

(4)) proposed by Di Felice [37, 38] is applied.

Fd  Fd 0 ( 1) (4)

where  is the porosity of the particle phase. The fluid drag force on the particle in the

9
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

absence of other particles ( Fd 0 ) and the equation coefficient (  ) can be expressed as Eq.

(5) and Eq. (6).

 d p2

PT
Fd 0  0.5 f CD ( (u  vi ))2 (5)
4

RI
(1.5  log10 Re p )2
  3.7  0.65exp[ ] (6)
2

SC
where d p is the particle diameter, u represents the velocity of the fluid phase, and CD

NU
is the fluid drag coefficient, which is related to the Reynolds numbers, as follows:

24
MA
CD  Rep  1 (7)
Rep

4.8 2
CD  [0.63  ] Re p  1 (8)
D

Re0.5
p
TE

4. Validation of the 2D-DEM model

P

To simulate the particle motion in the extraction tower with the simplified 2D-DEM
CE

model, the transformation of porosity and particle motion between 3D and 2D should be
AC

examined.

Hoomans [39] derived an equation (Eq. (9)) to transform the 3D porosity ( 3d ) into

2D porosity (  2d ) on the basis of a comparison between a 2D hexagonal lattice and a

unit cube. Similarly, Ouyang [40] put forward a relationship (Eq. (10)) between a 3D

hexagonal packed structure and 2D hexagonal lattice. However, a modifier must be added

to the correlation owing to the random packing used in this work, as shown in Eq. (11)–

Eq. (13).

10
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

2
3d  1 (1 2d )3/2 (9)
 3
2
3d  1 (1 2d )3/2 (10)

PT
 3

3d  1  (1 2d )3/2 (11)

RI
2 2 2
  Dr (  (12)

SC
)
 3  3  3

 max  3d
Dr 

NU
(13)
 max   min

max min
where and
MA
represent the porosities in the loosest and compaction states,

which are 0.530 and 0.400, respectively. The porosity of the cold-model extraction tower
D

and the 2D-DEM geometric model are 0.450 and 0.180, respectively (the measuring
TE

method of max , min , and the porosity of the tower can be seen in the supplementary
P

materials). Using the transformation equation (Eq. 11), the 2D porosity of the extraction
CE

tower is about 0.195, which is only a small difference from the built 2D-DEM geometric
AC

model.

The 2D-DEM model will be invalid if particles move in all X, Y and Z directions

because the 2D-DEM model limits the particle motion in the X-Y plane (the details of the

X, Y, and Z directions are also marked in Fig. 1). In the cold-model experiments, the

particle velocity in the Z direction was also measured, and its signal is shown in Fig. 4. It

is clear that the test signal of the particle velocity in the Z direction is much weaker than

that in the Y direction, which reveals that the particle motion in the Z direction can be

ignored. Thus, the particles mainly move in the X-Y plane.

11
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

As mentioned above, the 2D-DEM model can well reflect the particle porosity, and the

particle motion can be simplified into a planar motion. Fig. 5 shows a comparison of the

PT
DEM simulation and the experiment results at the A5 axial position. Clearly, the

non-uniformity of the particle velocity distributions near the inserts acquired by the

RI
experiments is well reproduced by the DEM simulations. This further indicates that the

SC
established 2D-DEM model can be used to describe the particle flow behavior near the

NU
inserts.

5 Results and discussion

MA
5.1 Single-funnel insert with 45° dip angle
D

A single-funnel insert with a fixed dip angle of 45° and gap height of 51 mm is
TE

commonly used in industrial extraction towers. The experimental particle velocity

P

distributions at different axial positions between two adjacent abovementioned inserts

CE

and particle fluxes are shown in Fig. 6. It is clear that in the extraction tower, the particle
AC

flow near the insert outlet and inlet, namely the A1 and A5 axial positions, deviates from

the mass flow state in the examined particle flux range. Comparing the particle velocity

distributions at the A1 and A5 axial positions, the particle velocity distributions are more

uniform at the A2–A4 axial positions because these axial positions are far from the

inserts. Near the outlet of the inserts, the particles in the center area are accelerated with a

narrowed flow pattern, whereas the ones near the wall are impeded by the wall effect.

Meanwhile, the stacking angle is formed under the middle conical part of each

single-funnel insert, which promotes the movement of particles in the center. Therefore,
12
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

for particles close to the outlet of the insert, their velocities increase from the wall to the

center. However, near the inlet of the insert, the particle velocity distributions present the

PT
opposite tendency owing to the effect of interactions between the dilation and

compression of particle flow patterns [6]. In addition, the contact forces between particles

RI
near the inlet of the insert obtained through the DEM simulations are shown in Fig. 7. It

SC
can be found that the contact force between particles at the center of the A5 axial position

NU
is much larger than that at other positions. At the center of A5 axial position while using
MA
the single-funnel insert, particles are impeded by the middle conical part of the insert,

resulting in the decreasing particle velocity. Thus, a force hindering the particles from
D

moving downward must be applied to the particles, leading to the increasing contact force.
TE

The increasing contact force results in fast energy dissipation and makes the particles
P

slow down. Thus, near the inlet of the insert, particle velocities decrease from the wall to
CE

the center.
AC

As shown in Fig. 6a, at a particle flux of 3629 kg/(m2·h) and A5 axial position, the

particle velocities at R1 and R5 radial positions are 0.39 and 0.15 mm/s, respectively,

indicating the velocity difference between these two radial positions is only 0.24 mm/s.

However, at a particle flux of 8746 kg/(m2·h), the velocity difference between R1 and R5

radial positions can reach up to 0.49 mm/s because the particle velocities at these two

positions are 0.81 and 0.32 mm/s, respectively, as shown in Fig. 6c. This is because that

the degree of chaos of the contact force between particles is elevated with the increase in

particle flux, as shown in Fig. 7, resulting in the larger velocity difference at a particle
13
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

flux of 8746 kg/(m2·h).

The superficial velocity of the liquid phase has an obvious influence on the drag force.

PT
A change in the drag force can further transform the particle flow behavior. The

experimental results for the effects of liquid superficial velocity on the particle velocity

RI
distributions using a single-funnel insert with a fixed dip angle of 45º and gap height of

SC
51 mm are shown in Fig. 8. It is clear that the particle velocity increases as the liquid

NU
superficial velocity decreases at axial positions far away from the inserts, namely the A2–
MA
A4 axial positions. The particle motion in the liquid-solid countercurrent nylon 6

extraction tower should be decided mainly by the contact force between the particles and
D

the applied force between the liquid and solid phases such as buoyancy and drag force.
TE

The inserts have little effect on the contact force between particles because the particles
P

at the A2–A4 axial positions are far away from the inserts, but the drag force (which
CE

holds a dominant position in the particle flow behavior at these positions) clearly
AC

increases with the enhancement of the liquid superficial velocity. By contrast, at the A1

and A5 axial positions, the effect of the liquid superficial velocity on the particle flow

behavior is not obvious. This is because the contact force between particles can be

observably enhanced by a narrowed particle flow channel. Thus, the contact force

between particles holds a dominant position in the particle flow behavior.

Obviously, as discussed above, using a single-funnel insert with a fixed dip angle of 45°

and gap height of 51 mm results in non-uniform particle velocity distributions and

particle velocity insensitivity to the liquid superficial velocity near the inserts. These
14
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

phenomena indicate that the abovementioned single-funnel insert significantly disrupts

the particle flow.

PT
5.2 Special combination of the single-funnel insert

The particle flow channel and contact force between particles, which are of great

RI
significance to the particle flow behavior, can be deeply influenced by the dip angle. Fig.

SC
9a shows the experimental results of the dip angle effects on the particle velocity

NU
distributions near the outlet of the insert. It is clear that the particle velocities near the
MA
wall and center axis are much higher than those at other radial positions for a dip angle

larger than 45°, and with a decrease in the dip angle, the uniformity of the particle
D

velocity distribution is clearly improved. This is because with a decrease in the dip angle,
TE

the narrowed flow channel is closer to the wall, which accelerates the particles near the
P

wall and impairs the wall effect. Moreover, the stacking angle formed under the middle
CE

conical part of each insert increases with a decrease in the dip angle, which accelerates
AC

the particles in the center.

However, the experimental results of dip angle effects on particle velocity distributions

near the inlet of the insert are quite different from those near the outlet of the insert. This

is clearly shown in Fig. 9b. Correspondingly, the contact force between particles at

different dip angles near the inlet of the insert is shown in Fig. 10. It is clear that with an

increase in the dip angle, the contact force between particles becomes more uniform.

Because particle translational motion near the single-funnel inserts is mainly determined

by the contact force between particles, which has been demonstrated in section 5.1, the
15
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

particle flow near the inlet of the insert is gradually closer to the mass flow state with the

increase in the dip angle. Thus, with an increase in the dip angle in the range of 20°–53°,

PT
the uniformity of the particle velocity distribution near the inlet of the insert is improved.

As discussed above, decreasing the dip angle of a single-funnel insert can improve the

RI
uniformity of the particle flow at the outlet of the insert, whereas increasing the dip angle

SC
can facilitate the particle flow close to the mass flow state at the inlet of the insert. Thus,

NU
a special combination of the single-funnel insert is developed to eliminate the
MA
non-uniformity of particle flow at both the inlet and outlet of the insert, as shown in Fig.

11. Clearly, the critical parameters of this special single-funnel insert are the dip angle of
D

the upper part (β1) and the dip angle of the lower part (β2). As shown in Fig. 9b, a dip
TE

angle of 53° can guarantee the particle flow uniformity at the inlet of the insert. Thus, a
P

fixed 53° β1 is applied to investigated the effect of β2 on the particle velocity distribution
CE

by a DEM simulation, of which the results are shown in Fig. 12. Clearly, the uniformity
AC

of the particle flow is significantly improved at a β2 of 35° and 15°. Since the 15° β2

results in a block of particles, as shown in Fig. 12a, the optimal β2 should be 35°.

Then, the effect of β1 on the particle velocity distribution was investigated with a fixed

35° β2, as shown in Fig. 13. It is obvious that the particle flow becomes disordered when

β1 decreases from 53° to 45°. Meanwhile, a 60° β1 can also guarantee the uniformity of

the particle flow. However, an increase in β1 narrows down the particle flow path

(marked by the red square in Fig. 13a) and reduces the handling ability of the tower. Thus,

considering both the particle uniformity and handling ability of the tower, the optimal β1
16
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

is still set at 53°. Therefore, the optimized β1 and β2 for a uniform particle flow are 53°

and 35°, respectively. Fig. 14 shows the experimental particle velocity distributions using

PT
this special combination of single-funnel insert. In contrast to the particle flow behavior

of the conventional single-funnel insert, the particle flow of the optimized single-funnel

RI
insert tends to be a mass flow state near both the inlet and outlet of the insert.

SC
5.3 Multi-funnel insert

NU
Since the single-funnel insert limits the particle flow channel and makes the particle
MA
contact force disordered near the insert, the particle flow deviates from the mass flow

state. Conversely, increasing the particle flow channels and the homogeneity of the
D

particle contact force are supposed to benefit the uniformity of the particle flow. Thus, a
TE

new type of insert, a multi-funnel insert, was designed in this work. It is essentially
P

composed of three single-funnel inserts that are connected transversely, and the detailed
CE

geometric parameters can be seen in Fig. 1c.

AC

Fig. 15 displays the experimental results of radial particle velocity distributions with a

particle flux range from 3629 to 8746 kg/(m2·h) using a multi-funnel insert. It is obvious

that the uniformity of the particle flow at both the inlet and outlet of the new insert can be

improved in the examined particle flux range compared with the single-funnel insert. The

multi-funnel insert can be regarded as a distributor because it is composed of three

particle flow channels. Simultaneously, compared with the particle contact force near the

single-funnel insert, the particle contact force near the multi-funnel insert tends to be

uniform in the examined particle flux range, which is clearly shown in Fig. 16.
17
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

In addition, the experimental results of liquid superficial velocity effects on the particle

velocity distributions at the A1 and A5 axial positions was investigated for the

PT
multi-funnel insert, as shown in Fig. 17. In contrast to the single-funnel insert, the particle

velocities at the A1 and A5 axial positions increase as the liquid superficial velocity

RI
decreases. Thus, in contrast to the single-funnel insert, using the multi-funnel insert with

SC
a fixed dip angle of 45º and gap height of 32 mm facilitates the uniformity of the particle

NU
velocity distributions and makes the particle velocity near the inserts sensitive to liquid
MA
superficial velocity. These phenomena certify that the abovementioned multi-funnel

insert does not perturb the particle flow in the liquid-solid countercurrent extraction
D

tower.
TE

As discussed above, the new multi-funnel insert can be regarded as a distributor for the
P

particle phase motion. However, the distributor function will be gradually impaired along
CE

with an increase in gap height owing to the weakened interaction between the middle
AC

multi-conical part of the insert and the wall side multi-hopper-like part of the insert. Fig.

18 shows the experimental results of the gap height effects on the particle velocity

distributions utilizing the multi-funnel insert. The particle flow is still maintained under

the mass flow state when the gap height is 48 mm. Unfortunately, by further increasing

the gap height to 51 mm, the particle flow presents to be in the funnel flow state, and the

maximum value is supposed to exist at the dimensionless radial distance in the range of

0.6–0.8 at both the A1 and A5 axial positions.

As mentioned in the experimental part, the particle discharge rate is derived from the
18
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

particle flux multiplied by the annular space area. Therefore, the particle discharge rate

increases as the annular space area increases at the same particle flux. Table 5 displays

PT
the annular space area and particle flow type at different insert type and its gap height.

Clearly, the multi-funnel insert greatly extends the annular space area due to its three

RI
particle flow channels. At a gap height of 48 mm, the annular space area is 6.10 dm2,

SC
which is much larger than that of the single-funnel insert, even with a larger gap height of

NU
51 mm (2.80 dm2). Therefore, the new multi-funnel insert can maintain the particle flow
MA
under the mass flow state at a relatively higher particle discharge rate. This reveals that

the operating flexibility of the extraction tower equipped with the multi-funnel insert can
D

be enhanced.
TE

6 Conclusion
P

The particle velocity distributions in a liquid-solid countercurrent nylon 6 extraction

CE

tower with different types of inserts were investigated by both cold-model experiments
AC

and DEM simulations. The particle flow deviated from the mass flow state when using

the conventional single-funnel insert. At A1 axial position, particle velocities increased

from the wall to the center, whereas particle velocities decreased from the wall to the

center at A5 axial position. This undesirable particle flow state resulted mainly from only

one flow channel and a chaotic contact force near the insert. The particle velocities were

mainly determined by the particle contact force near the single-funnel insert, resulting in

particle velocities insensentive to the liquid superfical velocity. However, decreasing the

dip angle of the single-funnel insert can improve the uniformity of the particle flow at the
19
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

outlet of the insert, whereas increasing the dip angle can facilitate the particle flow close

to the mass flow state at the inlet of the insert. Thus, a special combination of the

PT
single-funnel insert which was composed of two contiguous single-funnel insert with

different dip angles was developed to improve the uniformity of the particle flow. The

RI
optimized dip angles of this special combination of single-funnel insert were 53º in the

SC
upper part and 35º in the lower part.

NU
Furthermore, a new type of insert, the multi-funnel insert, was developed to increase
MA
the particle flow channels and improve the homogeneity of the particle contact force near

the insert. For this new insert, the uniformity of the particle flow was greatly improved.
D

In contrast to the single-funnel insert, the particle velocities near the multi-funnel insert
TE

increased with the liquid superficial velocity decreasing, demonstrating that the
P

multi-funnel insert did not disturb the particle flow. Moreover, the operating flexibility of
CE

the liquid-solid countercurrent extraction tower equipped with the new multi-funnel insert
AC

was enhanced because the particle flow could be kept under the mass flow state at a

relatively higher particle discharge rate.

The authors gratefully acknowledge the supports of the National Key Research and

Development Program of China (Grant No. 2016YFB0302701), the Shanghai Rising-Star

Program (Grant No. 16QB140130) and the 111 Project (B08021).

Symbols used

20
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

mi kg mass of particle

vi m/s translation velocity of particle

PT
wi rad/s rotation velocity of particle

Fi N applied force of particle

RI
H m insert height

SC
Hf m gap height

NU
fij N contact force of particle j acting on particle i

g m/s2
MA
gravitational acceleration

Ii kg m2 moment of inertia
D

Tij N·m torque from particle j acting on particle i

TE

ki [-] number of particles interacting with particle i

P

n [-] number of particles in measuring zone

CE

Nstep [-] measuring internal steps

AC

tnstep s measuring internal time

Si m particle displacement

t s time step of DEM simulation

Fd 0 N fluid drag force on particle in the absence of other

particles

Fd N fluid drag force

Re p [-] Reynolds number of particle

21
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

CD [-] fluid drag coefficient, defined in Eq. (7) and Eq.

(8)

PT
dp m particle diameter

u m/s liquid superficial velocity

RI
Dr [-] modifier, defined in Eq. (13)

SC
Greek symbol

NU
β1 ° dip angle of upper part of special combination of
MA
single-funnel insert

β2 ° dip angle of lower part of special combination of

D

single-funnel insert
TE

 [-] defined in Eq. (12)

P

α2 ° dip angle of single-funnel insert

CE

γ [-] coefficient of drag force, defined in Eq. (6)


AC

[-] particle porosity

f kg/m3 density of fluid phase

Superscript/Subscript

max maximum

min minimum

2d two-dimensional

3d three-dimensional

22
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

[1] Y. Li, T. Li, H. Zhang, Q. Sun, W. Ying, LDV measurements of particle velocity

distribution and annular film thickness in a turbulent fluidized bed, Powder Technol. 305

PT
(2017) 578-590.

[2] J. Tang, R.P. Behringer, Orientation, Flow, and Clogging in a Two-Dimensional

RI
Hopper: Ellipses vs. Disks, Epl, 114 (2016) 34002.

SC
[3] J. Liu, Q. Yu, W. Duan, Z. Zuo, Q. Qin, Particles Flow Behavior Around Tubes in

NU
Moving Bed, John Wiley & Sons, 2016.
MA
[4] W.J. Yang, Z.Y. Zhou, A.B. Yu, Particle scale studies of heat transfer in a moving bed,

Powder Technol. 281 (2015) 99-111.

D

[5] J. Goetzke, Extract low molecular weight impurities from polyamide, China Pat.
TE

1284095 A (2001).
P

[6] S.C. Yang, S.S. Hsiau, The simulation and experimental study of granular materials
CE

discharged from a silo with the placement of inserts, Powder Technol. 120 (2001)
AC

244-255.

[7] W.R. Ketterhagen, J.S. Curtis, C.R. Wassgren, B.C. Hancock, Predicting the flow

mode from hoppers using the discrete element method, Powder Technol. 195 (2009) 1-10.

[8] S. Sanaei, N. Mostoufi, R. Radmanesh, R. Sotudeh-Gharebagh, C. Guy, J. Chaouki,

Hydrodynamic characteristics of gas-solid fluidization at high temperature, Can. J. Chem.

Eng. 88 (2010) 1-11.

[9] J. Chen, N. Rados, M.H. Al-Dahhan, M.P. Dudukovic, Particle motion in

packed/ebullated beds by CT and CARPT. AIChE J. 47 (2001) 994.

23
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

[10] F. Larachi, J. Chaouki, G. Kennedy, 3-D mapping of solids flow fields in multiphase

reactors with RPT, Aiche J. 41 (1995) 439-443.

PT
[11] N. Ali, T. Al-Juwaya, M. Al-Dahhan, An advanced evaluation of the mechanistic

scale-up methodology of gas–solid spouted beds using radioactive particle tracking,

RI
Particuology, (2017).

SC
[12] Y. Yu, H. Saxén, Discrete element method simulation of properties of a 3D conical

NU
hopper with mono-sized spheres, Adv. Powder Technol. 22 (2011) 324-331.
MA
[13] R.M. Nedderman, U. Tüzün, S.B. Savage, G.T. Houlsby, The flow of granular

materials—I : Discharge rates from hoppers, Chem. Eng. Sci. 37 (1982) 1597-1609.
D

[14] J. Wu, J. Binbo, J. Chen, Y. Yang, Multi-scale study of particle flow in silos, Adv.
TE

Powder Technol. 20 (2009) 62-73.

P

[15] V. Khane, I.A. Said, M.H. Al-Dahhan, Experimental investigation of pebble flow
CE

dynamics using radioactive particle tracking technique in a scaled-down Pebble Bed

AC

Modular Reactor (PBMR), Nucl. Eng. Des. 302 (2016) 1-11.

[16] T. Hagemeier, M. Börner, A. Bück, E. Tsotsas, A comparative study on optical

techniques for the estimation of granular flow velocities, Chem. Eng. Sci. 131 (2015)

63-75.

[17] M. Madrid, K. Asencio, D. Maza, Silo discharge of binary granular mixtures, Phys.

Rev. E, 96 (2017).

[18] P.A. Cundall, O.D.L. Strack, A discrete numerical model for granular assemblies,

Géotechnique, 29 (2015) 47-65.

24
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

[19] R. Balevičius, R. Kačianauskas, Z. Mróz, I. Sielamowicz, Analysis and DEM

simulation of granular material flow patterns in hopper models of different shapes, Adv.

PT
Powder Technol. 22 (2011) 226-235.

[20] A. Anand, J.S. Curtis, C.R. Wassgren, B.C. Hancock, W.R. Ketterhagen, Predicting

RI
discharge dynamics from a rectangular hopper using the discrete element method (DEM),

SC
Chem. Eng. Sci. 63 (2008) 5821-5830.

NU
[21] Alan, Roberts, Review of mass-flow hopper design with respect to stress fields and
MA
surcharge loads, Particuology, 8 (2010) 591-594.

[22] M. Liu, Y. Wen, R. Liu, B. Liu, Y. Shao, Investigation of fluidization behavior of

D

high density particle in spouted bed using CFD–DEM coupling method, Powder Technol.
TE

280 (2015) 72-82.

P

[23] C. Hu, K. Luo, S. Yang, S. Wang, J. Fan, A comprehensive numerical investigation

CE

on the hydrodynamics and erosion characteristics in a pressurized fluidized bed with

AC

dense immersed tube bundles, Chem. Eng. Sci. 153 (2016) 129-145.

[24] H. Zhu, J. Zhu, G. Li, F. Li, Detailed measurements of flow structure inside a dense

gas–solids fluidized bed, Powder Technol. 180 (2008) 339-349.

[25] H. Zhang, P.M. Johnston, J.X. Zhu, H.I.D. Lasa, M.A. Bergougnou, A novel

calibration procedure for a fiber optic solids concentration probe, Powder Technol. 100

(1998) 260-272.

[26] P.A. Moysey, N.V. Rama Rao, M.H.I. Baird, Dynamic coefficient of friction and

granular drag force in dense particle flows: Experiments and DEM simulations, Powder
25
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Technol. 248 (2013) 54-67.

[27] C. Chou, C. Tseng, J. Smid, J. Kuo, S. Hsiau, Numerical simulation of flow patterns

PT
of disks in the asymmetric louvered-wall moving granular filter bed, Powder Technol.

110 (2000) 239-245.

RI
[28] B.N. Asmar, P.A. Langston, A.J. Matchett, J.K. Walters, Validation tests on a distinct

SC
element model of vibrating cohesive particle systems, Comput. Chem. Eng. 26 (2002)

NU
785-802.
MA
[29] O.R. Walton, R.L. Braun, Viscosity, granular‐temperature, and stress calculations

for shearing assemblies of inelastic, frictional disks, J. Rheol. 30 (1986) 949-980.

D

[30] O.R. Walton, Numerical simulation of inclined chute flows of monodisperse,

TE

inelastic, frictional spheres, Mech. Mater. 16 (1993) 239-247.

P

[31] J. Zhang, J. Qiu, H. Guo, S. Ren, H. Sun, G. Wang, Z. Gao, Simulation of particle
CE

flow in a bell-less type charging system of a blast furnace using the discrete element
AC

method, Particuology, 16 (2014) 167-177.

[32] P. Xu, X. Duan, G. Qian, X.G. Zhou, Dependence of wall stress ratio on wall friction

coefficient during the discharging of a 3D rectangular hopper, Powder Technol. 284

(2015) 326-335.

[33] T. Weinhart, S. Luding, C. Labra, Y.O. Jin, Influence of coarse-graining parameters

on the analysis of DEM simulations of silo flow, Powder Technol. 293 (2016) 138-148.

[34] M. Oda, K. Iwashita, Study on couple stress and shear band development in granular

media based on numerical simulation analyses, Int. J. Eng. Sci. 38 (2000) 1713-1740.
26
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

[35] J. Hunt, T. Auton, K. Sene, N. Thomas, R. Kowe, ICHMT International seminar on

transient phenomena in multiphase flow, Dubrovnik, Yugoslavia, 1987, pp. 103-125.

PT
[36] C.H. Rycroft, G.S. Grest, J.W. Landry, M.Z. Bazant, Analysis of granular flow in a

pebble-bed nuclear reactor, Phys. Rev. E, 74 (2006) 021306.

RI
[37] Y. Zhao, M. Jiang, Y. Liu, J. Zheng, Particle-scale simulation of the flow and heat

SC
transfer behaviors in fluidized bed with immersed tube, AIChE J. 55 (2009) 3109-3124.

NU
[38] R.D. Felice, The voidage function for fluid-particle interaction systems, Int. J.

Multiphase Flow, 20 (1994) 153-159.

MA
[39] B.P.B. Hoomans, J.A.M. Kuipers, W.J. Briels, W.P.M.V. Swaaij, Discrete particle
D

simulation of bubble and slug formation in a two-dimensional gas-fluidised bed: A

TE

hard-sphere approach, Chem. Eng. Sci. 51 (1996) 99-118.

P

[40] J. Ouyang, J. Li, Particle-motion-resolved discrete model for simulating gas–solid

CE

fluidization, Chem. Eng. Sci. 54 (1999) 2077-2083.

AC

27
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig. 1. (a) Schematic of experimental cold-model system, (b) single-funnel insert, (c)

multi-funnel insert, and (d) DEM model geometries.

PT
Fig. 2. Sketch map of measuring points.

Fig. 3. Measuring zone width effect on the particle velocity calculated in DEM

RI
simulation

SC
Fig. 4. Test signals of particle velocity in (a) X-Y plane and (b) Y-Z plane.

NU
Fig. 5. Comparisons between 2D-DEM simulation and experiment results with u = 4.39

m/h, single-funnel insert, α2 = 45°, and Hf = 51 mm: (a) simulation results of particle
MA
distributions at 13 s, and (b) particle velocity distributions at A5 axial position.
D

Fig. 6. Experimental particle velocity distributions at different axial positions and particle
TE

fluxes with single-funnel insert, Hf = 51 mm, α2 = 45°, and u = 4.39 m/h: (a) 3629
P

kg/(m2·h), (b) 6996 kg/(m2·h), and (c) 8746 kg/(m2·h).

CE

Fig. 7. Contact force between particles with single-funnel insert, Hf = 51 mm, α2 = 45°,
AC

and u = 4.39 m/h: (a) 3629 kg/(m2·h), (b) 6996 kg/(m2·h), and (c) 8746 kg/(m2·h).

Fig. 8. Experimental results of liquid superficial velocity effects on radial particle

velocity distributions at different axial positions with single-funnel insert, Hf = 51 mm,

and α2 = 45º: (a) 3629 kg/(m2·h), and (b) 6996 kg/(m2·h).

Fig. 9. Experimental particle velocity distributions effected by dip angles at (a) A1 and (b)

A5 axial positions with single-funnel insert, 3629 kg/(m2·h), and u = 1.06 m/h.

Fig. 10. Particle contact force at different dip angles at 3629 kg/(m2·h) and u = 1.06 m/h.
Fig. 11. Structural parameters of new combined single-funnel insert.
28
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig. 12. (a) Particle distributions at 33 s, and (b) particle velocity distributions at A1 and

(c) A5 axial positions using different β2 for combination of single-funnel insert at 3629

PT
kg/(m2·h), u = 1.06 m/h, and β1 = 53°.

Fig. 13. (a) Particle distributions at 33 s, and particle velocity distributions at (b) A1 and

RI
(c) A5 axial positions using different β1 for combination of single-funnel insert at 3629

SC
kg/(m2·h), u = 1.06 m/h, and β2 = 35°.

NU
Fig. 14. Experiment particle velocity distributions at A1 and A5 with optimized

single-funnel insert at 3629 kg/(m2·h) and u = 1.06 m/h.

MA
Fig. 15. Experimental particle velocity distributions at different axial positions and
D

particle fluxes using multi-funnel insert, Hf = 32 mm, and u = 4.39 m/h.

TE

Fig. 16. Contact force between particles: (a) geometry model of multi-funnel insert with
P

Hf = 32 mm. Other parameters are same as Fig. 1(c), (b) 3629 kg/(m2·h), (c) 6996
CE

kg/(m2·h), and (d) 8746 kg/(m2·h).

AC

Fig. 17. Experimental particle velocity distributions effected by liquid superficial velocity

at A1 and A5 axial positions using multi-funnel insert and Hf = 32 mm: (a) 3629

kg/(m2·h), and (b) 6996 kg/(m2·h).

Fig. 18. Experimental results of gap height effect on particle velocity distributions at (a)

outlet and (b) inlet of insert. (Multi-funnel insert, 8746 kg/(m2·h), u = 1.06 m/h.)

29
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
NU
MA
D

Figure 1
TE
P
CE
AC

30
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
NU
MA
D

Figure 2
TE
P
CE
AC

31
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
NU
Figure 3
MA
D
TE
P
CE
AC

32
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
Figure 4

NU
MA
D
TE
P
CE
AC

33
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
NU
MA
D

Figure 5
TE
P
CE
AC

34
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
NU
MA
D
TE

Figure 6
P
CE
AC

35
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
NU
MA
Figure 7
D
TE
P
CE
AC

36
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
NU
MA
D
TE
P
CE
AC

Figure 8

37
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
NU
Figure 9

MA
D
TE
P
CE
AC

38
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
NU
MA
D

Figure 10
TE
P
CE
AC

39
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
NU
MA
D
TE
P

Figure 11
CE
AC

40
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
NU
MA
Figure 12
D
TE
P
CE
AC

41
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
NU
MA
Figure 13
D
TE
P
CE
AC

42
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
NU
Figure 14
MA
D
TE
P
CE
AC

43
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
NU
MA
D
TE
P

Figure 15
CE
AC

44
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
NU
MA
Figure 16
D
TE
P
CE
AC

45
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
NU
MA
D

Figure 17
TE
P
CE
AC

46
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
NU
Figure 18

MA
D
TE
P
CE
AC

47
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 1. Apparatus geometries and particle properties.

Moving bed (A) Width (m) 0.35

PT
Height (m) 3.0

Riser (C) Width (m) 0.05

RI
Height (m) 4.0

SC
Pressure regulator tube (B) Width (m) 0.05

NU
Height (m) 3.8

Particle
MA
Diameter (m) 0.003

Density (kg/m3) 1130

D

Table 2. Operation parameters in the cold-model experiments with different insert types
TE

Operation parameters Single-funnel insert Multi-funnel insert

P

Particle mass flux (kg/(m2·h)) 3629–8749 3629–8749

CE

Liquid superficial velocity (m/h) 1.06–4.39 1.06–4.39

AC

Insert dip angle (°) 20–60 45

Insert gap height (mm) 51 32–54

Frequency of PV 6D (Hz) 25.6 25.6

Measuring time (min) 27.3 27.3

Gas flow in riser (L/min) 11 11

48
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 3. Parameters used in DEM simulations.

Variable quantity Value

PT
Particle diameter (m) 0.003

Time step (s) 1e-6

RI
Particle density (kg/m3) 1130

SC
Normal critical damping ratio

NU
Particle-particle 0.3
MA
Particle-wall 0.5

Normal spring coefficient (N/m)

D

Particle-particle 3.45e5
TE

Particle-wall 6.9e5
P

Tangential critical damping ratio

CE

Particle-particle 0
AC

Particle-wall 0

Tangential spring coefficient (N/m)

Particle-particle 3.45e5

Particle-wall 6.9e5

49
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 4. Friction coefficients of different materials.

ID value

PT
1 (center axis) 0

2 (wall of tower) 0.1

RI
3,4,5 (wall of insert) 0.3

SC
particles 0.7

NU
Table 5. Annular space area and particle flow type at different insert type and its gap
MA
height

Insert type Gap height (mm) Annular space area (dm2) Particle flow type
D

32 4.07 Mass flow

TE

42 5.34 Mass flow

P

Multi-funnel 48 6.10 Mass flow

CE

51 6.49 Funnel flow

AC

54 6.87 Funnel flow

Single-funnel 51 2.80 Funnel flow

50
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Graphical abstract

PT
RI
SC
NU
MA
D
P TE
CE
AC

51
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Highlights

 The conventional single-funnel insert disorders the particle flow.

PT
 A special combination of single-funnel insert improves particle flow uniformity.

 The multi-funnel insert improves the uniformity of contact force and particle flow.

RI
 The multi-funnel insert possesses a larger operating flexibility.

SC
NU
MA
D
P TE
CE
AC

52