modelling the structure of deposits formed by polydisperse suspensions n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Modelling the structure of deposits formed by polydisperse suspensions PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Modelling the structure of deposits formed by polydisperse suspensions

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 25

Modelling the structure of deposits formed by polydisperse suspensions - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 110 Views
  • Uploaded on

Modelling the structure of deposits formed by polydisperse suspensions. Andrew Hogg. Robert Dorrell, Peter Talling, Esther Sumner, Tom Harris, Herbert Huppert. Outline. Settling through otherwise quiescent fluid: hindered settling Particle-driven gravity currents : turbidity currents

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Modelling the structure of deposits formed by polydisperse suspensions' - arva


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
modelling the structure of deposits formed by polydisperse suspensions

Modelling the structure of deposits formed by polydisperse suspensions

Andrew Hogg

Robert Dorrell, Peter Talling, Esther Sumner,

Tom Harris, Herbert Huppert

outline
Outline
  • Settling through otherwise quiescent fluid:hindered settling
  • Particle-driven gravity currents: turbidity currents
  • How are the dynamics affected by polydisperse suspensions?

u

f

h

ws

Initial suspension

Deposit

Gravitationally driven

flows of suspensions over

rigid boundaries

settling of an individual particle
Settling of an individual particle
  • Stokes settling velocity for an individual spherical particle settling through an unbounded fluid domain gives
  • The velocity field around the particle decays as d/r
  • Particle settling is influenced by its neighbours: Hindered Settling.
    • ‘Return’ flow of fluid
    • Enhanced viscosity of suspension

Streamlines in a frame moving with the settling particle

aaa

hindered settling of a suspension
Hindered settling of a suspension
  • Mass conservation for a suspension of concentration, f(z,t)
  • The settling flux, q, depends on the volume fraction, expressing the hindered settling
    • For example:
  • Discontinuous solutions are possible

q(z,t)=Settling flux

(Kynch,1952)

q

z=s(t)

  • ‘Shock’ speed

1

0

f/fm

f(s-)

f(s+)

monodisperse settling i
Monodisperse settling (i)

Settling from an initially well mixed state: f=f0 at t=0 for 0<z<h

  • f0determines whether there is a shock in the profiles of f(z,t)
    • f0 =0.1 Discontinuous profiles; f0 =0.5 Continuous profiles
  • The final deposit with f=fm is only formed as t

f0=0.5

f0=0.1

revised model of hindered settling
Revised model of hindered settling
  • Mass balance between the settling flux of particles and the return flow of suspending fluid (wp: particle velcoity; wf: fluid velocity)
  • Force balance: (fm: Maximum packing)If f < fmSubmerged weight = Drag If f > fm Submerged weight = Force from particle contacts
  • Settling flux

q

f

0

fm

1

monodisperse settling ii
Monodisperse settling (ii)

Settling from an initially well mixed state: f=f0 at t=0 for 0<z<h

f0=0.1

f0=0.2

Discontinuous jump to fm

Discontinuous jump to f<fm;

discontinuous jump to fm

f0=0.35

f0=0.5

Continuous evolution and

discontinuous jump to fm

Discontinuous jump to fm

bidisperse settling i
Bidisperse settling (i)
  • Hindered settling for two classes of particles:Mass conservation:Force balance: Submerged weight = Drag (if f1+f2<fm)
  • Fluxes of particles q1=wp1f1 , q2=wp2f2 (if f1+f2<fm)and q1=q2=0 (if f1+f2>fm)
  • Coupled evolution equations for f1(z,t) and f2(z,t)
    • Solutions with discontinuous volume fractions may arise.Across the shock, both volume fraction change discontinuously.

wpi: settling velocity of ith particle class

Note: q1(f1,f2) and q2(f1,f2)

bidisperse settling ii
Bidisperse settling (ii)

Settling from an initially well mixed state: f1=f2=f0 at t=0 for 0<z<hRatio of particle sizes (d1/d2)2=1/2

  • Dilute suspension f0=0.025F0=f1(0)+f2(0)=0.05
  • Discontinuous jump from well mixed suspension into stationary deposit with total volume fraction Ff1+f2=fm
  • Deposit composed of ungraded mixture of fine/coarse particles overlain by an interval of pure fines

The total volume fraction F=f1+f2

Volume fraction of larger particles

Volume fraction of smaller particles

bidisperse settling iii
Bidisperse settling (iii)

Settling from an initially well mixed state: f1=f2=f0 at t=0 for 0<z<hRatio of particle sizes (d1/d2)2=1/2

F0=0.05

F0=0.2

Discontinuous jump to fm

Discontinuous jump to f<fm;

discontinuous jump to fm

F0=0.3

F0=0.5

Continuous evolution and

discontinuous jump to fm

Discontinuous jump to fm

deposit from bidisperse suspension
Deposit from bidisperse suspension

z

  • The deposit comprises an ungraded region, overlain by a region consisting purely of fine particles
  • The relative proportion of larger to smaller particles in the ungraded portion is determined by
    • Size ratio (d1/d2)
    • Initial ratio (f1(0)/f2(0))
    • Combined initial volume fraction (F(0))

fm

Ratio of volume fractions in ungraded deposit

R= f1/f2

(d1/d2)2=0.5

f1(0)/f2(0)=1

F(0)

polydisperse suspensions experiments
Polydisperse suspensions: Experiments
  • Settling tube experiments (Amy et al. 2006)
    • Well mixed, polydisperse sand suspensions at different initial volume fractions (F(0)=0.05-0.6)
    • Settle until no particles remain in suspension
    • Deposit frozen, sliced into horizontal strips and composition measured.

z

  • Key observations:
  • The deposit has ungraded at base overlain by finer material
  • The average grain size in the ungraded portion decreases with increasing F(0)
  • The relative depth of the ungraded portion increases with increasing F(0)

Proportion with

diameter d

d50

polydisperse suspensions models
Polydisperse suspensions: models
  • Extend the hindered settling framework to an arbitrary number of particle classes
    • Represent the suspension with 28 classes
    • Suspension evolution represented by 28 coupled equations
    • Integrate until deposit fully formed from given F(0)

Evolution of the total volume fraction,F(z,t)=i fi(z,t)

F(z,0)=0.3

polydisperse suspensions results
Polydisperse suspensions: results

Composition of the deposit:

d50, d10, d90 as functions of relative depth in deposit

F(0)=0.05

F(0)=0.1

F(0)=0.2

F(0)=0.3

F(0)=0.4

F(0)=0.5

polydisperse suspensions interpretation
Polydisperse suspensions: interpretation

Key observations:

  • The deposit has ungraded at base overlain by finer material
    • From a well-mixed suspension, the flux of each class of particles into the deposit remains constant until all of the largest class of particles has deposited. Thus the composition of the deposit does not initially vary, forming an initially ungraded deposit.
  • The average grain size in the ungraded region decreases and its relative depth increases with increasing F(0)
    • Increasing F(0) reduces the settling velocity of the particles and thus the time during which the deposit is ungraded and of constant composition is increased. This means that a greater proportion of the particle load is deposited in the ungraded region.
turbidity currents
Turbidity currents
  • Motion driven by gravitational force associated with density difference between the cloud of particles and surrounding fluid: r=ra+ f (rs-ra)
  • Sedimentation reduces the concentration of the suspension and thus reduces the density difference
  • Passage of the current leaves a deposit on the underlying boundary

Flow over an impermeable, horizontal boundary

u

f

h

ws

models
Models

h(t)

  • ‘Box’ models capture the essential dynamics

Conservation of fluid mass

Evolution of concentration

Front (dynamic condition)

  • Flow stops when the volume fraction of particulate falls from its initial value f=f0tof=0.
    • This occurs at

L(t)

f(t)

ws

(monodisperse)

comparison with experiments
Comparison with experiments

Laboratory flume experiments in which varying initial volumes of monodisperse suspension (A), of varying particle sizes and settling velocities (ws) and differing initial concentrations (f0) were instantaneously released.

Scaled data and theory

Raw data

L/L

t/T

bidisperse gravity currents
Bidisperse gravity currents
  • For bidisperse suspensions:
    • Separate evolution of the volume fraction of each species because the particle settle with different velocities
    • The total volume fraction F=f1+f2 determines the excess density and drives the motion.
  • How well is the runout represented by treating the suspension as effectively monodisperse with settling velocity given by the initial average (ws1f+ws2(1-f)) and with the combined initial volume fraction (F0)?

At t=0

f1=fF0

f2=(1-f)F0

bidisperse currents runout lengths
Bidisperse currents: runout lengths

The runout length: L=L when f1=f2=0 and ws2/ws1=1/4

Relative to current with

average settling velocity

Relative to current of only

coarse particles

Enhancement of Runout length

L /Lc

Enhancement of Runout length

L /La

100%

coarse

100%

fine

100%

fine

100%

coarse

Fraction of coarse particles

Fraction of coarse particles

bidisperse currents temporal evolution
Bidisperse currents: Temporal evolution
  • Length of current L(t) for ws2/ws1=1/4

L(t)/La

Final runout

100%

coarse

100%

fine

Fraction of coarse particles

bidisperse currents deposit
Bidisperse currents: deposit

h(t)

The depth of the deposit and its composition for ws2/ws1=1/7

L(t)

f(t)

100%

fine

ws

Surface of

deposit

Vertical and longitudinal

grading of deposit

Depth within deposit

z/[F0A/La]

100%

coarse

Distance from release x/La

polydisperse gravity currents
Polydisperse gravity currents
  • Suppose the suspension was made up of N classes of particles, with initial concentrations fi(0)(i=1..N) and settling velocities wsi (i=1..N)
  • Is it reasonable to estimate runout by treating the suspension as monodisperse with initial volume fraction and average settling velocity ?
    • If it is reasonable, then runout
  • Models for the runout for the polydisperse current show
summary and conclusions
Summary and conclusions
  • Hindered settling
    • Formulation for polydisperse suspensions
    • Deposit formation and composition
    • ‘Shocks’ in the volume fraction play an important role.
    • Quantitative agreement with laboratory experiments
  • Turbidity currents
    • Simple ‘box’ model to predict the runout of dilute suspensions
    • Generalise to polydisperse systems
    • Mixture of particle sizes always leads to propagation further than had it been monodisperse with the average settling velocity
    • Deposit progressively thins and exhibit vertical and streamwise normal grading
slide25

Worldwide University Network SymposiumEarth Surface Sedimentary Flow Processes

11-13 April 2011, Bristol

Registration now open : http://www.wun.ac.uk/events/earth-surface-sedimentary-flows-symposium

Full funding available for registration and accommodation costs

Organisers:

Dr Andrew Hogg (Bristol), Dr Peter Talling (Southampton), Prof. Nico Gray (Manchester), Dr Chris Keylock(Sheffield)