Woodcock 1987

2 Gravity flow of bulk solids
2.1 Introduction
A good understanding of the nature of bulk solids flow is an essential
prerequisite to the design of virtually any system involving the storage or
handling of such materials. Observation of a bulk material discharging from a
hopper or flowing under gravity along a steeply inclined channel will
immediately suggest similarities to the behaviour of liquids. Whilst there are
certainly some similarities between the flow characteristics of bulk solids and
liquids, the analogy is one that it is unwise to pursue. In general it is more
appropriate to model a bulk solid as a plastic solid than as a fluid continuum.
The main features of liquids which are not shared by bulk solids are as
follows:
(i) At rest, liquids cannot sustain shearing stresses. This is most clearly
demonstrated by the fact that bulk solids can be formed into a stable heap
whereas liquids at rest always have a horizontal free surface.
(ii) Changes of pressure in a liquid at rest are transmitted uniformly to all
other points in the liquid.
(iii) Shear stresses that occur in a flowing liquid are dependent upon the rate of
shear and independent of the mean pressure of the liquid.
In contrast, bulk solids at rest can transfer shearing stresses and, in many cases,
possess sufficient cohesive strength after consolidation to retain their shape
under pressure. Furthermore, when a bulk solid 'flows' slowly the shearing
stresses within it are dependent upon the mean pressure to a much greater
extent than the rate of shear.
These distinctive features of liquids and bulk solids can be illustrated and
compared by considering the distributions of pressure on the internal surfaces
of two identical cylindrical containers; one filled with a bulk solid, the other
filled with a liquid having the same (bulk) density. In Figure 2.1 a the pressure
distributions due to the bulk solid and the liquid are shown and the much
greater stresses that exist in the liquid near the bottom of the container are
immediately apparent. The reason for this difference lies in the fact that there is
no shearing stress at the walls of the liquid container, and therefore the whole
weight of the liquid is taken on the horizontal base, whereas a significant
proportion of the weight of the bulk solid is carried on the vertical walls.
The manner in which internal stresses are transmitted through the bulk
solid and the liquid are illustrated in Figure 2.lb in which the effect of
C. R. Woodcock et al., Bulk Solids Handling

© Chapman & Hall 1987
48 BULK SOLIDS HANDLING
..
-_-:-J"_-~-
liquid bulk
solid
(a) Pressure distributions due to weight alone
...
liquid bulk
solid
(b) Excess pressures due to additional free surface loading
Figure 2.1 Pressure distributions in liquids and bulk solids.
increasing the loading on the free surfaces of each are shown. In the case of the
liquid, the excess load is transmitted uniformly throughout, so that all of this
excess load is, in fact, actually carried on the base of the container. However, at
the base of the bulk solid container there is no change as a result of the
additional loading on the free surface.
As explained in Chapter 1, the ability of a bulk solid to flow may be regarded
GRA VITY FLOW OF BULK SOLIDS 49
as the summation of a number of different effects, but it is essentially concerned
with the forces of attraction between constituent particles. Thus, when these
forces of attraction are low, the bulk material can easily be made to flow under
the influence of gravity with the particles moving as individuals relative to one
another. Dry sand and granulated sugar are familiar examples of free-flowing
materials. However, the high interparticle forces, which may be caused by such
effects as moisture or electrostatic charging and are especially pronounced in
very fine materials, result in a tendency for agglomerates to form so that the
material flows in an erratic manner as 'lumps', if indeed it flows at all.
Examples of cohesive materials which usually exhibit this sort of behaviour are
flour and cocoa powder.
The assessment of the flow characteristics of a bulk solid (i.e. whether it is
'free-flowing' or 'cohesive') is very much a matter of judgement based on
experience, but some of the various tests that can be undertaken to provide
evidence to assist this judgement have been described in Chapter 1. Having
established a method of predicting whether a bulk solid is likely to flow or not,
it is now helpful to gain some insight into the patterns of flow behaviour that
might be observed in various situations. In this chapter, therefore, attention is
given firstly to the usual form of pressure distribution that would exist in a bulk
material at rest (for example in a storage hopper or silo) and to the changes
that occur in that pressure distribution at the start of, and during, flow.
Descriptions are given of the types of flow pattern that may be seen in
gravity discharge of a product from hoppers of different configuration, and
also in gravity flow in inclined chutes and channels. Discussion of the
somewhat intractable problem of predicting the flow rate in such circum-
stances is considered to be largely beyond the scope of this book and only a
brief introduction will be attempted. In fact, although prediction offlow rate is
important, it is likely to be secondary to the task of ensuring unobstructed
flow, since in many cases the actual rate is controlled independently by a valve
or feeder downstream of the chute or hopper outlet.
The flow behaviour of bulk materials suspended in a stream of air, or at least
under the dominant influence of air or some other fluid medium, is dealt with
as a separate topic (in Chapter 3) and provides an essential foundation to the
understanding of the pneumatic conveying systems described in detail in
Chapters 12-17 of this book.
2.2 Pressure distribution in a bulk solid
2.2.1 Bulk solid at rest

The pressure distribution that would exist within a quantity of bulk solid
contained in a hopper or bin is of interest when designing the container for
strength, but does not have a direct influence on the pattern of flow from the
container. Nevertheless, a good understanding of the pressure distribution
:f~~~~~'-~:\'7~
- "
dh I'w Pr 1I"D dh
pg r D' dh
t I I I
Figure 2.2 Analysis of forces on an elemental 'slice' of bulk solid in a cylindrical bin.
under storage and flow can prove to be a valuable aid when assessing the
likelihood of obstructions to flow occurring.
It has already been explained that the pressure distribution within a bulk
solid is different from that within a liquid in a similar container. The main
cause of this is the frictional forces between the solid particles and the walls of
the containing vessel which means, in effect, that these walls are supporting
part of the weight of the bulk material. Also as a result of this frictional effect,
the lateral pressure on the containing walls is generally less than the
'hydrostatic' pressure due to the head of material (Figure 2.1).
In order to develop a model for the pressure distribution existing within a
column of particulate material contained in a cylindrical vessel, consider first
the equilibrium of a thin horizontal 'slice' as shown in Figure 2.2.
At distance h below the free surface of the bulk solid, the lateral pressure is Pr
and the vertical pressure, due to the overlying head of material, is PV' In
general, for particulate materials, the ratio of Pr to Pv is found to be
approximately constant, so that
(2.1)
where k is a constant less than unity.
Now for the elemental slice of material, of diameter D and thickness dh
(Figure 2.2), the vertical forces acting are those resulting from
pressure (difference) = iD2dpv
n
gravity = Pbg4D2dh
wall friction
GRAVITY FLOW OF BULK SOLIDS 51
where Pb is the bulk density of the particulate material and flw is the coefficient
of friction at the walls.
Then for equilibrium of this element
11:
Pbg4 D dh -
2
411: D 2 dpv - flwP r1l:Ddh = 0
Pbgdh - dpv - 4fl~Pr dh = 0
(Pbg - 4fl ;Pv )dh - dpv =0

from which
Integration then gives
4fl w kPv )
- -D- In ( Pbg--- = h +c
4flwk D
where C is a constant of integration.
Now Pv = 0 for h = 0, so that
and
from which
1 _ 4flw kpv = exp ( _ 4flwkh)
PbgD D
Rearranging this to give an expression for Pr leads to
P
r
= Pbg D
4flw
(1- ex p ( _ 4flwkh))
D
(2.2)
This is one form of the well-known Janssen formula for radial pressure on
the vertical wall of a cylindrical bin containing a bulk solid.
It may be noted that for tall bins h is large compared with D, so that
(2.3)
=ro increasing
~
bin diameter
Q)
"0
(/J_
eel:"
0-
Cl...
e
"Cn
&8
~:§
Q),~
~>.
(flU
(/J
~
a.
height of bulk solid above point P (h)
Figure 2.3 Relationship between the pressure at a point on the wall of a cylindrical bin and the
height of material above that point, from equation (2.2).
and
(2.4)
Figure 2.3 illustrates the relationship between the pressure at a point on the
wall of a cylindrical bin and the height of material above that point, as
predicted by equation (2.2).
2.2.2 The effect of flow on the pressure distribution

There are many records of serious mechanical damage occurring to bulk solids
storage vessels, notably grain silos, as a result of an apparent physical
weakness of the vertical walls. Investigations subsequently showed that the
problem was basically due to the failure of the designer to appreciate that
during discharge of the material from the bin or silo the lateral pressures
developed could be considerably greater than existed with the material at rest.
Tests on models have suggested that the so-called 'overpressure' on the side
wall may be as much as three or four times the static pressures. The maximum
possible lateral pressure during flow is a function of the height of the bulk solid
in the bin, being given simply by Prmax = Pbgh, where Pb is the bulk density of
the material. The transient pressures occurring on the sloping and vertical
sides of storage vessels during emptying are a complex phenomenon and it is
only in relatively recent years that progress has been made towards a
satisfactory explanation. The following description of the varying pressure
~-t __ 'peaked' fietd
l'V>.M--r-, - 'switched ' field
r)n.~_ switch
~..-_ 'arched· field
(a) Static (b) Dynamic
Figure 2.4 Static and dynamic stress fields in a bulk solid contained in a storage bin.
distribution within a bulk solid discharging from a storage vessel is

attributable to lenike and 10hanson.
During the filling of a bin an active state of pressure exists, as the material
tends to settle and thus contract vertically under the increasing load. The lines
of principal stress are almost vertical and form a 'peaked' or 'static' stress field
as shown in Figure 2.4a, When the bin outlet is opened and flow begins, the
material expands in the vertical direction, but it must contract laterally in
order for flow to continue through the converging hopper section, The
principal stresses now tend to align themselves with the lateral contractions of
the bulk material, becoming almost horizontal across the outlet of the hopper
and forming an 'arched' or 'dynamic' stress field in this region, The change
from a static to a dynamic stress field occurs quite rapidly, the effect travelling
upwards through the bulk solid as a shock disturbance or 'switch' which may
appear on the side wall as a narrow band of higher pressure (Figure 2.4b). This
'overpressure' is necessary to maintain equilibrium, since the dynamic
pressures existing below the level ofthe switch are less than the static pressures
that existed initially. The switch, with its associated band of higher pressure,
travels upwards at least to the transition where the conical and cylindrical
sections of the bin intersect, reaching a higher level in a free-flowing material
than it will in a cohesive one. Where there is a considerable height of bulk
material in a bin, the peak pressure occurring at the transition can be very
large. Above the level of the switch the material is undisturbed and a static
stress field still exists.
c
2.3 Flow of bulk solids from hoppers
2.3.1 Introduction
The flow patterns occurring as a bulk particulate material discharges under
gravity from a hopper have been investigated by many research workers using
a number of different experimental techniques. One common approach has
been to carefully fill the hopper with layers of differently coloured particles so
that changes in the stratification could be observed during the flow. Such work
helped to give an insight to the nature of gravity flow of free-flowing and of
cohesive materials and allowed the influence of the wall angle and the outlet
size to be determined. It became evident that the flow patterns could be
conveniently classified into two groups which are now generally known as
'core flow' (alternatively 'funnel flow' or 'plug flow') and 'mass flow'.
2.3.2 Core flow

In core flow from a bin, the discharge of the bulk solid is essentially irregular,
with material sloughing off the free surface and falling through a vertical
channel which forms within the bin (Figure 2.5). The material around this
central channel is stationary. Core flow bins tend to be relatively short with
rather more shallow wall slopes than would usually be associated with mass
flow. Such bins are sometimes deliberately designed for situations where the
headroom is severely limited, but often they are the result of ignorance about
the advantages of mass flow. The main characteristics of core flow, most of
which are generally regarded as undesirable, may be listed as follows:
(i) First-in, last-out sequence of flow
Figure 2.5 Patterns of discharge from hoppers.

(ii) If the bulk solid has a tendency to spoil, cake or degrade with time, this will
happen in the non-flowing region
(iii) For materials which segregate on charging, there is no re-mixing in the
hopper
(iv) Flow rate tends to be erratic with a widely varying density of the feed
(v) The erratic flow rate may cause fine powders to become aerated and
'flood'
(vi) 'Rat-holing' (described in section 2.3.4) will occur if the non-flowing
material consolidates sufficiently to remain stable after the flow channel
has emptied out.
Nevertheless, core flow may be acceptable in situations where segregation is
unimportant, deterioration of stored material is not likely to be a problem and
the outlet is sufficiently large to ensure flow without the help of a discharge aid
(Chapter 4).
2.3.3 Mass flow

The most important single distinguishing characteristic of so-called 'mass
flow' is that every particle of the bulk material in the hopper begins to move
when the outlet is opened (Figure 2.5). A hopper designed for mass flow
would generally be recognized by the steep wall slopes of the converging
section, the absence of sharp transitions and the relatively large outlet to the
feeder or flow control valve.
For most purposes mass flow is regarded as the ideal, or at least the
preferable, flow pattern. The beneficial properties of mass flow may be listed as
follows:
(i) Channelling, hang-ups, surging and flooding are absent
(ii) Flow is uniform, and steady flow (independent of the head of material in
the bin) can be closely approached
(iii) The bulk density of the drawn solid is constant, and practically
independent of the head of material in the bin
(iv) Pressures are relatively uniform across any horizontal section of the bin
(v) There are no dead regions within the bin
(vi) A first-in first-out flow pattern can be obtained
(vii) Segregation of the bulk solid is kept to a minimum.
2.3.4 Obstructions to gravity flow

The two principal types of flow obstruction encountered in practice are
(i) A 'rat-hole' or 'pipe' (Figure 2.6a), and
(ii) A cohesive arch or bridge (Figure 2.6b).
A third type of obstruction, which can occur when the size of the bulk solid is
(a) 'Rathole' or 'pipe' (b) Cohesive arch
Figure 2,6 Obstructions to flow from hoppers.
large in comparison to the outlet of the hopper, is a 'mechanical arch' formed

simply by the particles or lumps of material becoming interlocked across the
converging section above the outlet.
Both the rat-hole and the cohesive arch are characteristic of cohesive
materials, the former generally occurring in core-flow hoppers and the latter in
the mass-flow type. These obstructions occur when the bulk solid has gained,
within the constraints of the bin, enough strength to support itself, and
therefore both are impossible in free-flowing (non-cohesive) materials.
Arching can also occur in a core-flow bin, forming at the top of a cylindrical
void extending from the hopper outlet upwards into the bulk solid.
When designing storage vessels for bulk solids the primary aim is usually to
ensure that a reliable steady flow of the material will be maintained when the
outlet is opened. With most materials this aim can be achieved by correct
design, particularly with regard to the slope of the converging walls and the
size of the outlet, as explained in Chapter 4, but with very cohesive materials
the use of some form of discharge aid may be advisable, or indeed essential.
2.3.5 Predicting the solids discharge rate

An important step in the process of designing a bin or silo for the storage of a
bulk material is the estimation of the unrestricted rate of discharge, under
gravity, of the material when the outlet is opened. It is necessary thus to ensure
that the material is capable of being discharged at a rate in excess of the
required rate, as it is then a relatively simple matter to install some kind of
feeder beneath the outlet port in order to exercise control over the flow rate.
Because of the complex nature of the gravity flow of bulk solids there is as
yet no single convenient method that will lead to a consistently reliable
prediction of discharge rates for the full range of materials and various designs
of bins and hoppers. Indeed, for materials of a fine cohesive nature no method
has yet been developed that could be confidently recommended to the designer
of storage vessels.
As gravity flow takes place in the converging hopper towards the outlet
opening, the bulk material is in dynamic equilibrium and a force balance on an
element of material in this region should lead to an expression for the rate of
discharge. There are various effects that will influence the solids flow rate,
including the cohesive forces amongst the particles, the frictional effects
between the moving particles and the hopper surfaces, the pressure gradients
in the interstitial air and, consequently, the local air flow patterns and
resulting drag forces on individual particles. An adverse pressure gradient
across the outlet opening can cause a significant reduction in the solids
discharge rate, and thus the actual flow rate obtained may depend upon
whether the top of the storage vessel is open or closed and also upon the depth
of bulk material above the outlet opening. In some cases it may be beneficial to
modify the pressure gradient in the vicinity of the hopper outlet by injecting air
into the hopper during discharge. However, it should be noted that excessive
air injected into fine materials could well cause fluidization and uncontrollable
flooding from the outlet. Some examples of techniques that can be applied to
the gravity flow from conical hoppers of non-cohesive materials and, to some
extent, of coarse cohesive materials, will now be introduced. However, as
mentioned previously, the underlying theory is often extremely complex and
beyond the scope of this book. The reader wishing to pursue this subject is
recommended to begin with references [1-3].
Relatively simple equations, for rough order-of-magnitude assessment of
the discharge rate of coarse, free-flowing materials from circular and
rectangular outlets are recommended in a recently published British code of
practice [4]. These are as follows.
F or a circular orifice:
m=
S
d )0. 25 k P
0• 58p b go.5(D c - kpp (2.5)
For a rectangular orifice:
ms = l.03 ppg O.5(L- kpdp)(Dp - k pDp)1. 5 k p (2.6)
where Pb is the bulk density of the discharging material, Dc is the diameter of
the outlet (or, for a plane-flow hopper, Dp is the width of the outlet and L is its
length), dp is the particle diameter, kp is a shape factor (with values of 1.6 for
spherical particles up to about 2.4 for non spherical ones) and kp is a factor
equal to (tan [3) - 0.35 for [3 < 45° or equal to unity for [3 > 45°.
Of the various approaches to be found in the literature dealing with the
gravity flow of bulk solids from storage hoppers, only four will be discussed
here: Carleton [5], Williams [6] and Johanson [7] for mass flow and Zanker
Table 2.1 Summary of methods for predicting discharge rates from hoppers
Application Method(s) Remarks
Non-cohesive (i) British Code of Simple to use-circular

rna terials - coarse Practice [4] and rectangular orfices
(> 500jlm appro x.)
(Mass flow) (ii) Williams [6] Most widely applicable
since wall friction
effects are allowed for
(Significant for flow
through small orifices)
(iii) Carleton [5] Simple to use-graphical
solution available
Non-cohesive Carleton [5] Suitable for cases where

materials - fine the bin surcharge is
(Mass flow) small
Non-cohesive Zanker [8] Core flow: discharge

materials from circular orifice
(Core flow)
Cohesive materials- Johanson [7] Requires shear test data

coarse
Cohesive materials- No reliable method yet

fine available
[8J for core flow. Table 2.1 summarizes the applications of each of these
prediction techniques.
Carleton method. The expression derived by Carleton [5J relates the linear
velocity Uo of particles in the discharge stream to the properties of the particles
and of the interstitial fluid, and the geometry of the hopper outlet (Figure 2.7).
This expression can be written in the form
4p p d 5/3 sin {3(U6/3)3 + lOp/13 111 /3 Dc(U6 /3 )2 - g= 0 (2.7)
which is seen to be a cubic equation in U6 /3 . Although an iterative solution of
this equation should not be particularly difficult, it will clearly be useful to
have a simple graphical technique for the determination of U o from a specified
set of independent variables. Since the interstitial fluid is likely to be air under
normal atmospheric conditions, the relevant parameters are the diameter d
and density Pp of the particles, the diameter Dc of the hopper outlet and the
angle {3 that the hopper wall makes the vertical. Figure 2.8 is a line chart
developed from equation (2.7) and from which values of U o can be readily
determined.
The procedure to be followed when using the Carleton method to estimate
the discharge rate of free-flowing particles from a hopper can be summarized
as follows:
Figure 2.7 Parameters used in the Carleton method for estimating the discharge rate of free-
flowing particles from a conical hopper. Properties of particles: d, average diameter; Pp' density.
Properties of interstitial fluid: Pr, density; J1r, viscosity.
o
o
<'I
1000
--------- Pp
(kg/m')
1500
Uo o
(cm/S)
9
Figure 2.8 Line chart for the solution of the Carleton equation, equation 2.7, from [5].
(i) Note the parameters defining the hopper geometry, i.e. the diameter of the
outlet opening and the angle of the wall to the vertical.
(ii) Determine, for the bulk material, the average particle diameter and the
density of the particles.
(iii) Use the line chart (Figure 2.8) to determine a value for the linear velocity of
the material in the outlet opening. (Note that if the hopper is not
discharging into air at normal atmospheric conditions, the line chart will
not be valid and an iterative solution of equation (2.7) will be needed.)
(iv) Calculate the mass flow rate of the bulk material from
. nD;
ms=PbuoT (2.8)
where Pb is the bulk density of the discharging material.

Although this method is relatively easy to use it does appear to suffer from
some drawbacks. Probably the principal source of inaccuracy in the Carleton
method is its failure to take into account wall friction effects which could have
a significant influence where the discharge takes place through a small orifice.
In such situations the Williams method, described below, is likely to be more
reliable.
Another weakness in the Carleton model is that no allowance is made for
interstitial air flows resulting from adverse pressure gradients that develop
during the emptying of a hopper. This may not cause a great error when the
hopper surcharge is small, but for large surcharges the flow rate of material
may be substantially overestimated. A more complex modelling approach,
such as that proposed by Arnold et al. [1] should be adopted in such cases.
Williams method. This approach [6] takes into account the friction effects
between the flowing material and the hopper wall, and is therefore likely to
give a more reliable prediction for cases in which the outlet opening is small
(less than about 20 mm). However, no allowance is made for the influence of
interstitial air flows on the discharging particles. The model proposed by
Williams is thus based on the mass flow of homogeneous material consisting of
relatively large particles which offer no appreciable resistance to air flow.
Analysis ofthis model does not lead to a single unique value of discharge rate,
the result being instead in the form of upper and lower limits of the solids mass
flow rate. The upper limit in fact corresponds to zero wall friction and the
lower limit to the specified value of the angle of friction at the sloping wall of
the hopper. The difference between these limits is said to be sufficiently small
that their mean gives an estimate of the discharge rate which is accurate
enough for practical design purposes.
For the full analysis leading to expressions from which these upper and
lower limits can be computed the reader should consult [6], but for
convenience the data are presented here in a simplified form, using charts for
materials having angles of internal friction of 20-50°.
An expression for the solids mass flow rate is
(2.9)
where Pb is the bulk density of the material, Dc is the diameter of the hopper
opening and Kh is a coefficient which is a function of the wall slope of the
hopper, the angle of internal friction of the bulk solid and the angle of friction
3.0 3.0
\
$
0 \ I
.("
0>
2.5 \ 1
~
D
\ \ \
·E
• 2.0
\ \_ upper limit
2.0 \
l\ \ ....", Iower li mits
\ _ upper limi t
-
\\\ L~
Co
,
:.:: \ ~ Iower limi ts
,
C
0)
~
1.5 \"< ~ I" ~~
~ ~~ 0../ ~ I"\.
--
:--;::-
CD 1-.
0 2
0
1.0
~ 5 .g
c: J:.
:.:: 1 0 ~'" ~ ......
~
C .
100 ......
~ ~:t--- o5 ~
til
~ "\: (/) 0)
-0) .~
"'~g'
=01>
...
g ~ r-.-::: 1o 0>
CD 20.:3
0.5 I- o
;:
_"0
o~ o
0) ~
C.
.:
g
10 20 30 40 '" o 10 20 30 40
wall slope (j (degrees) wall slope (j (degrees)
(a) Angle of internal friction, cf>- 20° (b) cf> = 30°
2.o,........,.-....---,----r---,
upper limit
c:
0)
1.0
~ Co ,..,
CD :.::
oo
C
o til
0)
t=j=JE~~~~10402030 g'~
0)
~
o ~ "0
CD ~~
o ~--~---4----1---~ ~
o
~ 0·L---~1~0--~2~0--~3~0---4~0
wall slope (3 (degrees) wall slope (j (degrees)
c) cf> - 40° (d) cf> = 50°
Figure 2.9 Charts giving upper and lower limit values of flow coefficient Kh in equation 2.9 [6].
at the wall. Values of Kh giving upper and lower limits of the solids mass
flowrate can be determined from the appropriate charts in Figure 2.9.
Zanker's nomograph. A very convenient method of obtaining a rapid estimate

of the rate of discharge of a granular or particulate bulk solid from a circular
mean pa rt icle diame ter, d (mm)

0> (n ... W N
! .! ! I!,!! 1" I ,I II I! t I " I I !, t 1 I, t" I;; , I! ,! I ! I ' ! ! I"
! t,!. !, ! I
~/
/'
/'
/'
,,)'/ angle of internal friction, q, (degrees)
0> 0>.... ....
o~~'6
0/
g; 0 U1 0 (n
.1.1 ) & 111111 1 1 \ 1, 1", ,!, I l l ! 1 " I
I
t
I
I
I"III'P
N
I 'I' "I- ' '"1""1'1'
<.: .::t.<J'I / N
Ii' "I-
aW 0
A(,n
o :> 001 g
o 000 0 0 0 a
g 8 gg o0 .
, part iCle density Po 0 (kg/ni')
\
\
I" "I , Iii ii i '>Q:i1 Ii~ 'l' "'1 , I" "I
'" o'"
& g g g o'" g
o
o
o o
o
m \ (tonnes/hou~)
o o
o
solids flowra te
)
1'1' I i t llilii i t ' l l iii Ii i I If I t j I' Ii t I I i , I '

-iI.OCD ...... Ul 0') ~ W I\) I\)
gggggg g o
o '"
0 00 '"
o
I\)
o
diamet~ r o f out let open ing, 0 (mm)
Figure 2.10 Zanker's line chart for estimating the discharge rate of a granular bulk material in
core flow through a circular orifice [8].
ORA VITY FLOW OF BULK SOLIDS 63
orifice has been presented by Zanker [8J in the form of a line chart or
nomograph. It is based on an empirical relationship, proposed initially by
Franklin and Johanson, which can be written
. ppD~
m=------'----"------'------ (2.10)
s (6.288 tanp + 23.16)(d p + 1.889)
where Dc is the diameter of the orifice, pis the angle made by the hopper wall to
the vertical, dp is the mean particle diameter and n is an exponent. For angular
particles the value of n is about 2.5, ranging up to 3.3 for spheres, and it is
suggested that, in the absence of more reliable information, the value of the
angle offriction should be taken as 10% greater than the angle of repose of the
material concerned.
The Zanker line chart is reproduced (replotted in SI units) as Figure 2.10
and its use is summarized as follows:
(i) On the left-hand scales, join the values for particle diameter dp and angle
of internal friction c/J, and extend the line to the first pivot line.
(ii) Move to the second pivot line in the direction indicated by the oblique tie-
lines.
(iii) Join the resulting point to the appropriate value of particle density and
extend this line to the third tie-line.
(iv) On the right-hand scales, join the values for orifice diameter and index n,
and extend the line to pivot line 4.
(v) Join the points on pivot line 3 and pivot line 4, and where the resulting line
crosses the scale of solids flow rate read off the value required.
Johanson method. For the discharge of a fine cohesive bulk solid from a
hopper the model proposed by Johanson [7J is based on a continuously failing
arch that is in dynamic equilibrium. In order for the arch to fail, the strength of
the material in the arch, caused by the consolidation stress in the vicinity of the
hopper opening, must be overcome. In Chapter 4 it is shown that the
condition for continuous, unobstructed flow of material from a hopper is that
the ratio of major consolidating stress to the unconfined yield strength (a dO' c )
is less than a certain critical value which depends upon the geometry of the
hopper in addition to the flow properties of the bulk solid. These ratios are
termed 'flow factors' (if) so that for fJ.ctual > f!critical' flow will occur because a
stable cohesive arch cannot be sustained.
Johanson's method of analysis leads to the expression
rh - p
- b
nD2[~(1_ ffcrit )J1 /
4 4 tan P ffactual
2 (2.11)
for the mass flow rate of material from a conical hopper, where Dc is the outlet
diameter of the hopper and pis the slope that the wall makes with the vertical,
O.55r-------,-------r------,~----_.------~
CQ
~
c:OJ
'u
:;::
Qi
o
()
angle of hopper wall to vertical {3 (degrees)
Figure 2.11 Chart for coefficient Kp in equation (2.12) [7].
Pb is the bulk density of the discharging material and 9 is the specific

gravitational force.
The method of Johanson for estimating the rate of discharge of a cohesive
bulk solid can be summarized as follows:
(i) Determine the critical flow factor (.f.fcrit) for the hopper (see Chapter 4).
(ii) Determine the value of the bulk density of the discharging material at the
consolidating stress a 1 existing at the hopper opening. An approximate
value of bulk density may be used initially in order to determine the
consolidating stress from
(2.12)
where the coefficient Kp is a function of the ratio of the volume of the arch
to its perimeter and can be determined from Figure 2.11. Materials flow
property graphs will then need to be consulted for the actual value of bulk
density at the consolidating stress given by equation (2.12).
(iii) From the instantaneous Flow Function (FF) of the material (see section
1.9.6), determine the yield strength a c associated with the consolidating
stress a 1 and then calculate the actual flow factor ffactuaJ(at!a c)'
(iv) Use equation (2.11) with the values offfcrio a b andffactuaJ, obtained from
the steps above, to calculate the discharge rate rho
2.4 Flow of bulk solids in chutes
2.4.1 Introduction
There are many instances in bulk solids handling installations of gravity flow
of a particulate or granular material along an inclined channel or chute. For
example, where a bulk solid is to be discharged at a point below and to the side
of a hopper outlet, it would be common practice to rely on gravity flow
through a simple transfer chute. In such situations both straight and curved
chutes are used but, unfortunately, failure to understand the fundamental
principles of bulk solids flow often results in unsatisfactory chute
performance.
Amongst common applications of transfer chutes for bulk materials, perhaps
the most familiar occurs at the loading point of a belt conveyor. In this case it is
important that the horizontal velocity component of the material leaving the
chute is matched to the velocity of the belt in order to minimize the
acceleration of this material and so effect reductions in power consumption
and belt wear. Other situations may require that the exit velocity is as large as
possible and of a direction to obtain the maximum possible 'throw' of the
flowing material. Thus it is important that the design of gravity-flow chutes
and channels is undertaken in the light of a clear appreciation of the
characteristics of flow in such situations if the desired performance is to be
achieved.
In this section attention is directed to the characteristics of steady flow of
non-cohesive bulk solids in straight and curved chutes. Patterns, or modes, of
flow are described and an introduction is given to the complex problem of
modelling the flow in order to design chutes for specific purposes. Much of the
presently available information on flow in chutes and channels has been
presented by Roberts and his colleagues, for example [9], and by Savage [10],
and readers wishing to undertake a more detailed study are directed to these
sources. Little has been published on the flow behaviour of fine powders and
cohesive bulk solids, although Roberts and Scott [9] have drawn attention to
the characteristically different motion of such materials when compared with
cohesionless products. They report that alumina moves in a series of block wise
shears with each block elongating and decreasing in thickness as the velocity
along the channel increased. Similar types of flow have been observed by
Woodcock and Mason [11] in air-assisted gravity conveyors, which are
described in Chapter 15.
Gravity flow in vertical channels and pipes is regarded as a special case and
will be discussed in section 2.5.
2.4.2 Flow patterns in straight inclined chutes

As for liquids flowing along inclined channels, bulk solids in gravity flow may
be expected to exhibit two possible modes: varied flow or uniform flow.
However, the analogy between liquids and bulk solids must not be taken too
far. The terms 'fast' and 'slow' have been used to describe flow conditions that
are observed to occur in enclosed chutes [9] but these terms do not correspond
exactly to 'rapid' and 'tranquil' flow, used conventionally to describe liquid flow
in channels.
Increasing velocity (tending to

reach a maximum or 'terminal'
decreasing value i f the channel is
depth long enough)
(a) 'Fast flow'
(b) 'Slow flow '
Figure 2.12 Modes of flow in a straight inclined chute [9].
If a particulate bulk solid is fed into a steeply inclined straight chute or

channel of constant width, 'fast flow' occurs, with the material accelerating,
and consequently the depth of the flowing bed decreasing, until some steady
condition is achieved at which the downward component of the gravity force is
balanced by the various drag forces on the particles (Figure 2.12a). If the slope
of the channel is decreased the rate of acceleration will also decrease, since the
component ofthe gravity force on the material must be smaller. As the slope of
the channel approaches the angle of internal friction (¢) of the bulk solid, the
flow tends to become uniform, This condition of fully-developed flow at
constant depth (or 'slow flow') is observed in straight chutes or channels at
relatively shallow inclinations, normally only in the very restricted range
between the angle of repose (0:) and the angle of internal friction (¢) of the bulk
solid concerned (Figure 2.12b).
free fall zone due to

... ~·'··I·".··n. 'vena
contracta ' effect
(a) Fast flow: general case
(c) Transition from fast to slow flow (d) Slow flow
angle of repose
(e) Choked flow condition:

(jc too large
Figure 2.13 Modes offlow in a circularly curved chute [9]. DO' chute cut-off angle; Dco ' optimum
value of cut-off angle; Dr, limiting value of Dc for 'fast' flow.
Placing an obstruction near the downstream end of a chute in which a bulk

solid is flowing in the fast mode can cause a surge wave or stationary jump
(sometimes called a 'granular jump') to occur in much the same way as a
hydraulic jump occurs in a flowing liquid.
2.4.3 Flow patterns in curved chutes

The general flow patterns that may be observed when a bulk solid flows
through a curved, enclosed chute are illustrated in Figure 2.13 [9]. As with
straight inclined chutes, two modes of flow have been observed to occur,
termed 'fast flow' and 'slow flow' according to whether the stream of material is
accelerating or travelling at a uniform (slow) velocity.
Figure 2.13a shows the general case of fast flow in which the particulate
material first accelerates as it falls freely from a hopper into the chute, but then
decelerates as a result of the curvature of the channel and the decreasing slope
of the bottom surface. It should be noted that there exists an 'optimum cut-off
angle' (8 co in Figure 2.13b) at which the velocity of the stream is a maximum
and the stream thickness is a minimum. Ideally the chute should be terminated
at this optimum cut-off angle, since any additional length of chute will result in
an increase of stream thickness, frequently leading to an unstable flow
condition (Figure 2.13a).
Where the cut-off angle exceeds the optimum value, it is quite possible for
the thickness of the stream at the lower end of the chute to increase to the point
where the flowing material comes into contact with the top surface of the
chute.
The velocity ofthe stream of bulk material will then be considerably reduced
and a surge wave travels upstream as illustrated in Figure 2.13c. This surge
wave indicates a change from 'fast' to 'slow' flow as the channel becomes
completely full of the bulk solid which is then in contact with all four internal
surfaces (Figure 2.12d).
It should be noted that even a temporary obstruction to fast flow in a
chute having a cut-off angle greater than the optimum value can be sufficient
to initiate a change to slow flow. Indeed, if the cut-off angle is too large
(Figure 2.12e) the chute may become choked and flow cease altogether, or
flood over the sides if the chute is not enclosed. In order to ensure that fast flow
is maintained in a curved chute, the cut-off angle should not exceed some
limiting value 8r which depends upon the sliding friction between the
particulate material and the internal surfaces of the chute.
Figure 2.14 shows the typical form of relationship between the solids
flowrate and the cut-off angle for the two modes of flow. When the flow in the
chute is 'fast', the rate is governed by the size and type of the outlet from the bin
or hopper feeding the chute. However, in slow flow the chute itself restricts the
rate, behaving effectively as an extension of the bin or hopper.
Q)
Ol
~
L
()
U)
'6
fast flow Of ~I slow flow I cut-off

angle, Oc
Figure 2.14 Typical discharge graph for a circularly curved chute fitted to a flat-bottomed bin
[9].
2.4.4 Chute design

There is relatively little published information on the modelling of gravity flow
in inclined channels and the design of transfer chutes for bulk solids. The
following approach is a simplified form of that presented by Roberts and Scott
[9].
It is generally recommended that transfer chutes should be designed to
ensure a stable 'fast' flow condition throughout the length of the chute and
therefore the analytical model ofthe flow should enable the designer to predict
the variation along the chute of the velocity and cross-sectional area of the
bulk solids stream. The main features of the model are:
(i) The flow is steady with the material behaving as a continuum
(ii) There is no drag on the free surface of the flowing bed
(iii) The flow is not affected by interparticle effects within the bed
(iv) The bulk density is uniform throughout the flowing bed.
For the general case of gravity flow in a curved chute Figure 2.15 illustrates
the forces that would affect the motion of an element of the flowing bulk
material.
Now for steady flow
rhs = PbAu = constant (2.13)
where Pb is the bulk density of the flowing stream, A is its cross-sectional area
and u is its velocity along the chute. Then since any variation in the bulk
density is to be ignored, we can write
(2.14)
Figure 2.15 Forces acting on an elemental mass of bulk solid flowing under gravity in a curved
chute [9].
where Ao is the cross-sectional area ofthe flowing stream as it enters the chute
and U o is the velocity at this point.
Also, for the direction perpendicular to a radius of curvature (i.e. along the
chute), the equation of motion for the elemental mass is
du
6m 9 cos () - FD = 6mcit (2.15)
F or this simplified model the drag force F D comprises only the wall friction
effect and therefore it can be written as
(2.16)
where f.1E is an effective friction coefficient and F N is the normal force on the
element.
F or a chute of rectangular cross-section, taking the pressure distribution to
be of the simple form shown in Figure 2.16a, an expression for f.1E is
f.1E = f.1w( 1 + k ~) (2.17)
where f.1w is the coefficient of friction at the wall, k is the ratio of the lateral
pressure to the major normal pressure at the wall, B is the width of the chute
and H is the depth of the flowing bed.
Experimental work carried out by Roberts and others using a variety of
bulk materials showed that a more reliable model is obtained by replacing the
coefficient k with the expression
(2.18)
ORA VITY FLOW OF BULK SOLIDS 71
B
(a) Rectangular cross-section (b) Circular cross-section
Figure 2.16 Distributions of pressure on the interior surfaces of chutes (Roberts' model).
where K EO is the effective linear pressure gradient down the wall surface at zero
velocity and C is an 'intergranular stress constant'.
Noting also that H = (uo/u)H 0, equation (2.17) becomes
(2.19)
If the chute is of circular cross-section a similar approach, based on the

pressure distribution shown in Figure 2.16b and supported by experimental
work, suggests that equation (2.19) can be used, with B equal to the diameter of
the chute and suitable values taken for the parameters k EO and C.
Now referring to Figure 2.15, the normal force on the flowing element of
bulk solid is given by
FN=bm(gSine+ ~) (2.20)
and combining with equation (2.16) gives
FD =J1E bm (gSine+ ~) (2.21 )
Substituting for F D in equation (2.15) and rearranging leads to
~~ = g (cos e- J1E sin e) (2.22)
If J1E is taken to be constant (for example, at a value corresponding to the

average stream thickness along the chute) equation (2.22) can be solved for the
cases of straight inclined chutes (for which R = 00) and circularly curved
chutes (R = constant).
Thus, for straight inclined chutes, noting that

du du
-=u-
dt ds
where s is the distance measured along the chute from the entry point,
equation (2.22) becomes
udu = g(cos () - /lE sin ()ds (2.23)
and integration then yields a velocity distribution as
u= [U6 + 2gs(cos () - /lE sin 8)J1(2 (2.24)
The solution of the corresponding equation for circularly curved chutes is
much more difficult, but Roberts and Scott [9J give
u= [ 2r;R {sin () (1 - 2/l~) + 3/l Ecos ()}

4/lE + 1
6/l Rg ) ] 1(2
+ exp( - 2/lE() ( U6 - 4/l~E + 1 (2.25)
Using equations (2.24) or (2.25) together with the continuity equation (2.14),
the variation of the stream thickness along the chute can be investigated.
Allowance can be made for the curvature (concave or convex) of the free
surface of the flowing stream by using an appropriate value of the surcharge
angle when developing expressions relating the depth H of the flowing bed to
its cross-sectional area.
For a chute of rectangular cross-section (Figure 2.l7a) in which the
surcharge surface is parabolic, the cross-sectional area of the bed is given by
Cal Rectangular cross-section Cb) Circular cross-section
Figure 2.17 Calculation of cross-sectional area of bulk solids stream in transfer chute.
and since
Hl=H-BtanA
we have
A A-I
H=-+--BtanA (2.26)
B A
In the case of a circular cross-section, again with a parabolic surcharge, the
cross-sectional area is
A= ~l tan A C-~os b) + ( b- ;in b) ] (2.27)
where the angle b defines the contact perimeter. Also, an expression for the
depth of the bed is
(2.28)
The following general guidelines can then be given for the design oftransfer
chutes in order to ensure stable 'fast' flow conditions.
(i) Identify the requirements in terms of direction and magnitude of the exit
velocity. (The overall cross-sectional dimensions of the chute (B and H 0)
are likely to be dictated by the upstream feed arrangement, which would
also fix the bulk solid mass flowrate and therefore the entry velocity uo).
(ii) Estimate, from equation (2.17) or (2.19), an average value of IlE' Values of
the unknown parameters should be determined experimentally if possible,
but failing this, a preliminary assessment of chute performance may be
made with Ilw = 0.46 and k = 0.3 in equation (2.l7).
(iii) (a) For a straight inclined chute, equation (2.24) is used to determine the
longitudinal velocity profile, and then equation (2.26) allows the variation
of the bed thickness to be determined.
(b) For a circularly curved chute the cut-off angle should normally be
designed to correspond to the optimum value for minimum thickness and
maximum velocity. The value, which is principally influenced by the
radius of curvature of the chute, the initial velocity of the bulk· solids
stream and the effective wall friction IlE' can be determined from equation
(2.25) by setting the derivative dujde equal to zero and solving for e [12].
Typical data for the variation of cut-off angle and stream velocities at cut-
off with radius of curvature, initial velocity and effective wall friction are
shown in Figure 2.l8. As explained in section 2.4.3 the maximum cut-off
angle should not exceed the limiting slope angle er which is given
approximately by er = tan - 1 IlE at exit.
Note that for a chute of circular cross-section it is recommended that
the flow is restricted to ensure that the chute fullness at any point in the
deceleration zone does not exceed half [9].
~ 60~----~--~~--~--~
Q)
~
Ol
Q)
;:g ftE= 0.35
/lE= 0.40
0
~u
/lE = 0.45
Q) /lE = 0.50
0>
c
co
~
'5
u
E
:J
E
E-o
radius of curvature R (m) initial velocity Uo (m/s)

(a) Optimum cut-off angle
2.6.....--....--..---,.."....,,.........,....,,...---..
r.
en
:g 2.61---+----+.f-I-1-I--+-----I
o
U
:J
:::: 2.41--+---+--I-I--N'---+---j 2.41---+---1--1+1'-1---+-----1
'?
'5
u
E
E2.2 2.21-----J-it+.FP->!---
li
o
Cij 2.01---+---HH----+---+---j 2.0 1-----"~4I'---+--_____+--I
:;!'
'0
o
Q)
>
1.8 0 1.0 1.80
radius of curvature R (m) initial velocity Uo (m/s)
(b) Velocities at optimum cut-off
Figure 2.18 Charts showing typical optimum cut-otT data for flow in circularly curved chutes
[12].
Typical predicted performance curves for straight inclined and circularly-

curved chutes are illustrated as Figures 2.19 and 2.20.
2.5 Flow of bulk solids in vertical pipes
2.5.1 Introduction
Very little information is available on the flow of particulate bulk solids under
gravity through vertical pipes. It has been suggested [3] that dry material can
1.0
J: IJ:°
I
:>°1:>
0.5 8~~~~~~~~2.0}
0.5
~oB
1-+-+-+--,--+--1
-'
_ _ (a) Uo - 1.22 mis, 0 - 45 0
1.5
---r-
-- 600)
J: IJ:° 1.0 ~ -~- 59 0
~
O·
:>°1:> 0.5 ........ ~ 450
t--
~
~: 30:
15
(b) Uo -
H0
1.22 mIs, B - 1.0
-
0
f}
J: IJ:° 1.0
r-
0 .5 r-..... u. (m/s)
:,01:>
- Ho
1
2
B - 1.0
0
_ _ (c) 0 - 45
0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0 .8 1.0
distance down chute, s (m)
Figure 2.19 Typical predicted performance curves for straight inclined chutes [12].
0.6 I I I
",I ~o _ 0.651
1
rh - 2.87 lonnes/hour
0.5 uo - 0.315 mls -
Ilm I'b= 1000 kglm' ~
'"c:-~ 0.4
1\ I a:
I 0.25
Q)
~~
Q)Q)
L
~
.x;Q)
oE <0
>
:E .~ 0.3 0.5
"'""- I ~ 0.75 0~
l~ ~
- '0 ~
~!!l
Q) :> 0.2 t:-- 1 I
~ 1.0 '0
!:OU '":>
'" Oco 10, I '6
o. 1 I
~
o I
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
posilion along chule, 0 (degrees)
Figure 2.20 Typical predicted performance curves for circularly curved chutes of circular cross-
section [9].
discharge from a filled open-ended vertical pipe two or three times faster than
through a circular aperture of the same size positioned in the centre of a flat-
bottomed bin. Consequently it would not be possible to obtain steady plug
flow through a vertical pipe fitted to the base of a flat-bottomed container
because the pipe could not be filled at a rate to match the potential maximum
outflow. Nevertheless, it seems likely that the discharge from a hopper or flat-
bottomed container could be increased by fitting a vertical stem to the outlet
and evidence suggests that, especially with fine particulate materials, the rate
of discharge rises as the length of the stem is increased.
2.5.2 Mode of.flow

Observations of a fine cohesionless bulk solid flowing under gravity in a
vertical tube show a number of quite distinctive features. Figure 2.21a
plugs may
form
Figure 2.21 Gravity flow of a fine cohesion less bulk solid in a vertical pipe from a flat-bottomed
con tainer [9].
illustrates the entry region to a vertical pipe from a flat-bottomed container.
Within the container the movement of the bulk material is likely to follow the
'tulip' pattern first reported by Brown and Hawksley [3], but once the
particles enter the discharge zone they are able to fall under gravity through
the orifice into the pipe as a smooth stream. The cross-section of this stream
initially decreases as it accelerates but, after a short distance, particles begin to
come into contact with the pipe wall and soon a condition of more or less stable
plug flow will be attained. At this point there may be observed what appear to
be 'bubbles' rising up the pipe through the downward flowing material. This
effect is probably due to 'free fall surfaces' developing within the flow.
The existence and motion of a free fall surface can be readily demonstrated
by filling vertical tube with fine sand, sealing the top end and allowing the sand
to discharge from the lower end (Figure 2.22). Immediately sand particles will
fall from the lower surface of the plug and as a result this 'free fall surface'
moves slowly upwards (Figure 2.22b). At the same time the whole plug of sand
begins to slide downwards, the upper free surface and the lower free surface
approaching each other until they meet (Figure 2.22d). This behaviour occurs
only because of the low-pressure region existing at the top of the pipe; any air
entering this region (for example if the closing seal is removed) will cause the
sand plug immediately to fall out of the pipe. It is thus evident that, where a
container discharges through a vertical pipe, the flow behaviour in the pipe
will be greatly influenced by interstitial air flows and therefore by the size and
density of the particles, the length and diameter of the pipe and the conditions
existing in the exit region of the feed container.
sand 'p lug' moves
pipe filled slowly down the pipe
with sand
rubber
seal
..
".'.
:",
(b) (d)
(a) ;\
'free-fall surface'
moves up the pipe
Figure 2.22 'Free-fall surface' in a cohesion less bulk solid discharging under gravity from a
vertical pipe.
10 - -- --t- t-t-t- ~ -1
-t- - -- -
--
5
.... +--w-
3 -
4
t- =- I Ie
'"
-
~
2
+-
I"-
!!! - H
-
co -~-"-
~ 0.5
g 0.4 :::;!!:---
:;;;;"'(
CI) 0.3
E 0.2
CI)
--
CI)
~
"0
CI)
0. 1
~~ -
- I-
0.05 0:;;::
0.04 "'--
l-
i- -
0.03
0.02
~
-
0.0 1
0.5 , 1.5 2
pipe length (m)
Figure 2.23 Experimental data for the flow of two different sizes of sand particles through
vertical pipes fitted to a flat-bottomed container [13]. Mean particle size of sand:-- 206 pm,
--- 112 pm.
Tests carried out at Thames Polytechnic [13J seem to confirm that the rate
of discharge from a circular aperture in the centre of a flat-bottomed bin can be
substantially increased if a vertical downpipe is fitted, the amount of the
increase being mainly a function of the length of the pipe and its diameter. The
effect is particularly marked for very fine free-flowing products in small-
diameter down pipes. Figure 2.23 shows, for example, the results for two
different sizes of fine sand discharging from a flat-bottomed container through
vertical pipes of various sizes and lengths.
It has been suggested, from observations of downward flow in relatively
large standpipes [14J, that the maximum flow rate that can be attained will
depend upon the extent to which the flowing bulk solid can become
compacted. Aeration of the material needs to be undertaken with care in order
to reduce the chance of flow-obstructing 'pseudo-bridges' developing in the
standpipe.
Some measure of flow control can be exercised by allowing an influx of air
near the top of the vertical pipe, but a more effective method, allowing
complete shut-off of the flow, involves the use of a non-mechanical valve, such
as a 'J-valve' or 'L-valve' at the lower end of the pipe.
2.5.3 Flow control: J-valves and L-valves

Essentially these types of so-called 'non-mechanical valve' rely on the natural
angle of response of a bulk solid which prevents it from flowing under gravity
past a bend, or a series of bends, in a pipe. Thus, an obstruction develops and
the flow stops (Figure 2.24a). In order to re-start the flow, air is introduced to
(a)
a ir in air in
(b)
Figure 2.24 Non-mechanical valves (L-valve and I-valve) for the flow control of bulk solids in
vertical pipes.
(a) The valves in the 'closed' condition.
(b) The addition of air reduces the angle of repose ofthe bulk solid and effectively 'opens' the valve.
the static material in the vicinity of the bend, reducing its angle of repose and so
permitting it to negotiate the bend. The flow of the bulk solid should then
continue smoothly until the air supply to the valve is stopped, and when this
occurs the bulk solid flow will also cease. It should be noted, however, that
whether the flow ceases initially or not will be very much dependent upon the
capacity of the bulk solid to retain air in its interstices and so maintain, for a
time, a 'fluid' state. A typical application of J- or L-valves is to feed directly into
a dense-phase (fluidized-bed) environment, but they are also suitable for
feeding into a dilute-phase system such as a pneumatic conveying line or the
freeboard above a fluidized bed.
Much of the work on the development and performance of non-mechanical
valves has been undertaken by Knowlton and Hirsan [15, 16], who state that
the maximum flow rate obtainable is a function of the length of the vertical
downcomer above the L-valve or J-valve, and suggest techniques for
determining the length of down comer needed in order to achieve a specified
flow rate.
Some insight to the operation of the device can be gained by recognizing
that, in a steady-flow condition in (for example) an L-valve, the pressure-drop
over the downcomer must be equal to the pressure in the L-valve plus that in
the outlet pipe since both the inlet to the system and the outlet are open to
6.p downcomer
Figure 2.25 Pressure-drops in an L-valve controlled system.

atmosphere (Figure 2.25). However, the pressure that can be sustained at the
bottom of the downcomer will be limited, its maximum value depending upon
the fluidization characteristics of the material in the downcomer. Up to this
maximum value the pressure-drop in the downcomer will adjust itself until it
exactly balances the pressure-drop in the L-valve and outlet pipe. Increasing
the air supply to the aeration point on the L-valve will tend to increase the
solids flow rate until either the limiting pressure in the downcomer is reached
or the maximum discharge rate into the top of the downcomer is reached. In
the latter case the flow in the downcomer becomes dilute and free-falling
occurs. Excessive aeration to the L-valve will result in 'bubbling' of the
material in the downcomer which, in extreme cases, can cause complete
stoppage of the flow-a situation known as 'gassing up'.
A design procedure, based on the work of Knowlton and Hirsan, can be
summarized as follows:
(i) Select a suitable horizontal length to stop the flow. In order to keep the
pressure-drop in the valve as low as possible, this length must be a
minimum, which can be calculated by simple trigonometry based on the
pipe diameter and the angle of repose of the bulk solid.
(ii) Using experimental data, or an appropriate correlation, estimate the
pressure-drop in the valve and outlet pipe at the desired solids flow rate.
(iii) Using fluidization data for the bulk solid, estimate the maximum
permissible pressure-drop per unit length in the downcomer (I'lp/L)max.
(iv) Calculate the minimum length of the downcomer from the expression
L . = I'lp(L valve+outlet pipe)

(2.27)
mID (I'lp/ L)max
(v) Determine from experimental tests the required flow rate of air to the
aeration tap, which should be positioned about 75-100 mm above the
centre line of the horizontal section of the valve.
2.6 Notation
A Cross-section of flowing stream in chute
Ao Cross-section of flowing stream in chute at entry
B Width of channel
C Constant of integration; 'intergranular stress constant' in
equation (2.18)
Diameter of storage container or pipe
Diameter of outlet (circular-section hoppers)
Width of outlet (rectangular-section hoppers)
Particle diameter
Drag force on element of bulk solids stream
Normal force on element of bulk solids stream

Flow factor
Gravitational acceleration (specific gravitational force)
Depth of flowing bed in channel
Vertical distance
Coefficient in equation (2.12)
Hopper factor in equation (2.9)
Constant in equation (2.1); ratio of lateral to normal
pressure on an element in a flow bulk solids stream
Effective linear pressure gradient, normal to flow direction,
of flowing bulk solids stream
Hopper factor in equations (2.5), (2.6)
Particle shape factor in equations (2.5), (2.6)
Length of outlet (rectangular section hoppers)
ms Solids mass flow rate
n Exponent in equation (2.10)
Pr Lateral (radial) pressure
Pv Vertical pressure
R Radius of curvature of channel
s Distance measured along chute
u Velocity of flowing stream in chute
Uo Velocity of solids; velocity of flowing stream at entry to chute
C( Angle of repose of a bulk solid
f3 Angle of hopper wall to vertical (i.e. half-included angle)
<5 Angle of arc of contact of bulk solids stream in channel
() Angle of inclination of straight channel; radial angle
of curved (measured from horizontal)
Chute cut-off angle
Optimum value of chute cut-off angle
Limiting value of ()c for 'fast flow'
Surcharge angle of bulk solids stream in channel
Effective friction coefficient
Viscosity of fluid
Coefficient of wall friction
Bulk density
Density of fluid
Angle of internal friction of a bulk solid
References and bibliography
References
1. Arnold, P.c., McLean, A.G., Roberts, A.W. (1979) Bulk Solids: Storage, Flow and Handling,
TUNRA Ltd, Univ. of Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.
2. Jenike, A.W. (1964) Storage and Flow of Solids, Bull. No. 123, Utah Engg. Exp. Station, Univ.
of Utah.
3. Richards, J.e. (1966) 'Bulk solids in motion', in The Storage and Recovery ofParticulate Solids,
IChemE Working Party Report, Institution of Chemical Engineers, London.
4. Draft Code of Practice for the Design of Silos, Bins, Bunkers and Hoppers, 2nd edn., British
Materials Handling Board (1985) edn.
5. Carleton, AJ. (1972) The effect of fluid drag forces on the discharge offree flowing solids from
hoppers. Powder Technol. 6, 91-96.
6. Williams, J.e. (1977) The rate of discharge of coarse granular materials from conical mass-
flow hoppers. Chern. Engg. Sci. 32, 247-255.
7. Johanson, J.R. (1965) Method of calculating rate of discharge from hoppers and bins. Trans.
Min. Engrs AIME 232,69-80.
8. Zanker, A. (1975) Estimating the flow of solids through openings. Process Engg (July) 66-67.
9. Roberts, A.W. and Scott, O.J. (1981) Flow of bulk solids through transfer chutes of variable
geometry and profile. Bulk solids Handling 1 (4) 715-727.
10. Savage, S.B. (1979) Gravity flow of cohesion less granular materials in chutes and channels. J.
Fluid Mechanics 92 (1) 53-96.
11. Woodcock, e.R. and Mason, J.S.(1977) Theflow characteristics of a fluidised PVC powder in an
inclined channel, in Proc. Int. Powder and Bulk Solids Handling and Processing Conf,
Chicago, May 1977,466-475.
12. Roberts, A.W. and Arnold, P.e. (1971) Discharge-chute design for free-flowing granular
material. Trans. ASAE 14 (2), 304-308, 312.
13. Bishop, A. W. (1982) A study of the flow of bulk solids through vertical downpipes and the
effect of downpipes on the discharge rate of hoppers. Unpublished report, Thames
Polytechnic, London.
14. Dries, H.W.A. (1980) Packed-bed solids downflow in a cat. cracker standpipe: solids
compaction effects and flow instabilities, in Proc. Powder Europa Conf, Wiesbaden, January
1980.
15. Knowlton, T.M. and Hirsan, 1. (1978) L-valves characterised for solids flow. Hydrocarbon
Processing 57, 149-156.
16. Knowlton, T.M. and Hirsan, 1. (1980) The effect of system parameters on the operation of
dense-phase vertical lift lines and J-valves, in Proc. Pneurnotransport 5, BHRA Conf., London,
1980, Paper E3.
Recommended further reading

Brown, R.L. and Richards, J.e. (1970) Principles of Powder Mechanics, Pergamon, Oxford.
Arnold, P.e., McLean A.G. and Roberts, A.W. (1979) Bulk Solids: Storage, Flow and Handling,
TUNRA Ltd., Univ. of Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.

Woodcock 1987

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Woodcock 1987

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2 Gravity flow of bulk solids

C. R. Woodcock et al., Bulk Solids Handling

(a) Pressure distributions due to weight alone

(b) Excess pressures due to additional free surface loading

Figure 2.1 Pressure distributions in liquids and bulk solids.

2.2 Pressure distribution in a bulk solid

2.2.1 Bulk solid at rest

Pbgdh - dpv - 4fl~Pr dh = 0

(Pbg - 4fl ;Pv )dh - dpv =0

Integration then gives

2.2.2 The effect of flow on the pressure distribution

~-t __ 'peaked' fietd

l'V>.M--r-, - 'switched ' field

~..-_ 'arched· field

(a) Static (b) Dynamic

distribution within a bulk solid discharging from a storage vessel is

2.3 Flow of bulk solids from hoppers

2.3.2 Core flow

Figure 2.5 Patterns of discharge from hoppers.

2.3.3 Mass flow

2.3.4 Obstructions to gravity flow

(a) 'Rathole' or 'pipe' (b) Cohesive arch

Figure 2,6 Obstructions to flow from hoppers.

large in comparison to the outlet of the hopper, is a 'mechanical arch' formed

2.3.5 Predicting the solids discharge rate

Application Method(s) Remarks

Non-cohesive (i) British Code of Simple to use-circular

Non-cohesive Carleton [5] Suitable for cases where

Non-cohesive Zanker [8] Core flow: discharge

Cohesive materials- Johanson [7] Requires shear test data

Cohesive materials- No reliable method yet

where Pb is the bulk density of the discharging material.

(a) Angle of internal friction, cf>- 20° (b) cf> = 30°

c) cf> - 40° (d) cf> = 50°

Zanker's nomograph. A very convenient method of obtaining a rapid estimate

mean pa rt icle diame ter, d (mm)

1'1' I i t llilii i t ' l l iii Ii i I If I t j I' Ii t I I i , I '

diamet~ r o f out let open ing, 0 (mm)

angle of hopper wall to vertical {3 (degrees)

Figure 2.11 Chart for coefficient Kp in equation (2.12) [7].

Pb is the bulk density of the discharging material and 9 is the specific

2.4 Flow of bulk solids in chutes

2.4.2 Flow patterns in straight inclined chutes

Increasing velocity (tending to

(a) 'Fast flow'

(b) 'Slow flow '

Figure 2.12 Modes of flow in a straight inclined chute [9].

If a particulate bulk solid is fed into a steeply inclined straight chute or

free fall zone due to

(a) Fast flow: general case

(c) Transition from fast to slow flow (d) Slow flow

(e) Choked flow condition:

Placing an obstruction near the downstream end of a chute in which a bulk

2.4.3 Flow patterns in curved chutes

fast flow Of ~I slow flow I cut-off

2.4.4 Chute design

f.1E = f.1w( 1 + k ~) (2.17)

(a) Rectangular cross-section (b) Circular cross-section

If the chute is of circular cross-section a similar approach, based on the

and combining with equation (2.16) gives

FD =J1E bm (gSine+ ~) (2.21 )

Substituting for F D in equation (2.15) and rearranging leads to

~~ = g (cos e- J1E sin e) (2.22)

If J1E is taken to be constant (for example, at a value corresponding to the