BATCH ,AND CONTINUOUS THICKENING

Basic Theory.

Solids Flux f o r Rigid Spheres

PAUL T. SHANNON1 AND ELWOOD STROUPE

Purdue University, Lafayctte, Ind.

ELMER M. T O R Y

McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Batch and continuous thickening are regarded as the process of propagating concentration changes upward from the bottom of the settling vessel owing to the downward movement of the solids. A proper choice o f coordinates in defining the solids flux clarifies the relation between batch and continuous thickening and allows the same basic analysis to b e applied to both. The equations for the movement of planes of constant concentration are derived from continuity considerations. Experimental results for the batch settling of rigid spheres, in water are presented. The plot of solids flux vs. concentration was doubly concave.
~ T C Hsedimentation

Bthought of as the process of propagating concentration

and continuous thickening may be

changes, due to the downivard movement of the solids, from the bottom of the settling vessel up\vard through the slurry. These concentration changes may be either finite or infinitesimal as in the case of the propagation of a continuous concentration gradient. The slurry itself may be moving do\vnward as in the case of continuous thickening. The doivnward velocity of the slurry may be such that the concentration changes being propagated up from below remain stationary relative to the thickener walls. This is the case for steady-state continuous thickening. It seems appropriate to analyze batch and continuous ;:hickening in terms of the movement of planes of constant concentration within the vessel, as was first in his analysis of batch sedimentation. done by Kynch (9) Many theoretical and semitheoretical equations have been proposed \vhich relate the initial dimensionless settling rate of a to the volumetric concentration of solids. The simplest system \vhich can be envisaged is that for which the dimensionless settling rate at any point in a slurry is a function only of the local solids concentration, and Kynchs theory of batch sedimentation is based on this postulate. To date. this theory appears to have been judged primarily on the basis of its usefulness in the design of continuous thickeners (4. 7 6 ) . It seems that it might better be considered analogous to the ideal gas law in thermodynamics Lvhich. though often not sufficiently accurate for design purposes, p.rovides a standard against which real gases can be compared. The behavior of actual systems can then be attributed to r,itional causes. -4 system which fulfills K y c h s basic postulate will be termed a n ideal slurry. The assumption that the local settling velocity of solids relative to the slurry is a function only of the local solids concentration is essentially equivalent to the assumption that the only forces acting on the particles are caused by the local interstitial fluid velocity. The forces caused by fluid and solids acceleration are neglected. Thus, solids in a plane of constant concentration within a concentration gradient, wherein the solids entering and leaving the :plane are being decelerated and at the same time the fluid is being accelerated upward: are assumed to move with exactly the same velocity relative to rhe slurry as they would in a region of uniform concentration. This will be true only for systems Ivhich are highly damped and in which the solids concentration varies slowly.
1 Presrnt address, Tha.yer School of Engineering. Dartmouth College, Hanover, N. H. 2 Present address, U. S. .4rmy, USAECR, Fort Belvoir, Va.

From derived equations for the velocity of planes of constant concentration. the present series of papers develops and applies a more general treatment of settling encompassing batch settling lvith constant or variable area and steady- and unsteady-state thickening and relates the batch and continuous cases. Experimental results for rigid spheres and calcium carbonate are presented and interpreted in terms of the theory. This approach offers a consistent interpretation of the experimental results and provides a logical explanation of many previously unexplained phenomena encountered in batch and continuous thickening.
Theory

The theoretical treatment given below is not confined to .ideal slurries but is limited by the folloiving assumptions : The particles are all of the same size, shape: and density. \Val1 effects are negligible. No radial variation occurs in the solids concentration. No radial variation occurs in the downward component 01 slurry velocity. The settling velocity of the solids relative to the slurry is independent of the velocity of the slurry itself. I n continuous thickening, the downward solids flux relative to the thickener, G: results from two different phenomena : settling of solids through the slurry and movement of the slurry itself. Thus
G = c(u

a)

(1)

\\.here c = local concentration of solids in the slurry (weight of solids per unit volume of slurry) u = doivnward velocity of the solids relative to the slurry u = downward velocity of the slurry relative to the thickener u u = downward velocity of the solids relative to the thickener

All velocities are defined as positive doivnward and height is defined as positive upward. The coordinate system and velocities are shown schematically in Figure 1. The slurry velocity, u, is defined by the equation

L , G= L G + Q s = - .
PL Pa

(2)

Lvhere p = density, subscripts 1 and s refer to liquid and solid, respectively, Q = volumetric underflow rate, and A = crosssectional area. By definition, u = 0 for batch thickening. For this case
G(v = 0) = S = cu
VOL. 2 NO. 3 AUGUST

(3) 1963
203

The continuity equation for the solids in a thickener in which the concentration and velocities varv continuously with time t and height z and the cross-sectional area. A . may vary continuously \\ith z is
(4)

equations c = c ( t , z ) and u = u ( t . z ) . implicit in the continuity equation. gives u = u ( c . 1 ) . Hence G = G(6,v.t) and

But

.4t constant c.4. constant \\.eight of solids per unit height. z and t , are related by

and, from Equation 1

(5)

.4 comparison of Equations 4 and 5 shows that

so that

where @ is defined by the first equality and is seen to be the velocity with bvhich a plane of constant weight of solids per unit height moves relative to the thickener. If the crosssectional area is constant. then from Equation 6. fi is the velocity of a plane of constant concentration. I n any zone of uniform concentration. the continuity equation cannot be ivritten. Hojvever, the basic approach is the analysis of the propagation of concentration changes upward through the slurry which may be of uniform concentration above the zone of concentration changes. Where there are finite changes of concentration with height. Equation 5 no longer applies. .4s shown by Kynch ( 9 ) :it must be replaced by a n equation stating that the flow of particles into one side of the discontinuity equals the flow out the other side. .4ssume that at time t and height z there exists a finite discontinuity in concentration-i.e., c is a step function of 2. -4ssume further that the variation in A is continuous. If suffix ( I denotes the layer above the discontinuity and suffix b the layer below. and 6 is the downward velocity of the discontinuity. then a mass balance on the solids gives
C.(Uo

For the special case ivhere u is a function only of c.

and if also the cross-sectional area is constant

6) =

Cb(Ub

L'

- 6)

(7)

and

- Ga 6 = Gb __Cb

Co

(8)

LVithin the limitations of the assumptions. Equations 6 and 8 apply to the propagation of concentration changes in any slurry. For 21 = 0. these equations apply to batch settling. If crosssectional area is also constant: Equation 6 reduces to

.4ccording to Equation 15. a plane of constant concentration moves relative to the thickener \vith a constant velocity \vhen u = u ( c ) and u and A are constant. Similarly, if u = U ( C ) and cross-sectional area and underfloi\. rate are constant? 6 is constant. provided that c, is maintained. In both cases, if the underflow rate is not zero. the specification of constant L) requires constant -4. Obviously the problem is greatly simplified if u = u ( c ) . ,4s pointed out by Kynch, if L' = 0 and -4 is constant. 6 and 6 are time-independent quantities ivhose values can be calculated from Equations 9 and 8. Initial batch settling rates can be used to establish the flux plot \vhich sholvs the batch flux. S. as a function of local solids concentration-Le., S = S(c). The experimental part of this paper is devoted to finding the fluxconcentration relationship for rigid spheres. T h e prediction of the complete family of settling curves from initial rate data constitutes a test of Kynch's basic hypothesis. and ivill be given in subsequent articles.
Determination of Flux Plot

NOM' 8 is simply a n operating variable and u can be determined from batch tests. To apply a value of u determined from initial batch rates directly to the design of a continuous thickener assumes that u = u ( G ) . Even when this is not true. batch tests can be used. provided that the functional dependence of u can be completely defined. If assumption 5 is cormust be possible. at rect-i.e.. u and u are independent-it least in principle. to use batch tests to predict results in continuous thickening. For steady-state continuous thickening, fi = 0 and 6 = 0. Equations 1, 6, and 8. together with a functional relationship for u, will be used to treat this important industrial process in a later paper. T h e design of thickeners on this basis depends upon the validity of the five assumptions and the accuracv with Xvhich u is characterized. I n general. /3 = P ( z , t ) and 6 = 6 ( z , t ) . This is true even for batch settling with constant area. T h e conditions for \vhich fi is constant can be found as follows. Elimination of z from the
204
ILEC FUNDAMENTALS

The rate of fall of the fluid-slurry interface is the settling rate of the solids immediately below the interface. If the slurry is thoroughly mixed to a uniform concentration, the initial interface concentration is known. Otherivise the interface concentration is unknown and unequal to the calculated average concentration. Because of the nature of the system, if mixing is not uniform, the upper portion of the slurry is a t a concentration less than that calculated and the settling rate is greater than that expected. Since settling rates are very strongly dependent on concentration, a small variation in interface concentration effects a large change in the observed settling rate. Inadequate mixing also produces initial concentration gradients which have pronounced effects on the fall of the fluid-slurry interface. Attaining a n initially uniform concentration becomes increasingly difficult as initial solids concentration decreases. I n order to reduce the effect of variables other than concentration, one should determine the flux plot by taking a given weight of solids and effecting concentration changes by adding and subtracting fluid. It is good experimental practice to randomize the initial concentrations. T h e settling rate during the initial constant-rate period is plotted against the initial

uniform concentration, which is the concentration at the fluids1urr)- interface during the constant-rate period. If settling rates are reproducible, the data \vi11 form a smooth curve for the given slurry. The corresponding flux plot is then readily obtained by multiplying the concentration by the corresponding settling rate. . 4\vide range of initial concentrations should be studied in order to determine accurately the complete flux plot. This method enables one to evaluate systematically the effect of variables other than concentration, by examining the flux curves obtained for a series of slurries. Kynch (9) has pointed out that it is theoretically possible to deduce a portion of the velocity-concentration relationship from the analysis of a single batch settling curve for a slurry conforming exactly to the theoretical assumptions. Such a method requires extremely accurate data. Secondary effects caused by concentration gradients. nonuniform initial concentration. particle segregation effects. etc.: which may represent relatively small deviations from the behavior predicted from concentration considerations alone, may cause a large error in the velocity-concentration relationship deduced by extrapolation procedures applied to one batch settling curve. Nevertheless. it is possible to gain a great deal of information from the analysis of sett'ling curves. If a settling curve is to be interpreted meaningfully. readings must be taken frequently until settling is complete or negligible. Only if the entire batch settling curve is accurately kno\vn can the results be used to test predictions based on the flux plot determined from the initial rate data. In fact. it is the portion of the batch settling curve after the constant-rate period which furnishes the most information regarding the settling characteristics of the slurr>-. Unfortunately. in the past. data for this period often !cere not obtained or \vere not sufficient to establish the settling curve. Obviously. the correct analysis of erroneous batch settling cun'es will not produce correct answers. serve to test the theoretical analysis. or suggest and allo\v the evaluation of the effect of variables other than solids concentration. . 4 large portion of the previous experimental work reporred in the literature has been concerned \vith the settling of calcium carbonate slurries. Sumch slurries are compressible and. therefore. additional variables are introduced. Tory (77) has studied this system extensively?and the results will be reported in subsequent papers. To gain a better insight into the behavior of these complex systems, the settling of closely sized, rigid, spherical particles 'glass beads) in a Newtonian fluid (water) \\*as chosen for investigation and analysis. Some work has been done on the batch settling of rigid spherical particles in water (77: 72, 7 1 : 79). The solid and liquid properties of this type of slurry are constant with time and can be measured easily and accurately. A knowledge and understanding of such a system are prerequisite to Understanding and interpreting the settling behavior of compressible slurries and 'or those ivith time-dependent properties. For a.ny slurry. the test of the basic assumption, 21 = u ( c ) . and theory is lchether or not one can predict from the flux plot, based on initial settling rate data, the complete batch settling curve for any initial concentration.
Experimental Procedur(e

DIFFERENTIAL VOLUME ELEMENT

I I

\
Figure 1. system
u.

1"

Schematic of coordinate

v. z.

Solids velocity relative to slurry Slurry velocity relative to wall Height

.A 600-po\cer Cooke, Troughton. and Simms microscope wirh movable stage and micrometer eyepiece was used to measure particle diameter. The size distribution was obtained by raking fi1.e samples a t random from the population and measuring 200 beads per sample. The micrometer scale was calibrated by measuring six lengths of 60 to 120 microns on a standard millimeter scale. Settling curves were determined in a 4.76-cm. inside diameter borosilicate glass column 1.83 meters in length. Care !vas taken to ensure that the column was vertical. The spheres were allowed to soak to become thoroughly wet before any runs were made. Mixing was accomplished by blowing humidified air into the slurry through a porous bronze disk (Type G: Micrometallic Co.) mounted on the bottom of the column. The rising air bubbles produced a vigorous random mixing of the solids in the column. Complete details of the experimental procedure are given by Stroupe (75)and De Haas ( 3 ) . Each set was run with a constant iveight of solids which was kno\vn to +0.5 gram. The solids concentration was changed by adding or subtracting water. The order of slurries to be ! run \vas randomized by selecting the initial concentration b lot. The slurry was mixed for at least 5 minutes until apparently uniform and then allowed to settle. The initial concentrations were not measured but were assumed as uniform for the basis of all calculations. The fall of the interface between the slurry and the supernatant water and the rise of the slurry-fixed bed interface from the bottom of the column were followed by taking readings at 1.5-second intervals. The heights of these interfaces were known to i l to =k3 mm. and the times to within 0.25 second. Settling times were measured from the moment the air was shut off. Tivo or 3 seconds ivere required to dissipate the last of the air bubbles and for rhe slurry to stabilize. Temperature for each run was held as close as possible to 7 6 ' F. by using forced air convection over a large Mater-cooled (or heated) surface. The temperature \vas recorded after 8 ' F. each run and ranged from 74' to 7
Results

Particle Size Distribution. Of the 1000 spheres measured: 8.58 formed a normal distribution with a mean diameter. 2 = 66.49 microns and standard de\iation. u = 6.70 microns as sho\cn in Figure 2. -4chi-square test confirmed that the distribution was normal (P = 0.38). The remaining 142 spheres made up a ..tail" ranging do\cn to 5 microns. The distribution in this tail was fairly even. with a slight peak a t 10 microns. For the normal distribution
hiean volume per particle
=

Class IV standard microbeeds (Slicrobeads: Inc., Jackson. Yliss.), average particle size 50 microns, were screened to obtain the fraction noniinally between 61 and 74 microns. After the initial screening. the desired cut was rescreened twice. The beads were washed thoroughly in distilled ivater and acerone. Three ..%,eightsof glass spheres were studied: Set X (597.7 grams), Set XI (193.5 grams): and Set X I 1 (1992. grams). The same beads were used in all the sets in order to eliminate differences in particle size distribution.

-m

\vhere .Y = ( d - d ) , u . The integral {cas evaluated by expanding the cubic and integrating by parts. The volume of the particles constituting the tail \*'as calculated directly. On this basis the tail was found to make up 1 .48Tcof the total particle volume.
VOL. 2

NO. 3 A U G U S T 1 9 6 3

205

c = p*(1

- e)

(18)

I
where ps is the solids density (weight of solids divided by their effective volume in solution) and e is the void fraction. The quantity c is not the slurry density. While the solids concentration is always calculable, for many slurries the terms on the right-hand side of Equation 18 cannot be separated. It is at times more convenient to use the reduced concentration or volume fraction (LIP,), which is equal to 1 minus the void fraction. Similarly, the flux divided by the product of the solids density and a n appropriate Stokes velocity is defined as the reduced flux. For slurries having a range of particle sizes, in which case the Stokes velocity is ambiguous, it is convenient to use the flux divided by the solids density. Solids Settling Velocity. Initial settling velocities were obtained from plots of the height-time readings for each experimental run a t the various initial concentrations for all sets. The initial settling rate of the fluid slurry interface was taken as the settling rate of the solids immediately below the interface, which was assumed to be at a known initial uniform concentration. For each run, a straight line was fitted by eye to the experimental data in the initial constant settling rate period. The initial settling velocity of the slurry was determined for at least three runs at each initial concentration. Settling rates of repeated runs varied by 0.5 to 5%, with an average of less than 3%. The initial concentrations, initial bed heights, final concentrations, final bed heights, initial settling rates, rates of rise of the fixed bed: and temperature for Sets X. XI, and X I 1 are given by Stroupe (75) along with other batch settling data. Additional settling data obtained with thr same so!ids in water are given by De Hass (3). Typical results are shown in Table I. The initial settling velocity of the solids was expressed as a simple power series in the reduced initial concentration ( c / p S ) as given by Equation 19 :

PART I C L E Figure 2.

DIAMETER ,(microns)

Particle size distribution of glass spheres

Similarly, mean area per particle =

u =
--m

,=o The constants, A,, ivere evaluated by a least-mean-square error fit of the experimental results. A digital computer was used to do the calculations. All experimental results for each set \\.ere used. including all the final bed concentrations a t which the flux was zero. Power series in reduced concentration from third to seventh order were evaluated. It was found that a

Ai(1

- e)>

The apparent surface area of the fines was computed directly and found to be 2.86% of the total. The characteristic or effective mean diameter was taken as that of a sphere with the same volume-surface ratio as that of the distribution of spheres. Including the tail, de = 66.94 microns. Independent of the particle size distribution, the solids concentration is defined by

Table 1.

Typical Experimental Results for Spherical Glass Beads in Water

Mean particle diameter, d = 67 microns Column diameter = 4.76 cm.

Initial Reduced
CilP,

Concn.,

Run No. X-3

(7

- e,)

0.15

Initial Height, Z., Cm. 93.6

XII-4 XII-8

0.30 0.50

15.6 9.4

Final Height, Z m ,Cm. 21.90 21.95 22.00 22 .oo 7.35 7.35 7.30
7 .

7.30 7.25

Solids density, p. = 2.45 cm. per cc. X, weight of solids per unit area = 33.6 grams per sq. cm. XII, weight of solids per unit area = 11.2 grams per sq. cm. Final Reduced Concn., Initial Slurry Rate o/ Rise CmlPa = Settling Rate, of Awed Bed, ( 7 - em) u, Cm./Src. Cm . /Sec. Temp., OF. 0.641 0.218 76.0 0.640 0.191 0.6486 76 . O 0.638 0.206 0.0494 ... 0.638 0.204 0,0498 76 .O 0.637 0.0659 0.0463 75.5 0.637 0.0665 0.0473 75.5 0.641 0.0667 ... 75.5 n 641 0.0133 0.0457 76.0 . . . ~ ~ ~ 0.0450 76 .O 0.0136 0.641 76.0 .. 0.0133 0.646

206

I&EC FUNDAMENTALS

third- or fourth-order power series gave the best fit to the data, particularly a t high solids concentration. While the normalized error squared deceased slightly for the higher order power series, the resultling calculated velocity curves oscillated around the experimental points and actually gave a poorer fit to the experimental results. Table I1 summarizes the constants for Equation 19 evaluated from the experimental results for all sets. Figure 3 shows the experimental initial settling velocities for Sets X and X I 1 and the settling velocities calculated from Equation 19 using the experimentally determined constants given in Table I1 The flux curves for Sets X and X I 1 are shown in Figure 4. Both curves are definitely doubly concave. The size of the circles in Figures 3 and 4 is consistent with the precision of the data The average final reduced concentration \\as the same. 0.64. for all sets The values of the reduced concentration a t the inflection points and thr maximum flux are also ver) nearly equal. as shown in Table I1 Results for Set X I were identical. uithin experimental error. to the results of Set XII.
Discussion of Results

I \i

11.2 g./sq.cm.

Experimental Settling Velocity and Solids Flux. The third- and fourth-order power series for the settling velocity correlated the data for a given set within the experimental variation. Since the power series expressing the initial settling velocity as a function of initial solids concentration were evaluated by fitting the experimental data, the backcalculation of initial seixling rates does not test the theory but merely tests the fit of the curve of the data. T h e test of the theory lies in its ability to predict the total settling curve for any given initial concentration. I t is the measurement and analysis of the settling curves after the initial constant rate period which provide ):he test of the theory and give insight into the basic fluid-solids dynamics of the system. This will be dealt with in subsequent papers. The significant difference between the curves for Set X and those for Sets X I to X I 1 was that the values of the settling velocity and the flux are consistently higher for Set X (weight of solids per unit area. ze = 33.6 grams per sq. cm.) than for Set XI1 ( E = 11.2 granis per sq. cm.). The per cent deviation of the curves increases from 4 to 5% a t the highly concentrated range to approximately 2070 in the dilute range. There were several possible reasons for this variation of results: variation of Jveight of solids per unit area, mixing effects, particle size

segregation. reading variations (which would be important primarily in the coilcentrated range), and also orientation effects. The deviations in the settling velocity and corresponding solids flux curves for Sets X and X I 1 are believed primarily caused by small initial concentration gradients in the slurries. It is important to notice that the flux curves for Sets X and X I 1 were nearly identical in the high concentration range. This is the second concave region of the flux plot and has a pronounced effect on the batch settling curves expected from such a system. .4n indirect effect of the variation of weight of solids per unit area on the solids settling velocity was the inability to mix slurries of Set X ( w = 33.6 grams per sq. cm.) to uniform initial concentrations. For any given initial concentration the slurry height for Set X \vas three times as high as for Set X I I , be-

Table ll, Constants for Power Series Fit of Experimental Initial Settling Data
u = A,

+ Al(l

e)

+ z-il(l - + A , ( 1 - + A,(1
E)*

e)3

e)l.

cm./sec.
,\ormalized dl

S
SI XI1
srt

XI XI1

0.465798 0.378215 0,3384:33 ( 7 - e ) at >Max. Flux 0.162 0.169 0.179

-2.23693 -0.683673 - 1 ,37672 ( 7 - e ) at InJection Point5 0.313, 0,546 0.325, 0.542 0.337, 0,545

f3.77187 f2.88495 + I ,62275

- 2.20863 - 1 ,66367 +0.11264

...

-0.90223j

Errora Squared 0.25 X l o - ? 0.13 X 0 . 3 4 x 10-3

AVormalized error squared

I= 1

VOL. 2

NO. 3

AUGUST

1963

207

..
& I

g./sq. c m . 33.0 g./sq.cm. Pa 2.46 g./CC.

11.2

----

Figure 4. spheres

REDUCED SOLIDS CONCENTRATiON.(I-E) Experimental solids flux plot for glass

= 11.2 p.Ibq.crn.

. .
o

050-0.15,
0.10

0.075
0.05

120

180

TIME,(sec.)

Figure 5.

Rise of fixed b e d for glass spheres

0.6
a4

< ai D8 0" .06

I

U .04

>

I,

I;

7,

0.4 O 06 Q8 1 . 0 L VOIDAQE Figure 6. Comparison of results with Richardson-Zaki correlation

D

0 . 2

cause the weight of solids per unit area for Set X \\'as three times as great. Mixing effects produced by air agitation apparently Lvere not great enough to lift the solids for Set Y the greater distance required to give a n initially uniform concentration. The concentration of the upper portion of the bed \vas very probably less than calculated. Because the concentration was less. the settling velocity and hence the solids flux (calculated concentration times the actual settling velocity) were greater than they \.iould have been for a n initially uniform concentration. .4s the solids velocity was strongly dependent on solids concentration. small errors in interface concentration due to mixing would produce significant errors in the resulting \Telocity and flux correlations. Particle Segregation and Agglomeration. The theoretical analysis assumes that the particles are all of the same size, shape. and density. For the solids used in this study, this is obviously not the case (see Figure 2). The ratio of the Stokes velocities for particles of diameter (d u) and (d - u) is 1 .SO. For those of (2 2u) and (d - 2u), the ratio is 2.26. Kynch ( 9 ) has suggested that further development of the theory of settling lies in a n attempt to remove the restriction of identical particles. One of the objectives of the present \>.ark was to study the extent to Lvhich this restriction could be relaxed. The theoretical assumption that all particles are identical. \vhich greatly simplifies the mathematics, is equivalent to the assumption that no solids segregate during settling. If little or no segregation occurs? the slurry may be treated as if all particles were identical for the purpose of analysis. Segregation is indicated by a hazy fluid-slurry interface and. for rigid spheres. a nonlinear rate of rise of the fixed bed. Thick slurries settle with a sharp interface despite a range of particle sizes. Kermack. McKendrick, and Ponder ( 8 ) have presented a theoretical analysis of segregation and stability of suspensions. I n the present work, slurries of reduced concentration of 0.30 to 0.55 had distinct slurry-ivater interfaces. If particle size segregation \<'ereto occur to a n appreciable extent in the upper portion of the bed of initial uniform concentration, it would also occur to a n appreciable extent a t the slurry-water interface and cause a n increasingly hazy interface as settling proceeded. This was observed during the initial settling period for slurries of reduced initial concentration of 0.25 and less. Holyever, the rise of the fixed bed was linear down to a concentration of 0.15. For the very dilute runs of Set X I I : reduced initial concentration of 0.10 and less: particle size segregation was pronounced. The slurry-bvater interfaces could not be distinguished. The measured rate of rise of the fixed bed portion shown in Figure 5 \vas not linear as predicted. I n this reduced concentration range. both particle segregation and the presence of a n initial concentration gradient with higher mncentrations at the bottom of the vessel would cause the fixed bed portion to g r o ~ c faster than predicted. The increasing deviation from linearity was especially pronounced in the latter portion of the settling period. However, Ivithout knoiving the actual initial concentration gradients, if an>-. \\.ithin the bed it \vas not possible to isolate these t\vo effects. Additional studies with very closely sized particles are required to separate these t\vo effects. I n summary, no segregation occurred for initial reduced concentration from 0.55 to 0.30, slight segregation from 0.30 to 0.15. and pronounced segregation from 0.15 to 0.05. The lack of appreciable segregation for (1 - e) 2 0.1 5 indicates that the assumption of identical particles can be relaxed considerably. The particle agglomeration effects for slurries of uniform: closely sized, rigid spheres appears to be unimportant for local solids concentrations (1 - E ) greater than 0.35 but may be a

208

l&EC

FUNDAMENTALS

significant effect for d i h t e slurries, However, if for a given slurry and method of dispersion a given concentration has a given orientation (results are reproducible), the effect of particle orientation will automatically be incorporated in the analysis in the experimental determination of the solids flux relationship based on the initial rates obtained in the batch settling tests. Particle agglomeration will be fully discussed in a forth coming article. Comparison of Experimental Results with Those of Other Workers. T h e experimental settling rates for reduced concentrations from 0.15 to 0.55 agree very closely with the theoretical and semitheoretical equations of several other \\.orkers. Figure 6 shows the very close fit with the Richardson-Zaki 172. 73) equation.
U,'&

4,IS(l-)
i.o
0.4

0.8

1.2

1.6

2.0

= e"

(2Oj

'The straight line is drakvn such that n = 4.65, as found by Richardson and Zaki (1-7). T h e Stokes velocity (value of u bvhere E = 1.0) of 0.350 cm. per second is within 1 l y 0 of the value of 0.372 calculated from the effective particle diameter. An excellent fit was also obtained with the theoretical equation proposed by Vand (78) and Hawksley ( 7 ) and experimentally verified by Hanratty and Bandukwala (5).
.02

As predicted by their theory; the points fell very closely on a straight line when plottrd as in Figure 7. T h e extrapolated value of 0.364 cm. per second for u, differs by onl!- 7% from the calculated value. Steinour's (74) equation, 'c = e2e:ip 1-4.19 ( 1
110

,
I

,
1

- E)]

(22j

which is also sh0w.n in Figure -, failed to gi\e the predicted straight line. .\s shown in Figure 8. agieement \\as also good \cith Oliter's ( 7 7 I equation

5
U O

[ I - k ( 1 - e ) ] [I

- 0.75(1 -

e)la]

(23)

u p to a value of kl - e ) = 0.30. after lvhich the points fell above the straight line. Since Oliver's equation was developed for dilute slurries. agreement is not to be expected in the concentrated range. T h e \-alue of u, obtained by extrapolation \vas 0.423 cm. per second compared to 0.372. a difference of 8$. T h e slope, ku0: is 0.765, so that k = 2.28. This is !vel1 \\ithin the range of 2.06 to 2.36 calculated by Oliver ( 7 7 ) using data from the literature. and differs by only 67, from his ..best value" of 2.15, The values for Stokes velocity correspond to effective particle diameters of 63.2, 64.5. and 67.5 microns for the equations of Richardson-Zaki, Vand Hawksley, and Oliver. respectively. This very sjight difference in particle diameter from 66.7 microns illustrates the fact that the Stokes velocity is eKectively a correlating parameter if the solids have a range of particle sizes and/or shapes. S o n e of these equations satisfies the experimental result that the batch settling velocity is zero at a reduced concentration ol 0.64. T h e first t\vo predict zero velocity a t (1 - e ) = 1.0, Lvhile Oliver's equation indicates zero velocity a t (1 - E ) = 0.465. Therefore. despite the excellent fit with the Richardson-Zaki and Vand-Hau.ksley equations over the range 0.15 to 0.55, neither of these e,quations was used. T h e power series

02 03 0.4 REDUCED S O L I D S CONCENTRATlON,(I-E)

Comparison of results with Oliver correlation
VOL. 2
NO. 3
AUGUST 1963 209

ai

Figure 8.

~~

Table 111.

Tabulation of Reduced Solids Flux Equations

1 - E

At
max.

At
injection points

Brinkman (7) Carman-Kozeny ( 2 ) Vand-Hawksley (7, I S ) Happel ( 6 ) Oliver ( 7 7) Richardson-Zaki (72, 73) Steinour (74) Experimental, Set XI1 4.5 (1 - .5)6'3 - 3(1 - e ) ' { - e) 3 - 4.5(1 - 3 ++ 2(1 ! = (1 - e)([1 - 0.75(1 - e)1i3][l - 2.15(1 - e ) ] ) = (1 - e)[i - (1 - 4 1 4 . 6 5 = (1 - e ) ( [ l - (1 - e)]* exp [-4.19 (1 - e ) ] ) = (1 - e)(0.338433 - 1.37672 (1 - e) + 1.62275 (1 - e)* + 0.11264 (1 - ,)a - 0.902235 (1 = =

0.178 (1

0.394
...

- e)

- (1 - )3

0.0

...
(1

0.172 0.198 0.176 0.148 0.179

0.368

,)Si8

.. 0.348 0,312 0.339 0,545

in (1 - E ) , Equation 19, is intended expressly to fit the above boundary condition and the range of concentrations studied. Experimental and Theoretical Flux Plots. Figures 9 and 10 compare the experimentally determined settling velocity curve and the corresponding flux plot for Set XI1 with those calculated from the equations presented in Table 111. The experimental curves have been drawn using the calculated Stokes velocity; hence the reduced velocity extrapolates to 0.864 instead of 1.0. The theoretical equations failed to meet t\ro very important characteristics of the experimental flux plot. First. the theoretical equations predict flux plots which are singly concave and not doubly concave as shown for the experimental results. Second, with the exception of Brinkman's equation, the theoretical equations shown in Figure 10

do not predict zero flux at a reduced concentration of less than 1. It is interesting that all equations give a peak flux a t very nearly the same reduced solids concentration, 0.18, while the magnitude of the peak flux varies by a factor of two. In batch settling of rigid particles the flux must be zero when the particles are resting on one another. T h a t is, for a slurry with a n initial concentration equal to that of the final fixed bed, the settling velocity of the solids relative to the slurry is zero. Martin and McCabe (70) have shown that the maxiI

EXPERIMENTAL-SET XI1

IHAPPEL
EXPERIMENTAL- SET XI1 BRINKMAN HAPPEL RICHARDSON-ZAKI

------

--

-----~
I

STOKES VELOCITY u,-0392 cm/secI

Figure
210

REDUCED SOLIDS CONCENTRATION.( 1-61 9. Equations for solids settling velocity

I&EC FUNDAMENTALS

mum reduced concentrarion to which uniform rigid spherical particles can be packed is 0.7405. Hence a finite batch flux for any concentration greater than this is impossible. The average final reduced concentration for the spherical glass beads studied in this investigation was 0.64. The theoretical .equations failed a t this boundary condition because the problem has been approached through analysis of the fluid, while the forces acting on the solids, in addition to those caused by the moving fluid, have k e n neglected. I t has been assumed that the entire weight (of the solids is borne by the fluid. However, when rigid particles rest on one another. as they must a t their maximum concentration, this is not true. The equations of Brinkman and Oliver were the only ones which predicted a flux of zero a t a reduced concentration less than 1. However, Brinkman felt that his model was "too schematic," and Oliver's equation was developed for dilute slurries. l ' h e theoretical equations also failed to produce the second concavity in the region of high solids concentration. This second concave region h.as a pronounced effect on the settling curves of a slurry. as will be shown. This concave region was definitely found to exist for the slurries of glass beads studied in this work. Tor); (77) has noted a second concave region for slurries of calcium carbonate and has cited additional evidence from the literature to support the doubly concave flux plot. The prediction of the entire batch settling curves utilizing the equations developed for the velocity of planes of constant concentration and the flux plot based on initial settling rate data will be given in subsequent publications. Predicted and experimental batch settling curves will be compared and the results shown to validate Kynch's basic hypothesis. The confirmation that the flux curve is doubly concave is to be found in the analysis of the bai:ch settling curves given in these subsequent papers.
Conclusions

Acknowledgment

Audrey Tory measured the particle size distribution. An AEC fellowship (E.P.S.) and the financial support of the Purdue School of Chemical Engineering are gratefully acknowledged.
Nomenclature

A A,
c

= cross-sectional area of thickener, sq. cm. = constant determined from power series fit = = = = = = =

c/lp,

2
de

G Q
S
t

of experimental data solids concentration, grams per cc. reduced concentration = (1 - e): dimensionless particle diameter, microns mean particle diameter, microns effective particle diameter = Zd3,/Zd2,microns total solids flux = c ( u o), grams,'sq. cm.-sec. volumetric underflow rate, cc. per second batch solids flux = c u , grams/sq. cm.-sec.

S//pau, = reduced batch solids flux = ( ~ j p , ) dimensionless ~ ,

u,

Batch and continuous thickening may be regarded as the process of propagating concentration changes (continuity waves) upLvard from the bottom of the settling vessel owing to doivnivard movement of the solids. A proper choice of coordinates in defining t.he solids flux clarifies the relationship between batch and continuous thickening and allows the same basic analysis to be applied to both. The equations for the movement of planes of constant concentration can be derived from continuity considerations. Solids having a Gaussian distribution of particle diameters with (r,'J) = 0.1 showed no appreciable segregation a t reduced concentrations of 0.15 or higher. Therefore, the theoretical requirement of identical particles can be relaxed considerably. Experimental results for the batch settling of rigid spheres in lvater were in excellent agreement with previous workers for reduced concentrations from 0.15 to 0.55. Application of the boundary condition that the solids flux must be zero for the packed bed. which occur; a t a solids fraction less than 1.0 (0.64 for rigid spheres), gave a doubly concave flux curve. I n subsequent papers of this series, the experimental batch settling curves will be shown to be in complete qualitative and close quantitative agreement with the curves predicted from the doubly concave flux plot and the assumption of "ideal" slurry behavior.

time, sec. U = downward velocity of the solids relative to the slurry, cm. per second = Stokes velocity, cm. per second uu = reduced settling velocity, dimensionless u/u0 = propagation velocity of plane of constant concentrap tion, cm. per second = propagation velocity of concentration discontinuity, 6 cm. per second 1' = downward velocity of slurry relative to thickener, cm. per second L ( i = weight of solids per unit area, grams per sq. cm. z = height, cm. b = differential operator, partial E = voidage P = microns = solids density, grams, cc. ps pz = fluid density, grams/cc. SUBSCRIPTS Q = above a concentration discontinuity b = below a concentration discontinuity a = final value a t infinite time SUPERSCRIPT * = pertaining to batch settling ( D = 0)
=

literature Cited

(1) Brinkman? H. C.. .4$$l. Sci. Res. A l , 27 (1947). (2) Carman, P. C., "Flow of Gases through Porous Media," Chap. VII, Butterworths, London, 1956. (3) De Haas, R., M. S. thesis, Purdue University, 1962. (4) Fitch, B.. '.Sedimentation Process Fundamentals." A.I.M.M.E. Meeting, S e w York. N.Y., Frbruary 1962. (5) Hanrattv, T. J., Bandukwala, .%.. A.1.Ch.E.J. 3, 293 (1957). (6) Happel, J.: Ibid., 4, 197 (1958). (7) Hawksley, P. G. \V., "Some Aspects of Fluid Flow," Edward Arnold, London, 1951. (8) Kermack, \V. 0.. McKendrick, X., Ponder, E., Roy. Soc. Edinburgh. Proc. 49, 170 (1929). (9) Kynch, G . J., Trans. FQrQdQy Soc. 48, 166 (1952). (10) Martin, J. J., McCabe, \V. L., Monrad, C. C., Chem. Engr. Progr. 47, 91 (1951). (11) Oliver, D. R., Chem. En,?. Sci. 15, 230 (1961). (12) Richardson, J. F., Zaki, \V. N., Ibid., 3, 65 (1954). (13) Richardson, J. F.; Zaki, \V. N.: Trans. Inst. Chem. Engrs. 32, 35 (1954). (14) Steinour. H.. Ind. Enp. Chem. 36. 618 (1944). (l5j Stroupe, E., 'M.S. t h h s , Purduk Uniiersit;, 1962. (16) Talmage, I$-. P., Fitch, E. B., Ind. Eng. Chem. 47, 38 (1955). (17) Tory. E. M., Ph.D. thesis, Purdue Lniversitv, 1961. (18) Vand, V., J . Phys. Colloid Chem. 52, 277 (1948). (19) Verschoor, H.. A$$l. Sci.Res. A2, 155 (1949) RECEIVED for review August 16, 1962 ACCEPTED March 13, 1963

VOL. 2

NO. 3

AUGUST 1963

211