16

H 1-2 Do
w
The flowrate, in general, is much lower for a granular material, and is
almost independent of H. Early researchers found that the influence of
both tPand 1 ! J on the flowr~~ were J!!glig_ !_ ble, except when the bunker
was nearly empty.
. .
For a granular material, there is no observable vena contracta.
~
where C0 =discharge coefficient=0.65.
(3.22)
:rcD2
~iq (H) =CoP1iq -0.J2gH
4
~ '~
Do
the bunker contained a l~vy _ yiscosicy liquid, we would expect the mass
flowrate to be given by:
H
>
D
(
Consider flow of a cohesionless granular material, of particle diameter d
and bulk density Po , from a smooth-walled (no wall friction) cylindrical
bunker. The central circular orifice (outlet) has a diameter D0
(The influence of cohesion, rough walls and orifice shape will be
mentioned later on.)
3.1.1 Cylindrical bunkers
3.1 Empirical Correlations for Mass Flowrate
17
k >1.5 for spherical particles, with a somewhat larger value for angular
-. . _. . -. . .
particles, although the exact value will depend upon the type of d
measurement chosen.
~ 0.58 [almost i= f()], although values as large as 0.64 have been
reported for very smooth particles, such as spherical glass beads.
(3.25)
Beverloo correlation
They conducted tests on various materials, and found that f Z ex & for
particles of the same shape.
c
Do
w21s
It was Bever loo et al. (1961) who decided to pJ2t ~273 (!gainsj Do on
linear axes. They obtained a straight line, but with a non-zero intercept,
Z , on the Do axis.
Early experimentalists plotted W against Do (everything else being
constant) on a log-log scale, but obtained gradients around 2.9, not 2.5
(' 1
w
Hence
G w = f (Po,~) (3.23)
------_. . / l ) ~fV l
= f() :. w = C()pbgv2Dg12 (3.24)
P
1;2Ds12
bg 0
Intuitively, looking at the remaining parameters:
Also, for a given range of d, rV i= f (d).
P[f f (D) for D > 2D0 ; for narrower bunkers, larger flowrates are
obserVed and as D approaches Do, the orifice ceases to exist and the
material accelerates under gravity.
18
Ci
N.B. Only for cohesionless material
t
\
Parallel lines
(discharge rates equal)
Delay \ :d - material is- ~~~::::::~::::c:1::wing p
, -- Material rammed into bunker
\
'
\
\
\
\
\
\
H
Plotting the position of the top surface of material against discharge time:
The correlation fails when the particle size is large enough to
mechanically block the orifice (d > ~D0/6). Also, for fine particles
(d < 00 um) , the correlation over- redicts the flowrate (see later
Section 3.4).
~~ CJ
The Beverlee correlation uses the bulk density of the material. Granular
materials can exhibit a Iill!Phecof dm~s (as-poured, tapped, etc.). The
Q.ishfil:g~rate is found to be insensit~ve to the .Q!igj,nal ~!..e_ te of the
material. This is because by the time the material reaches the outlet, it has
been strained and has ' forgotten' its original state. The material takes u2 a
'flowing density' (considered constant, although there is dilation, etc.).
The Beverloo correlation is still the most reliable for predicting the
flowrate from a cylindrical bunker. Taking Pb as the bulk density of the
loosely packed material, the correlation will provide a prediction of W to
within~5% for coarse free-flowing materials.
The intercept Z is caused by a J:rnunCim~y l~e!]at the wall of th_ o_ utle ,
three or four particles thick, creating an ~fectivs.-orifi~~ less
than IEJ0l . The particles in this shearing boundary layer move more slowly
than the core of the flow.
(3.26)
19
=? l W ~ CpJi(tanaf035 (D0 -kd)25 I
Beverloo/Rose &Tanaka correlation
This in incorporated into the Beverloo correlation Cassuming ~=2j:5):
a 900-x
No further decrease in flowrate when
a> 90 -x because material forms its
own wall, so W not influenced by a
----ir--. !. -----
F= 1 if a> 90-x
x =' !!}gle made b; Y : the stagnant zone
boundary to the horizontal. Not easy to
measure, and is in the range 30-50.
Usually estimated as 45, so that tanx =1.
w
(.1
< >
Do
Rose and Tanaka (1956) (i.e. pre-Beverloo) state that the mass flowrate is
proportional to F =(tan a tanxr0 35 provided a< 90 -x.
The Beverloo correlation (Equation 3 .25) is only applicable for
cylindrical bunkers and core flow hoppers. In mass flow conical hoppers,
the effect of the half angle a needs to be considered.
CJ 3.1.2 Conical zappers
20
Predicting the flowrate of a cohesive material from a bunker or hopper is
still a challenge, and will not be covered here.
3.1.4 Cohesive materials
(3.30)
D* =4(b-kd)(l-kd)
H 2(b+Z -2kd)
~r 6 --f ki .f -)o/~ i~
A* = ( b-kd)(l-kd)
I~
/~
For a b x l slot orifice:
(3.29)
-~
,~~~nd Equation (3.25) can be written as:
W =4C pbA* ~ gD~
Jr
(3.28) D~ =(D0 -kd~
A* = Jr(D -kti
2
4 0
For a circular orifice:
Here * represents the effective area or diameter, i.e. after taking into
account the boundary layer of particles.
(3.27) Thus
The Beverloo correlation can be modified to take into account non-
circular orifices. Fowler and Glastonbury (1959) suggest that the
flowrate is proportional to the orifice area x (DH )
112,
where Dtt is the
hydraulic mean diameter= 4 x cross-sectional area/perimeter.
" -- tA
"' ~ -
f
c
3.1.3 Orifice shap_ e