Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T05:58:10.214Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The dynamics of two spherical particles in a confined rotating flow: pedalling motion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2008

K. MUKUNDAKRISHNAN ,
HOWARD H. HU  and
P. S. AYYASWAMY
K. MUKUNDAKRISHNAN
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering and Applied Mechanics, 229, Towne Building, 220 S. 33rd Street, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
HOWARD H. HU
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering and Applied Mechanics, 229, Towne Building, 220 S. 33rd Street, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
P. S. AYYASWAMY*
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering and Applied Mechanics, 229, Towne Building, 220 S. 33rd Street, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
*
†Author to whom correspondence should be addressed: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We have numerically investigated the interaction dynamics between two rigid spherical particles moving in a fluid-filled cylinder that is rotating at a constant speed. The cylinder rotation is about a horizontal axis. The particle densities are less than that of the fluid. The numerical procedure employed to solve the mathematical formulation is based on a three-dimensional arbitrary Larangian–Eulerian (ALE), moving mesh finite-element technique, described in a frame of reference rotating with the cylinder. Results are obtained in the ranges of particle Reynolds number, 1 <Rep≤60, and shear Reynolds number, 1≤Res<10. Two identical particles, depending on initial conditions at release, approach each other (‘drafting’ and ‘kissing’), tumble in the axial direction, and axially migrate towards opposing transverse planes on which they ‘settle’ (settling planes). Under some other initial conditions, the particles migrate directly onto their settling planes. For two identical particles, the settling planes are equidistant from the mid-transverse plane of the cylinder and the locations of the planes are determined by particle–particle and particle–wall force balances. Furthermore, for identical particles and given values of Rep and Res, the locations of such settling planes remain the same, independent of the initial conditions at release. While located on these settling planes, as viewed in an inertial frame, the particles may attain three possible distinct states depending on the values of the Reynolds numbers. In one state (low Rep, high Res), the particles attain and remain at fixed equilibrium points on their settling planes. In the second (all Rep, low Res), they execute spiralling motions about fixed points on their respective settling planes. These fixed points coincide with the locations of the equilibrium point which would occur on the mid-axial plane in the case of a single particle. In the third state (low Rep, moderate Res or high Rep, moderate to high Res), they execute near-circular orbital motion on their respective settling planes, again about fixed points. These fixed points also coincide with the locations of the equilibrium points corresponding to single-particle dynamics. Both the spiral and near-circular motions of the particles occur in an out-of-phase manner with regard to their radial positions about the fixed point; the near-circular out-of-phase motion resembles bicycle pedalling. Also, in the second and third states, the particles simultaneously experience very weak axial oscillations about their settling planes, the frequency of such oscillations coinciding with the frequency of rotation of the circular cylinder.

The behaviours of two non-identical particles (same density but different sizes, or same size but different densities) are different from those of identical particles. For example, non-identical particles may both end up settling on the mid-axial plane. This occurs when the locations of their corresponding single-particle equilibrium points are far apart. When such points are not far apart, particles may settle on planes that may not be symmetrical about the mid-axial plane. While located on their settling planes, their equilibrium states may not be similar. For example, for particles of the same density but of different sizes, the smaller of the two may execute a spiralling motion while the larger is in near-circular orbital motion. With particles of the same size but of different densities, while the lighter of the two approaches its equilibrium point on the mid-axial plane, the heavier one experiences a circular motion on the same plane about its equilibrium point. A major reason for the eventual attainment of these various states is noted to be the interplay between the particle–particle and particle–wall forces.

Type
Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 599 , 25 March 2008 , pp. 169 - 204
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Annamalai, P. & Cole, R. 1986 Particle migration in rotating liquids. Phys. Fluids 29 (3), 647–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayyaswamy, P. S. & Mukundakrishnan, K. 2007 Optimal conditions for simulating microgravity employing NASA designed rotating wall vessels. Acta Astronaut. 60, 397–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bagchi, P. & Balachandar, S. 2002 Shear versus vortex-induced lift force on a rigid sphere at moderate. J. Fluid Mech. 473, 379–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coimbra, C. F. M. & Kobayashi, M. H. 2002 On the viscous motion of a small particle in a rotating cylinder. J. Fluid Mech. 469, 257–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferry, J. P. & Balachandar, S. 2001 A fast Eulerian method for dispersed two-phase flow. Intl J. Multiphase Flow 27, 1199–1226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Folkersma, R., Stein, H. N. & van der Vosse, F. N. 2000 Hydrodynamic interactions between two identical spheres held fixed side by side against a uniform stream directed perpendicular to the line connecting the spheres' centres. Intl J. Multiphase Flow 26, 877–887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fortes, A., Joseph, D. D. & Lundgren, D. D. 1987 Nonlinear mechanics of fluidization of beds of spherical particles. J. Fluid Mech. 177, 483–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gao, H., Ayyaswamy, P. S. & Ducheyne, P. 1997 Dynamics of a microcarrier particle in the simulated microgravity environment of a rotating-wall vessel. Micrograv. Sci. Technol. X (3), 154–165.Google Scholar
Hu, H. H. 1996 Direct simulation of flows of solid–liquid mixtures. Intl J. Multiphase Flow 22, 335–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hu, H. H., Patankar, N. A. & Zhu, M. Y. 2001 Direct numerical simulations of fluid–solid systems using the arbitrary Lagrangian–Eulerian technique. J. Comput. Phys. 169, 427–462.Google Scholar
Kim, I., Elghobashi, S. & Sirignano, W. A. 1993 Three-dimensional flow over two spheres placed side by side. J. Fluid Mech. 246, 465–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, J. & Ladd, A. J. C. 2002 Axial segregation in a cylindrical centrifuge. Phys. Rev. Lett. 10, 1–4.Google Scholar
Lipson, S. G. 2001 Periodic banding in crystallization from rotating supersaturated solutions. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 13, 5001–5008.Google Scholar
Lynch, S. V., Mukundakrishnan, K., Benoit, M. R., Ayyaswamy, P. S. & Matin, A. 2006 Escherichia coli biofilms formed under low shear modeled microgravity in a ground-based system. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 72, 7701–7710.Google Scholar
Matson, W. R., Ackerson, B. J. & Tong, P. 2003 Pattern formation in a rotating suspension of non-Brownian settling particles. Phys. Rev. E 67 (050301(R)).Google Scholar
Maxey, R. M. & Riley, J. J. 1982 Equation of motion for a small rigid sphere in a nonuniform flow. Phys. Fluids 26 (4), 883–889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michaelides, E. E. 2003 Hydrodynamic force and heat/mass transfer from particles, bubbles, and drops. The Freeman Scholar Lecture. Trans. ASME I: J. Fluids Engng 125, 209–238.Google Scholar
Minkov, E., Ungarish, M. & Israeli, M. 2000 The motion generated by a rising particle in a rotating fluid – numerical solutions. Part 1. A short container. J. Fluid Mech. 413, 111–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minkov, E., Ungarish, M. & Israeli, M. 2002 The motion generated by a rising particle in a rotating fluid – numerical solutions. Part 2. The long container case. J. Fluid Mech. 454, 345–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mukundakrishnan, K. 2005 Fluid mechanics and mass transfer in rotating wall vessels: a numerical and experimental study. PhD thesis, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Mullin, T., Li, Y., Del Pino, C. & Ashmore, J. 2005 An experimental study of fixed points and chaos in the motion of spheres in a Stokes flow. IMA J. Appl. Maths 70, 666–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramirez, L. E. S., Lim, E. A., Coimbra, C. F. M. & Kobayashi, M. H. 2004 On the dynamics of a spherical scaffold in rotating wall bioreactors. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 84, 382–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, G. O., Kornfeld, D. M. & Fowlis, W. W. 1991 Particle orbits in a rotating liquid. J. Fluid Mech. 229, 555–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schiller, L. & Nauman, A. 1933 Uber die grundlegende berechnung bei der schwekraftaubereitung. Ver. Deutch. Ing. 44 (11), 318–320.Google Scholar
Seiden, G., Lipson, S. G. & Franklin, J. 2004 Oscillatory axial banding of particles suspended in a rotating fluid. Phys. Rev. Phys. Rev. E 69 (015301(R)).Google Scholar
Swaminathan, T. N., Mukundakrishnan, K. & Hu, H. H. 2006 Sedimentation of an ellipsoid inside an infinitely long tube at low and intermediate Reynolds numbers. J. Fluid Mech. 551, 357–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Y.-X., Lu, X.-Y. & Zhuang, L.-X. 2004 Numerical analysis of the rotating viscous flow approaching a solid sphere. Intl J. Numer. Meth. Fluids 44, 905–925.CrossRefGoogle Scholar