KYAMBOGO UNIVERSITY

FACULTY OF SCIENCE

DEPARTMENT OF CHEMISTRY

DESIGN OF A TURBULENCE REDUCTION

DEVICE FOR CANE JUICE CLARIFICATION
BY

GIMEI BENEDICT

14/U/132/CHD/GV

A RESEARCH PROJECT REPORT

SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR

THE AWARD OF BARCHELOR OF SCIENCE IN CHEMICAL
ENGINEERING DEGREE OF KYAMBOGO UNIVERSITY

August 2018
 DECLARATION

I, Gimei Benedict, humbly declare, that the work which is being presented in this project report is
an authentic record of my own work carried out during my research period from January 2018 to
August 2018.

I also declare that, the matter presented in this project report has not been submitted by me for the
award of any other degree elsewhere. It is only prepared for my academic requirement and not for
any other purpose.

SIGANTURE:

………………………………………

DATE:

………………………………………

GIMEI BENEDICT

14/U/132/CHD/GV

i
 APPROVAL

This project work has been done under the supervision of the following:

SIGNATURE:

………………………………………

DATE:

………………………………………

DR. WILLIAM MICHAEL WANASOLO

ii
 DEDICATION

I dedicate this report to my beloved parents, Mr. Mafabi Patrick Gimei and Mrs. Nannozi Lucy,
for their encouragement, unconditional love and support that has made me the person I am today.
Thank you for believing in me and may the Almighty God reward you abundantly.

Also to my brothers, Mafabi Patrick and Gimei Peter, and my only beloved sister Nabisaawa
Christine whose love and company was very important to keep moving me forward. I wish you
the best in your future endeavors.

iii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

A great number of people have helped me during my research project. First of all, I thank The
Almighty God, Who has enabled me produce this piece of work.

I would like to place on record my deep sense of gratitude to Dr. Wanasolo Micheal William, for
his generous guidance, insightful comments, help and constructive suggestions to improve the
quality of this report work.

I also express my sincere gratitude to Mr. Bantu Magoola Peter, Process Chemist, Works
Department (Process Section), SCOUL, for his stimulating guidance, continuous encouragement,
his support and effort to compile this report.

I am also indebted to all my colleagues, for their insightful comments and invaluable suggestions
to improve the quality of this report work. Their efforts also provided me with a valuable
environment, without which this project work would not have been possible.

Finally, yet more importantly, I would like to express my deep appreciation to my parents, Mr.
Mafabi Patrick and Mrs. Nannozi Lucy, my sister and brothers for their perpetual support, advice
and encouragement that has enabled me reach this level as far as my degree is concerned. May
The Almighty God reward them accordingly.

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION ............................................................................................................................. i
APPROVAL ................................................................................................................................... ii
DEDICATION ............................................................................................................................... iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................... iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................ v
LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... vi
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ vii
SYMBOLS OF ACRONYMS ...................................................................................................... vii
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................. viii
CHAPTER ONE ........................................................................................................................... 1
INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 BACKGROUND ...................................................................................................................... 1
1.1.1 SUGARCANE PROCESSING .............................................................................................. 1
1.1.2 EXTRACTION OF THE JUICE ........................................................................................... 1
1.1.3 HEATING .............................................................................................................................. 2
1.1.4 CLARIFICATION ................................................................................................................. 3
1.1.5 THE RAPIDORR-444 CLARIFIER: .................................................................................... 4
1.1.6 DEFINITION OF TERMS: ................................................................................................... 5
1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT ....................................................................................................... 6
1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY .............................................................................................. 7
1.4 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ............................................................................................ 7
1.5 RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND DESIGN CONCEPTS ........................................................ 8
1.6 SCOPE OF THE STUDY ......................................................................................................... 8
1.7 JUSTIFICATION OF THE STUDY ........................................................................................ 9
1.8 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY.......................................................................................... 9
CHAPTER TWO ........................................................................................................................ 10
LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................................... 10
CHAPTER THREE .................................................................................................................... 14
MATERIALS AND METHODS ............................................................................................... 14
3.1 THE CAD MODEL GEOMETERY DESIGN PROCEDURE: ............................................. 14
3.2 SETTING UP THE MODEL USING AUTODESK COMPUTATIONAL FLUID
DYNAMICS (CFD) 2018- COMPUTER SOFTWARE .............................................................. 18
3.2.1 ASSIGNING THE MATERIALS ....................................................................................... 19
v
3.2.2 SETTING THE BOUNDARY CONDITIONS ................................................................... 20
3.2.3 DEFINING THE MESH ...................................................................................................... 23
CHAPTER FOUR ....................................................................................................................... 24
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ................................................................................................. 24
4.1 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................... 24
4.2 DISCUSSION ......................................................................................................................... 29
CHAPTER FIVE ........................................................................................................................ 32
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ........................................................................ 32
5.1 CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................................... 32
5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................ 32
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 33
APPENDIX A .............................................................................................................................. 34

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Clarification Process ...................................................................................................... 2
Figure 2: Rapidor-444 Clarifier ..................................................................................................... 5
Figure 3: Prototype embodiment of a TRD ................................................................................. 11
Figure 4: CFD Simulation of the Operation pf a TRD ................................................................ 12
Figure 5: 3D CAD Geometry using Auto Desk SimStudio tools 2016 ....................................... 14
Figure 6: Internal Rectangular Conduit with Four Equally sized adjacent holes ........................ 15
Figure 7: TRD fluid flow pattern ................................................................................................. 16
Figure 8: CFD Assessment Tool of the 3D CAD model ............................................................. 17
Figure 9: Assigned Materials for the Model ................................................................................ 19
Figure 10: Boundary Conditions for External Surfaces of the Model ......................................... 21
Figure 11: Boundary Conditions for Internal Surfaces of the Model .......................................... 22
Figure 12: Displayed Auto-sized mesh........................................................................................ 23
Figure 13: Solve dialog ................................................................................................................ 24
Figure 14: Displayed Shaded Mesh of the 3D Model ................................................................. 26
Figure 15: 3Dimensional View of Flow at Planes ....................................................................... 27
Figure 16: Sample Excel Result Sheet of Iterations carried out from 1 – 34 .............................. 31

vi
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Specifications of the CAD Geometry Design ................................................................ 16

Table 2: Parameter values for the model: .................................................................................... 20
Table 3: Physics Settings ............................................................................................................. 25
Table 4: Solver Settings ............................................................................................................... 25
Table 5: Convergence Settings .................................................................................................... 25
Table 6: Mesh enhancement Settings........................................................................................... 25
Table 7: Mesh Enhancement Settings .......................................................................................... 25
Table 8: Meshed Model Settings ................................................................................................. 26
Table 9: Simulation Results at Inlet and Outlet ........................................................................... 28
Table 10: Plane Results ................................................................................................................ 28

SYMBOLS OF ACRONYMS

𝑅𝑒 Reynolds Number
𝜌 Density of Cane Juice
𝑉 Velocity of cane Juice
𝑑 Diameter of cane juice feed pipe of the model device
𝐷 Diameter of the Outer Circular Conduit of the model device
𝑞 Volumetric Flow rate of Cane juice
𝐴 Area of the Plane along the model device
𝑝𝑝𝑚 Parts per million
3D 3Dimension
CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics
TRD Turbulence Reduction Device

vii
 ABSTRACT

Clear Juice, which accounts for almost 90% to 95% of the mixed juice is settled in a clarifier with
long residence times at Sugar Corporation of Uganda Limited (SCOUL), which can lead to:
increased sugar inversion and reduction in both sugar quality and color. The sugar losses are a part
of the process in any sugar manufacturing industry. Most industries do not have the technology
and method to reduce the sugar losses.

Theoretical research and computer modelling was carried out towards designing a turbulence
reduction device for cane juice clarification. In this study, research was carried out towards the
development of a model device for substantially reducing the momentum and velocity of a first
liquid that is flowing into a second liquid specifically for sugar production. The device allows one
to substantially reduce or even eliminate large scale turbulent eddies that could be produced by
liquid flowing into or within a vessel. The device constitutes a simple design, improves separation
efficiencies and requires only short residence times. A turbulence reduction device was designed
to introduce high volume into the tank while diffusing turbulence which shortened residence times
by as much as 70%. Reduced turbulence and fast settling times lead to increased sugar production
as well as improved color and purity.

viii
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND

The cane sugar industry is an important economic force in Uganda. Sugar Corporation of Uganda
Limited is a sugar factory with a distillery plant, located at Lugazi and is one of the pioneers of the
sugar industry in Uganda. The main product of the company is commercial light-brown and brown
sugar. However, this industry has a major challenge each year: the harvest season is very short.
Therefore, the sugar industry must be very efficient in order to remain competitive. One of the
areas where the factory process can be improved is in the juice stream that needs to be settled for
clarification, which is settled in a clarifier for about 2 hours. This stream accounts almost 90-95%
of the volume of juice processed and the long duration for clarification brings several
disadvantages like: increased sugar inversion and reduction in sugar quality, microbial activity,
and color generation. If this stream is subjected to a clarification operation that can shorten the
residence time for clarification, the process can increase the plant capacity. This research reports
the development of a model of a Turbulence Reduction Device (TRD) that effects short residence
times and can easily be retrofitted onto the Rapidor-444 Clarifier that is currently being used at
Sugar Corporation of Uganda Limited.

1.1.1 SUGARCANE PROCESSING

The process for producing sugar (sucrose) is a complex process that requires several unit
operations: cane milling, heating, flashing, treatment, clarification, evaporation, boiling and
centrifuging. The first steps of the process (extraction, heating and Subsidation or clarification) are
shown in Figure 1 and explained below.

1.1.2 EXTRACTION OF THE JUICE

Juice extraction by crushing the cane is the first step in sugar processing. The cane is first prepared
for crushing by a set of revolving knives that cut the stalks into chips and/or heavy duty hammer
mills (fiberizer) that shred the cane. After this operation, the prepared cane is conveyed to the
mills. To improve the juice extraction, water or thin juice sprays are directed to the cane as it
1
emerges from each mill unit to leach out the sugar, this operation is known as imbibition. In the
best milling practice more than 95% of the sugar in the cane goes into the juice. This percentage
is called sucrose extraction. After the milling process, the fiber component (bagasse) from the last
mill contains the un-extracted sugar, the woody fiber, and 45 to 55% water. This material usually
sent to the boilers to be used as fuel. The juice obtained from the milling process is finally obtained
as mixed juice. It is this juice that has to be treated and sent for clarification.

Juice Heating Defecation /Treatment Subsidation

50°C Flash Tank Magna

Mixed 𝑪𝒂(𝑶𝑯)𝟐 Floc
Juice 70°C

103°C Clarifier
Vapor Line
Juice Heater 100°C

Raw Juice Heater

𝑯𝟑 𝑷𝑶𝟒 Reaction Treated
Vessel Juice Heater
Treated Juice Tank

Figure 1: Clarification Process

1.1.3 HEATING
Cane juice contains non-sugar soluble particles (e.g. proteins and polysaccharides), Coagulation
of these proteins will only emerge as a result of heat. Better quality of juice is obtained if these
coagulated particles combine together to form macro-floc particles for better clarification. Juice
also contains suspended and colloidal particles. The effect of heat causes a density gradient
between the juice and suspended insoluble particles, favoring proper clarification. Heating Juice
2
prior to liming (treatment) also acts as a way of inhibiting the growth of micro bio activity. Low
temperatures and high pH favour the growth of the bacteria Leuconostoc Mesenteroides which
transforms sucrose into a spongy gum that can block pipes.

The juice is generally heated in two or more stages, making use of low pressure steam in the first
stage to improve the steam economy. The juice is usually heated in stages, with the lowest pressure
steam used for the first stage and progressively increasing it after each stage. In most cases, two
stages of heating are applied. These operations are referred to as primary (PJH) and secondary
(SJH) heating stages as shown in Figure 1.

1.1.4 CLARIFICATION

The clarification operation shown in Figure 1, is designed to remove both soluble and insoluble
impurities. The clarification of the juice is achieved in a settler, commonly named clarifier where
two products are obtained: a clarified juice and a mud which are obtained as an overflow and
underflow, respectively. The clarified or clear juice is sent to the evaporators to be converted to
syrup and finally sugar. On the other hand, the mud is pumped to the filtration station to recover
the sucrose entrained in the mud. To achieve a good clarification it is important to add milk of lime
to the mixed juice until it reaches a pH of 7-7.5; this operation neutralizes the natural acidity of
the juice and promotes the formation of insoluble salts, mainly calcium phosphate. Then, the limed
juice is heated to slightly above its boiling point to coagulate the albumin, waxes and gums and
more important flashing it. The flashing operation consists in forwarding the superheated juice to
a vessel open to the atmosphere where most of the dissolved air is eliminated. This operation is
important to eliminate entrained air from the juice to avoid undesirable effects like flocs flotation.
After the flashed juice is sent to the clarifier, a flocculant, which is a chain of polyacrylamide
partially hydrolyzed added at the clarifier’s feed, forms flocs that settle in the clarifier. These flocs
are basically compounded by insoluble calcium phosphate that formed from reaction of the milk
of lime and the inorganic phosphate present in the juice. If the phosphate concentrations are below
200 ppm, the clarification will be poor. If this occurs, phosphoric acid can be dosed to the juice in
order to increase the phosphate concentration. The phosphoric acid is usually added prior to
heating in order to guarantee enough time to form a floc of good quality. Finally, the juice is

3
separated by Sedimentation /Subsidation where two phases are obtained: clear juice and mud. The
clear juice is sent to the evaporators and the mud is filtered in order to recover sucrose.

Clarification is the settling or removal of suspended solids from a liquid, for example in municipal
water treatment or the treatment of sugarcane juice. Existing clarifier designs have the general
disadvantage that large, turbulent eddies are created as the liquid flows into the tanks. The
turbulence results in inefficient use of the settling area, reduced quality of the liquid overflow, and
generally imposes longer residence times than would otherwise be needed. A long residence time
is inherently less efficient and more expensive especially where perishable or degradable products
are involved. For example, in the clarifying sugarcane juice, a long residence time can result in
partial product deterioration. Clarification of sugarcane is an important part of the milling process.
A standard clarifier design involves a cylindrical tank with a sloped base with or without a raking
mechanism for thickened sludge removal (Swarovsky, 1990). Although a number of clarifier
designs have been tested over the years, few have found extensive application in the sugar industry.
In most conventional multi-tray clarifiers, such as Rapidorr-444, liquid has to travel horizontally
outwards and vertically upward following the pathway from central feed well to overflow launders
(Rein, 2007). In the Graver clarifiers, liquid travels from the periphery of the tank toward the
central juice outlets, while precipitated solids slide off the trays into a mud boot. The horizontal
travel reduces efficiency and throughput of the clarifier. It also creates large-scale circular motion
inside the clarifier, decreasing both capacity and separation efficiency. A separation that takes only
a few minutes on a small scale can take from 30 minutes to several hours due to the effects of
turbulence on settling time. For years, researchers have focused their efforts on reduction of
clarifier residence time, optimization of clarification regimes, and changing internal construction
to improve hydrodynamic conditions.

1.1.5 THE RAPIDORR-444 CLARIFIER:

It is a vessel into which the treated juice to be clarified is fed uniformly and continuously, and
which is large enough to reduce the velocity of flow and of circulation of the treated juice to such
a low value that it does not prevent settling from taking place. Its main purpose is to clarify the
treated juice by removing impurities in the form of mud. It consists of four (4) superimposed

4
compartments, each fed separately by a rotating central shaft by means of openings situated in the
upper part of the compartment as shown in Figure 2.

Bridge Support Foam Chamber

Overflow
Box
Mud
Withdraw
Line
Feed
Compartment
Baffle
plate Central shaft

Scrapper
Mud boot
Tray

Liquidating
Pump

Figure 2: Rapidor-444 Clarifier

1.1.6 DEFINITION OF TERMS:

Clarifier: A clarifier is a vessel into which the treated juice to be settled is fed uniformly and
continuously, and which is large enough to reduce the velocity of flow and of circulation of the
treated juice to such a low value that it does not prevent settling from taking place.
CFD: Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) is a simulation technique that mathematically
simulates fluid flow and heat transfer.

5
Autodesk CFD: Autodesk CFD is a software that turns a 3D CAD workstation into a fully
interactive flow bench, thermal test rig, and wind tunnel.
Turbulence: The unsteady or violent movement of a fluid within a vessel.
Inversion: The process that takes place when sucrose is exposed to high temperatures and low
pH’s, and breaks down into equal parts of glucose and fructose referred to as invert sugar.
Retrofitting: Refers to the addition of new technology or features to older systems. To retrofit a
clarifier means to put new parts or new equipment in it after it has been in use for some time,
especially to make it work better.
Mesh: A representation of a geometric object as a set of finite elements. A 3D mesh is the
structural build of a 3D model consisting of polygons which use reference points in X, Y and axes
to define shapes with height, width and depth.

1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT

Standard Clarifier Designs produce mixing which agitates the liquid more than necessary leading
to long settling and residence times. If there is too much turbulence in the tank, it takes long for
the mud to settle. More settling time means more inversion of sugar which means sugar losses and
more color. The existing clarifier (Rapidorr-444) that is currently being used at SCOUL has
general disadvantages that large turbulent eddies are created as cane juice flows into the tank. The
turbulence results in inefficient use of the settling area, reduced quality of the juice overflow, and
generally imposes longer residence time (2 hours) than would otherwise be required. Utilization
of a Turbulence Reduction Device (TRD) technology can actually help increase efficiency and
reduce clarifier losses. A Turbulence Reduction Device is also designed to introduce high volume
into the tank while diffusing turbulence which can shorten residence times by as much as 75% (30
to 40 minutes). Reduced turbulence and faster settling times leads to increased sugar production
as well as improved color and purity.

6
1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

General Objective:

To design a Turbulence Reduction Device (RTD) model suitable for reduction of turbulence within
a Rapidorr-444 Clarifier at SCOUL.

Specific Objectives:
1) To determine the current operating conditions of viscosity, temperature and pressure of the
existing clarifier design.
2) To design and simulate the model using Autodesk Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) –
Computer Software.

1.4 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

The direction of flow makes substantial changes several times after the fluid exits an inlet pipe or
hose. Suitably sized and positioned plates induce changes of flow direction. By the time the fluid
leaves the interior of the device, the fluid velocity and momentum are both very low and
turbulence is nearly or entirely eliminated. In some cases, the flow velocity is reduced by a factor
of -50. In one embodiment, the device comprises two parallel plates held a set distance from one
another- for example, connected to one another by spacers. A first liquid enters through a pipe or
hose through an opening in the first plate (usually the upper plate) and impinges on the second
plate (the deflection plate, usually the lower plate).

The first and second plates have approximately the same area, and that area is substantially larger
than the cross-section of the inlet in the first plate through which the first liquid flows. The second
(deflection) plate diverts the direction of the first liquid flow by approximately 90 degrees. The
second (deflection plate) also changes the flow from being more or less linear-all the first liquid
moving in approximately the same direction to a radial flow outward, more or less perpendicular
to the original direction of flow, and more or less parallel in all directions to the second plate. The
effect of the second plate (deflection plate) dissipates most of the energy of the flow within the
space between the two parallel plates. Turbulent eddies are substantially reduced or even
eliminated. Velocity and momentum of the fluid flow are greatly reduced by a factor of 40, 50, or

7
even higher. The device allows fluid to be introduced into a second liquid in vessel in a non-
turbulent manner (Figure 3 and 4) at substantially higher rates than would otherwise be possible.
(The first and second liquids may be the same or different). In the prototype embodiment, the
distance between the parallel first and second plates was 8 inches (20 cm). L, the length of the
two plates, was 12 inches (30 cm). D the distance between opposing baffles, was 5 inches (13
cm). Liquid entered through a pipe that passes through a circular opening in the center of the first
plate. Deflection baffles were affixed to the second plate. The height of the deflection baffles, h,
was 1.5 inches (4cm). The deflection baffles were places in a less square configuration, with
spaces between adjacent baffles. The inlet pipe diameter, d, was 3 inches (8cm) and flow rates
tested varied from 0 to about 110 gallons per minute. (25m3/hr.)

1.5 RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND DESIGN CONCEPTS

The following questions were set as research questions.

1) What are the operating conditions for this design and what materials are used in this design?
2) What should the CAD model look like and how should the model be optimized for Simulation?

The following basic considerations laid the groundwork for the design of the Turbulence
Reduction Device (TRD):
1) Large scale turbulent eddies created by juice introduction need to be reduced. The endpoint of
the distribution piping was fitted with a turbulence reduction device to cancel the momentum
of the liquid jet, hence reducing the scale of turbulent eddies. This effect can be observed in
Figure 4.
2) Juice overflow is collected through a series of uniformly distributed outlets at the top portion
of the clarifier. This feature maintains uniform vertical juice velocity profiles to make full use
of the cross-sectional area of the clarifier. This also minimizes any non-vertical flows within a
clarifier.

1.6 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The model design of the device was developed using Autodesk Sim Studio Tools 2016 R3
Computer Software and the Simulation was performed using Autodesk Computational Fluid

8
Dynamics (CFD) 2018. The research study was carried out within a time frame of four months as
invaluable experience has already been achieved during internship training period of the academic
year of 2016/2017. The main project areas included: creating the CAD geometry and a flow part
for the device using Autodesk Sim Studio Tools 2016 R3 – Computer Software and setting up the
model using Autodesk Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) 2018. The simulation was then run
and results were visualized.

1.7 JUSTIFICATION OF THE STUDY

The importance of the cane sugar clarification process has been acknowledged by cane sugar
technologists for many years. Clarification arguably influences all stages of production of raw and
refined sugar. Both computer modeling and experimental visualization have demonstrated that
most existing clarifier designs are inefficient, and are subject to large scale turbulence. These
inefficiencies lead to increased production costs, lower quality output or both. Computer-aided
simulations of the clarifiers using various CFD packages also demonstrated that the presence of
turbulent eddies were responsible for efficiency reduction. With increased demand for higher
quality sugar and continuous efforts to reduce inversion losses, the improvement in clarifier
operation was timely.

1.8 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

1) The invention employs a simple design, improves separation efficiencies, and requires only
short residence times.
2) The invention is economical to employ and it may readily be retrofitted onto the existing
clarifier.
3) Several of the devices may be placed simultaneously at different locations within a single
clarifier, thus increase efficiency further, preferably connected to a common header or input.
4) By the time the fluid leaves the interior of the device, the fluid velocity and momentum are
both very low, and turbulence is nearly or entirely eliminated.
5) The device is simple to manufacture, to operate and to clean.
6) The equipment footprint may be small.

9
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

A key step in processing sugar is removing solid particles from the sugarcane juice because the
juice naturally contains dirt particles and plant residues. The clarifiers that sugarcane mills have
used for decades are expensive to operate and are inefficient. Vadim Kochergin (2009) reported
that when liquid is introduced into a clarifier, it creates a turbulent jet, and this jet prevents the
liquid from settling. Vadim Kochergin (2009) also noted that in conventional clarifiers, the liquid
typically travels horizontally outward. This horizontal movement slows throughput and creates
circular motion inside the clarifier. Vadim Kochergin (2009) stated further that the inefficiencies
of the clarifier are caused by the presence of large-scale eddies caused by horizontal flows. Vadim
Kochergin (2009) saw the need for reduction or elimination of these flows to optimize the
clarification process. A turbulence reduction device was developed to solve some of the problems
of a conventional clarifier.

Vadim Kochergin (2009) went ahead and created a working model. Vadim Kochergin (2009)
created a device consisting of two parallel plates with liquid introduction into the space between
the plates. The two plates were connected by four bars that formed a box, with four vanes to
distribute liquid sideways. Vadim Kochergin (2009) reported that the new device allowed for
reduction of the scale of turbulence within a clarification vessel by minimizing the momentum of
the liquid jets at the entry into the clarifier. Vadim Kochergin (2009) conducted a Prototype testing
using dye dispersion. Although the flow pattern improved considerably and the jetting was
reduced, certain turbulence was still observed.

Vadim Kochergin (2009), disclosed a drawing sheet that illustrated schematically the prototype
embodiment of the invention which was successfully built and tested as shown in Figure 3. The
embodiment comprised two parallel, horizontal plates 1 and 2, with a feed pipe 3 extending
vertically and perpendicularly through an opening in upper plate 1.

10
 Figure 3: Prototype embodiment of a TRD

Vadim Kochergin (2009) reported that the degree of turbulence was reduced substantially as lower
plate 2 changed the flow direction and dissipated the energy of an impinging liquid jet. Baffles 4
further deflected the fluid flow further dissipating energy. Spacers 5 held plates 1 and 2 in a fixed
position relative to one another. Vadim Kochergin (2009) also reported that spacers 5 also
dissipated additional energy from the fluid flow, although these effects were generally minimal
because most of the energy had been dissipated before the liquid flow encountered the spacers.

Vadim Kochergin (2009) further reported that the inlet pipe should have an opening corresponding
with the opening in the upper plate of the device. In the prototype embodiment, the distance
between the parallel first and second plates was 8 inches (20 cm). L, the length of the two plates,
was 12 inches (30 cm). D the distance between opposing baffles, was 5 inches (13 cm). Liquid
entered through a pipe that passed through a circular opening in the center of the first plate.
Deflection baffles were affixed to the second plate. The height of the deflection baffles, h, was 1.5
inches (4cm). The deflection baffles were placed in a less square configuration, with spaces

11
between adjacent baffles. The inlet pipe diameter, d, was 3 inches (8cm). Vadim Kochergin (2009)
further tested flow rates which varied from 0 to about 110 gallons per minute. (25m3/hr.)

The presence of large scale turbulence had been confirmed by multiple Computational Fluid
Dynamics (CFD) studies by South African (Peacock et al., 2000; Chetty and Davis, 2001) and
Australian (Steindl, 2001; Steindl et al., 2005) researchers. Through utilization of advanced
modelling and visualization techniques such as Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD), the
inefficiencies of existent clarifiers had become even more obvious.
For visualization of flow patterns in the prototype conducted by Vadim Kochergin (2009), a CFD
modelling of such device was performed by specialists from Amalgamated Research Inc. (Twin
Falls, ID, USA, 2010) as shown in Figure 4. Contrary to the expectations, liquid was not reversed
by a deflection plate, and the area between the plates was not utilized completely by the flow.
Instead, the flow was ‘hugging’ the bottom plate, and the velocity of liquid leaving the plate was
even higher than that in the core of the flow. However, a certain amount of turbulence reduction
was achieved.

Figure 4: CFD Simulation of the Operation of a TRD

12
After several design iterations, the internal construction was modified to achieve almost
complete turbulence reduction. In the final version, the jet flow was reversed several times
after leaving the volume encased between the parallel plates. No additional CFD modelling was
carried out to optimize the elements of internal construction.
The results appeared satisfactory, and the project effort was then redirected towards industrial
implementation. A provisional patent application was filed for a turbulence reduction device
(TRD) (Kochergin and Gaudet, 2009).

Prior work by the inventors had also been presented as Chetty S and Davis SB (2001). Chetty S
and Davis SB (2001) disclosed a Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) modelling progress of a
Rapidor-444 Clarifier. Chetty S and Davis SB (2001) reported the use of a single-point feed system
to produce a constant velocity in the feed launder, and a uniform distribution of feed around the
circumference of the feed well. Chetty S and Davis SB (2001) also claimed that the apparatus for
reducing the turbulence was associated with flow of a first liquid, from a pipe or hose and into a
second liquid within a vessel; wherein said apparatus was adapted to be submerged within the
second liquid; the first and second liquids were either the same or different and comprised of:

a) First and second rigid plates, wherein said first and second plates were about the same size and
shape, except that the first plate incorporated a central hole through which a pipe or hose may
pass, so that the pipe or hose was positioned to discharge the first liquid into the space between
said first and second plates.
b) One or more spacers, wherein each said spacer was attached to both the first plate and to the
second plate, wherein said spacers held the first and second plates in a fixed position relative
to one another and parallel to one another.
c) At least four baffles were rigidly affixed to the second plate; wherein said baffles were
positioned symmetrically relative to the axis that passed through the center of the hole in the
first plate and that is also perpendicular to both said plates; and wherein spaces are present
between adjacent baffles to allow some liquid to pass between adjacent baffles;
C. Gaudet, M. Robert and S. Bergeron (2000), also discovered a novel device for substantially
reducing the momentum, velocity or both of a first liquid flowing into a second liquid.

13
 CHAPTER THREE

MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1 THE CAD MODEL GEOMETERY DESIGN PROCEDURE:

The 3D CAD geometry and flow part flow parts for the device was created using Autodesk
SimStudio Tools 2016 R3. The basis for each part of the CAD geometry design procedure for the
turbulence reduction device (TRD) was based on the provisional patent application filed for a
turbulence reduction device and references cited by Vadim Kochergin and Gaudet, (2009).

The distance between the parallel, horizontal plates 1 and 2 was 50mm and the length of the two
plates was 60mm. The width of the two plates was 45mm. The two plates were held by spacers to
form the shape of a box. Liquid entered through a feed pipe that passed through a circular opening
in the center of the first plate. Liquid that was deflected by the second plate was directed into a
larger rectangular conduit whose area was twice the area formed by the plates 1 and 2 shown in
Figure 5. The inlet pipe diameter, d, was 30 mm.

Cane Juice Feed Pipe

Horizontal plates 1 and 2

Figure 5: 3D CAD Geometry using Auto

Desk SimStudio tools 2016
14
Liquid was deflected into the larger rectangular conduit affixed with 4 adjacent holes so that
overflow is collected through a series of uniformly distributed outlets at the top portion. This
feature maintained uniform vertical liquid velocity profiles to make full use of the cross-sectional
area of the larger rectangular conduit which further reduced the momentum and velocity of the
liquid. This also minimized any non-vertical flows within the model device shown in Figure 6.

Outer Cylindrical conduit

Equally sized adjacent holes

Figure 6: Internal Rectangular Conduit

with Four Equally sized adjacent holes

Liquid finally passed through an outer circular conduit whose diameter was 5 times, the diameter
of the inlet feed pipe at the bottom of the circular conduit with a velocity even lower than the
velocity in the core of the flow. The outer cylindrical conduit was also to allow for uniform
distribution of liquid into the clarifier vessel.

The 3D CAD model geometry was designed to follow a similar flow pattern cited by Vadim
Kochergin (2009), conducted in the prototype embodiment as shown in Figure 7.

15
 Figure 7: TRD fluid flow pattern

Table 1: Specifications of the CAD Geometry Design

diameter of Cane juice feed pipe: 30 mm

Area of Cane Juice Feed Pipe: 7799mm2
Loop length of Feed Pipe 200 mm
Length of Inner Plates 1 and 2 60mm
Width of Inner Plates 1 and 2 45mm
Plates thickness (all) 5mm
Area of Inner rectangular conduit: 6500mm2
Diameter of the Outer Cylindrical conduit 150mm
Loop length of the Outer Cylindrical conduit 1000mm

16
A Computational Fluid Dynamics Assessment Tool of the created 3D CAD model before
simulation is shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8: CFD Assessment Tool of the 3D CAD model

17
3.2 SETTING UP THE MODEL USING AUTODESK COMPUTATIONAL FLUID
DYNAMICS (CFD) 2018- COMPUTER SOFTWARE

The 3D model was transferred from Autodesk SimStudio Tools 2016 R3 and then launched using
Autodesk CFD 2018. The Setup tasks all followed a similar workflow. The setup tasks from either
the Setup tab or from the Design Study bar were used:

The following steps were taken to select and define settings with the Ribbon:

1. Left clicking on the model entity (surface or part).

2. Clicking Edit on the context panel.
3. Specifying settings in the quick edit dialog.

The following steps were taken to select and define close to the model:

1. Left clicking on the model entity (surface or part).

2. Clicking the Edit button on the context toolbar.
3. Specifying settings in the quick edit dialog.

The following steps were taken to select and modify the model from the Design Study bar:

1. Right clicking on the model entity or existing setting in the Design Study bar.
2. Clicking the Edit button.
3. Specifying settings in the quick edit dialog.

Setting up the model involved also specifying what was known about the device or system. This
included the following:

1) Assigning the materials for all the surfaces and volume of the device.
2) Setting the boundary conditions (inlets and outlet conditions for all the flow parts).
3) Defining the Mesh.

18
3.2.1 ASSIGNING THE MATERIALS

Assigning Fluid and solid materials was done using the Materials dialogue from the setup tab of
CFD Software. The internal and external parts and all surfaces of the device were assigned a solid
type of Stainless steel ABS 316. The volume of the system was assigned a fluid type of Cane Juice.
The color legend and tools tab were used to check for each material assignment and also verify
each assigned part as shown in Figure 9.

Figure 9: Assigned Materials for the Model

19
3.2.2 SETTING THE BOUNDARY CONDITIONS

Boundary conditions such as volumetric flow rate, pressure, and temperature were assigned to
openings and other specific locations, which defined the inputs of the simulation model. Assigning
the boundary conditions allowed to specify internal heat loading, such as heat dissipation. Some
conditions, like velocity and volumetric flow rate, defined how a fluid entered or left the model.
Other conditions, like film coefficient and heat flux, defined the interchange of energy between
the model and its surroundings. Most boundary conditions were either defined as either steady-
state or transient. Steady-state boundary conditions were used and persisted throughout the
simulation. Flow of fluid and heat energy entered and left the model at specified locations. External
surfaces that had no boundary conditions were considered adiabatic walls.

The following parameters were used to assign the boundary conditions for the 3D model.

Table 2: Parameter values for the model:

Parameter Value:

Density of Cane Juice: 1200 Kg/cm2

Operating Temperature: 105°C
Volumetric flow rate: 170m3/hr.
Viscosity: 0.0403 Pa.s

1. The velocity of flow was calculated from the formula:

Volumetric flow rate = Cross sectional area x Fluid Velocity.

2. Reynolds number was calculated using the formula:

𝑭𝒍𝒖𝒊𝒅 𝒅𝒆𝒏𝒔𝒊𝒕𝒚 × 𝑭𝒍𝒖𝒊𝒅 𝑽𝒆𝒍𝒐𝒄𝒊𝒕𝒚 × 𝑰𝒏𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒏𝒂𝒍 𝒑𝒊𝒑𝒆 𝒅𝒊𝒂𝒎𝒆𝒕𝒆𝒓

𝑽𝒊𝒔𝒐𝒔𝒊𝒕𝒚

𝜌×𝑉×𝑑
𝑅𝑒 =
𝜇
20
The Boundary Condition task was enabled from the Design Study bar: Left clicking on the model
entity (surface or part) and clicking the Edit button on the context toolbar was performed. The
settings in the Boundary Conditions quick edit dialog were specified. The type of condition and
units were set including the time variation (Steady State or Transient). Condition-specific settings
such as Normal for Velocity and Gage for Pressure were applied. The flow direction for velocity,
volume or mass flow rate were changed. The values were specified and then applied.

Figure 10: Boundary Conditions for External Surfaces of the Model

21
 Figure 11: Boundary Conditions for Internal Surfaces of the Model

Volume Flow Rate It was Applied to planar inlets and was very useful as the density of juice is constant.
Pressure The Pressure boundary condition was typically used as an outlet condition. The
recommended (and most convenient) outlet condition was static, gage pressure with a
value of 0. No other conditions were needed at an outlet.
Velocity The Velocity was typically used as an inlet boundary condition. It was specified as
normal to the selected surface. It was also applied to outlet as the direction was
defined as out of the model.

22
3.2.3 DEFINING THE MESH

The mesh was applied using the Mesh sizing dialogue from the setup tab of Autodesk CFD
Software. Because we are only studying the fluid flow within the vessel, all parts of the model
were suppressed and the ones needed were later resumed. Auto size tab was used to define the
mesh distribution. The mesh size branch was then used to create the mesh.

Figure 12: Displayed Auto-sized mesh

23
 CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 RESULTS

The Solve task was used to specify the type of analysis to run. The solve tab was clicked to open
the Solve dialog. Conditions and solution parameters were then defined on the Physics Tab shown
in Figure 13.

Figure 13: Solve dialog

The default settings defined an incompressible, turbulent flow analysis, with no heat transfer. The
analysis was then started by clicking the Solve button. The Control Tab was then used to define
how the analysis should run.

The Solution Mode was set to Steady state and the Save Intervals for Results were also set. The
Solver Computer was then selected. (The local computer was the default) and the number of
Iterations to Run was entered. The analysis was then started by clicking the Solve button. 100
iterations were generally sufficient for approaching convergence.
24
Table 3: Physics Settings

Flow On
Compressibility Incompressible
Heat Transfer On
Auto Forced Convection On
Gravity Components 0.0, 0.0, 0.0
Radiation Off
Scalar No scalar
Turbulence On

Table 4: Solver Settings

Solution mode Steady State

Solver computer My Computer
Intelligent solution control On
Advection scheme ADV 5
Turbulence model k-epsilon

Table 5: Convergence Settings

Iterations run 100

Solve time 1528 seconds
Solver version 18.0.20170328

Table 6: Mesh enhancement Settings

Mesh enhancement 1
Enhancement blending 0
Number of layers 3
Layer factor 0.45
Layer gradation 1.05

Table 7: Mesh Enhancement Settings

Mesh enhancement 1
Enhancement blending 0
Number of layers 3
Layer factor 0.45
Layer gradation 1.05

25
A display of the Model after Simulation with the mesh shaded is shown in Figure 14.

Figure 14: Displayed Shaded Mesh of the 3D Model

Table 8: Meshed Model Settings

Number of Nodes 165819

Number of Elements 564010

26
A display of the 3Dimensional View of Flow within the model along planes after Simulation is
shown in Figure 15.

Figure 15: 3Dimensional View of Flow at Planes

27
Table 9: Simulation Results at Inlet and Outlet

Inlet at the Cane Juice Feed Pipe: inlet bulk pressure 0.0 dyne/cm^2
inlet bulk temperature 105.0 C
inlet mach number 0.0
mass flow in 61204.9 g/s
minimum x,y,z of opening 0.0
node near minimum x,y,z of 39110.0
Reynolds
opening number 1450
surface id 75.0
volume flow in 7650.61 cm^3/s
Outlet at the Outer Cylindrical inlet bulk pressure 0.0 dyne/cm^2
Conduit: Outlet bulk temperature 100.0 C
mass flow out 106973.0 g/s
minimum x,y,z of opening 0.0
node near minimum x,y,z of 33326.0
Reynolds
opening number 1251
surface id 54.0
volume flow in 13371.6 cm^3/s

Table 10: Plane Results

Result Quantity Turbulence Reduction Device:

Fluid Flow
Area 611510791.3669064 mm2
Mass Flow -27073.1835938
Volume Flow -27122.0605469
Vx-Velocity -98844.0 cm/s
Vy-Velocity -4666.51 cm/s
Vz-Velocity 54367.8 cm/s
Density 0.998202
Pressure 1.81084e+17
Pressure Force 4.9688004201e+16
Temperature 100.0 C
Viscosity 0.0403 Pa.s

The configured area along the planes of the model in Table 10 and parameters in Table 2 were
used to calculate the Reynolds number (Re) at the Outlet of the Circular Conduit

28
 𝜌×𝑉×𝑑
𝑅𝑒 = ……………………………………………………………… Equation 1
𝜇

𝑞 = 𝑉 × 𝐴 ………………………………………………………………….. Equation 2

Area from Table 10 = 611510791.3669 mm2 = 611.5107913669 m2

Volumetric flow rate from Table 2 (q) = 170m3/hr.

𝑚3
Using Equation 2: 170 = 𝑉 × 611.5107913669 𝑚2
ℎ𝑟

𝑚
𝑉 = 0.2780 ℎ𝑟

1200×0.2780×0.15
Using Equation 1: 𝑅𝑒 =
0.04

𝑅𝑒 = 1251

4.2 DISCUSSION

Velocity vectors at the openings were displayed and the appearance was changed to wire frame
after which global velocity vectors were enabled. Planes were used to create a three dimensional
view of the flow shown in Figure 13 which graphically presented results on cross-sections.

For visualization of the flow patterns shown in Figure 13, the orange regions along the planes of
the inlet pipe to the bottom plate showed a high velocity magnitude (1450 Reynolds number)
through the device compared to the yellow and green regions at the planes of the outer rectangular
conduit that showed a reduced velocity magnitude through the device. The blue regions along the
planes of the outer circular conduit show a completely reduced velocity magnitude (1251 Reynolds
number) out of the device. A certain amount of turbulence reduction was achieved.

29
Because the pressure was 0 at the outlet, the pressure at the inlet was the overall pressure drop. No
pressure was expected to build up within the device. The temperature within the vessel remained
constant with only a slight drop of 2-3 within the vessel.

The calculated value of Reynolds Number (Re) at the outer cylindrical Conduit described the flow
of fluid as laminar, moving with moderate speed and with fluid layers moving parallel to each
other as shown by the blue regions at the planes in Figure 13.
The Reynolds number was reduced from 1450 at the inlet of the cane juice feed pipe to 1251 at
the outer cylindrical conduit which indicated that the turbulence was significantly reduced and the
distribution of the flow was uniform.

The Autodesk CFD analysis was made up of multiple iterations and the convergence of each
degree of freedom was plotted on the convergence monitor. Numerous iterations were required to
attain full convergence shown in Figure 16. The number varied based on the application and
physics. Convergence was determined automatically which assessed the progress of the solution
and stopped the analysis when it satisfied certain numerical criteria. Autodesk CFD constantly
examined small and large frequency changes throughout the solution field and evaluated the local
and global fluctuations of each degree of freedom. After several design iterations, No additional
CFD modelling was carried out as the simulated results appeared satisfactory.

30
Figure 16: Sample Excel Result Sheet of Iterations carried out from 1 – 34

31
 CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 CONCLUSION
In this study, a model of device for substantially reducing the momentum and velocity of a first
liquid that is flowing into a second liquid specifically for sugar application was successfully
developed. The device allowed one to substantially reduce or even eliminate large scale turbulent
eddies that could be produced by liquid flowing into or within a vessel. The device constitutes of
a simple design, improves separation efficiencies and requires only short residence times. A
complete CFD simulation on a 3D model of a TRD was conducted. Views that are interesting and
useful were created. The TRD technology opened the possibility of achieving very short residence
times (40 minutes or less), which was attractive for cane juice clarification application.

5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
I recommend this designed model to the Sugar Corporation Of Uganda Limited to use the design,
fabricate the device and make it readily retrofitted onto the existing clarifier. The device is simple
to manufacture, operate and its performance can be tested if implemented.

CFD modelling of the turbulence reduction devices (TRD) should also be continued to optimize
the proportions as a function of juice flowrate and the geometric dimensions of TRDs. Physical
testing of prototypes and evaluation of CFD modelling adequacy would be of interest in future.

CFD modelling of the entire clarifier should also be performed to optimize the number and position
of TRDs in the clarifier.

32
REFERENCES
1. Chetty S and Davis SB (2001). CFD modelling of a Rapidorr 444 Clarifier: Recent
progress. Proc S Afr Sug Technol Ass 75: 298-301.
2. Echeverri LF (2005). Analysis of flow in clarifiers. PhD Thesis, Audubon Sugar Institute,
Louisiana State University, USA.
3. Kochergin V and Gaudet C (2009). Turbulence reduction device. (Patent pending)
4. Peacock SD, Davis SB, Govender KA, Moodley K and Brouckaert CJ (2000).
Computational fluid dynamics modelling of a Rapidorr 444 clarifier. Proc S Afr Sug
Technol Ass 74: 348-353.
5. Rein P (2007). Cane Sugar Engineering. Verlag Dr Albert Bartens, Berlin, Germany. 496
pp.
6. Steindl RJ (2001). Development of new generation SRI clarifier design. Proc Aust Sug
Cane Technol 20: 477-483.
7. Steindl, R, Fernandes M and de la Riva G (2005). New generation SRI juice clarifiers:
Brazilian experience. Int Sug J 107(1273): 47-52.
8. Svarovsky L (1990). Solid-liquid Separation. Third edition, Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd.
van der Pol PW, Schiweck H and Schwartz T (1998). Sugar Technology. Verlag Dr Albert
Bartens, Berlin, Germany.
9. ASCL, “The Louisiana Sugar Industry,” American Sugar Cane League, 2011.
http://www.amscl.org/public_html/SugarIndustry.pdf.
10. P. Rein, Cane sugar engineering, 1st ed. Berlin: Bartens, 2007.
11. E. Hugot, Handbook of Cane Sugar Engineering, 3rd ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1986,
p.771.
12. J. C. P. Chen, Cane Sugar Handbook, 11th Ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1985.
13. W. Doherty and L. A. Edye, “An Overview on the Chemistry of Clarification of Cane
Sugar Juice,” Proc. Aust. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol., vol. 21, pp. 381–388, 1999.
14. E. J. Buchanan, W. S. Graham, L. M. S. A. Jullienne, and M. Matic, “The Mutual
Clarification Project Progress Report No. 1,” Proc. S. Afr. Sugar Technol. Assoc., no. June,
pp. 190–198, 1969.
15. V. Kochergin and C. Gaudet, “LLT Clarifier Optimization and Performance,” American
Society of Sugar Cane Technologist, vol. 31, p. 75, 2011.
33
 APPENDIX A

WORK PLAN

MONTH ACTIVITY PROCEDURES

JANUARY The Basics: Getting 1) What is Autodesk CFD?

started using Autodesk 2) Recommended Solution Strategy
CFD 2018 3) Important Resources
4) CAD Modeling
5) CAD Connection and Basic Model Interactions
6) The Autodesk CFD Interface
FEBRUARY Setup: Describing the 1) Geometry Branch and Tools
Problem and Solving 2) Assigning Materials and Devices
3) Assign Materials to the 3D model
4) Assigning Boundary Conditions
5) Defining the Mesh
6) Solving

MARCH Results: Gathering 1) Assessing Convergence

Data and Making 2) Controlling Global Results and Measuring Part
Conclusions Temperatures.
3) Using Planes to Understand the Results and
Explore Results with Planes and XY Plots
4) Explore Results at Specific Points and Explore
the Results with Iso Surfaces
5) Using the Decision Center to Make
Conclusions
6) Use the Decision Center to Assess Results

APRIL Analysis and Drawing Conclusions and Discussing the Results.

Discussion of Results
MAY Presentation and Getting in touch with my Project supervisor for
Report Writing guidance and suggestions before presentation.

34