2.2.1. Principle of agglomeration and depolymerization of membrane hybrids
As shown in
Figure 6, the residual film was not recovered earlier during the operation. It was entangled and mixed with straw in the soil. The soil particles and liquid droplets combined to form a strong wet clod and adhered to each other via the straw and the film. When the water in the soil was evaporated, the soil, straw, and film were agglomerated into a whole. The recovered residual film was mixed with a large amount of this film-soil-cotton stalk mixture agglomerate [
12].
As the device was rotated, the residual film–impurity mixture collided with the wall of the drum screen, and the agglomerates were depolymerized, thus achieving the effect of separating the residual film and impurities. When the maximum collision force,
Fcmax, was greater than the maximum viscous force,
Fvn, the agglomerates were broken. The relationship between them was given using Eq. (1):
Soil, straw, and residual film agglomerates collided with the wall of the trommel screen inside the device. The maximum collision force in the collision was expressed using Eq. (2):
where
d1 and
d2 are particle size (m); when
d2 was much larger than
d1, it was considered to be a collision between the agglomerate and wall;
k is the elastic deformation coefficient of particle (Pa);
ρp is the density of agglomerate (kg/m
3);
v is the relative collision velocity of agglomerate and wall of drum sieve (m/s);
ν is Poisson's ratio; and
E is Young's modulus of elasticity (Pa).
When the agglomerate collided with the wall, the comprising particles tended to move relative to each other and were subjected to both tangential and normal viscous forces. The distance between the agglomerate and the wall was rather small; thus, the tangential viscous force was much smaller than the normal viscous force. Therefore, the tangential viscous force was excluded when considering the force of the collision process [
13]. The normal viscous force relationship was given using Eq. (3):
where
μ is the dynamic viscosity (N·s/m
2);
vn is the normal relative motion velocity of the agglomerate and the wall (m/s);
h is the distance from the surface of the agglomerate to the surface of the trommel screen (m); and
R* is the folding radius, where
and
R1 and
R2 are the equivalent radii of the agglomerate and the wall of the trommel screen, respectively;
R2 can be increased to infinity.
Eqs. (2) and (3) were used to obtain the collision force between the agglomerates; the surface of the drum screen increased with increase in the relative collision velocity. Therefore, among the film-hybrid wind separators, enhancing the relative collision velocity between the residual film–impurity mixture and the trommel screen facilitated disaggregation.
2.2.2. Fluid-solid coupling simulation
Further, we investigated the maximum collision force inside the trommel screen, that is, we determined where the maximum relative collision velocity occurred. The operation of the membrane miscellaneous wind separator was simulated using a combination of EDEM and Fluent software.
Pre-processing of fluid-solid coupling simulation
SolidWorks 3D modeling software was used to model the structure of the membrane miscellaneous wind separator. Flow field simulation as well as the discrete element simulation model were also used to establish the model. The simplified flow field simulation model was imported into ICEM software for mesh drawing. The rotating trommel screen of the film miscible wind separator was located inside the stationary sealing hood; thus, the two fluid domains were plotted separately when the mesh was drawn. The screen holes on the trommel screen were named as interface surfaces. Data exchange between the two fluid domains was realized, and the delineated mesh model was imported into Fluent software. The standard k-ε model was selected for computations, and SIMPLEC algorithm was used for solving equations. The internal flow field of the film-hybrid wind separator was simulated, and the simulation results were exported to a .cgns format file.
The results of the discrete element model and the flow field simulation were imported into EDEM software. The imported flow field simulation data were identified using an API function. The operating parameters of each structure of the film miscellaneous wind separator were set separately to ensure that the coupled simulation results were consistent with the test results, and the bench test material was followed. A three-dimensional model of residual film, straw, and soil particles was established. Parameters for material contact and physical characteristics were obtained using the drainage method via tensile tests with a mass spectrometer, a mechanical testing machine, friction and wear tests, and literature review [14-19]. Intrinsic parameters of the materials are shown in
Table 1.
The corresponding material intrinsic parameters were set in Creator parameter setting interface in the discrete element simulation software EDEM. A particle model of residual film, straw and soil is established as shown in
Figure 7. The Bonding V2 contact model is added to simulate the flexible characteristics of the residual film. The residual film particle arrangement law and the deformation of the residual film particles after the force are shown in
Figure 7(a) and (b). The model could represent the formation of flexible bonding bonds between two bonded spherical particles. The flexible characteristics of the residual film were restored to the maximum extent. Since the volume fraction of the residual film inside the device is small, the effect of the thickness of the residual film on the flow field and the motion of the residual film is ignored to reduce the computational efficiency. To reduce the calculation volume and improve the simulation efficiency, the effect of the thickness of the residual film on the flow field inside the separation device and the motion of the residual film is ignored. The residual film particle diameter is increased and the residual film particle density is decreased to keep the residual film mass constant.
Particle model authenticity verification test
The stacking angle validation test was designed to verify the accuracy of the basic physical and contact parameters of the proposed particle model, as shown in
Figure 8(a). For the stacking angle test, a transparent bottomless cylinder with an inner diameter of 70 mm, a thickness of 1.5 mm, and a height of 200 mm was used to fill the transparent cylinder with material in proportion to the composition of the residual film–impurity mixture, and the cylinder was slowly lifted by clamping it with a lifting device. After all the materials flowed out from the bottom of the cylinder and formed a stable pile, vertical photographs were taken to measure the pile angle and the test was repeated 10 times. To perform the stacking angle simulation test, EDEM software was used to model the bottomless cylinder according to its size specifications. After generating a certain amount of particles to fill the cylinder as a particle plant, a slow rise speed was set for the cylinder, and the simulated particles flowed out from the bottom of the cylinder to finally form a stable pile of particles, and the pile angle of the pile of particles of residual film–impurity mixture was measured, and the average value was taken to compare with the pile angle of the actual physical test. The results show that the stacking angle of the actual test is 39.1° and the stacking angle of the simulation test is 36.2°, with a relative error of 7.4%. The simulated stacking angle matches well with the actual test stacking angle, which indicates that the contact parameters of each component of the film-hybrid mixture are set reasonably and can be used for working condition simulation.
At the same time, suspension characteristics of the residual film particles using the developed contact model were investigated. The residual film particles were used as the simulation material. Suspension simulation tests were conducted to compare with the suspension tests on the test bench. As shown in
Figure 8(b), the radii of the corresponding circular cross-sections from low to high were 100, 135, and 155 mm because the flow rates through the different cross-sections were the same. The flow relationship was given using Eq. (4):
where
rf is the material suspension position circular cross-section radius (mm);
rm is the thermal anemometer position circular cross-section radius (mm);
vf is the material suspension speed (m/s); and
vm is the thermal anemometer reading.
The relationship between different circular cross-section radius and the corresponding position suspension speed was deduced using Eq. (5):
At same test conditions, the speed of the fan was controlled using the controller. The suspension velocity of the residual film in both the simulation tests and the test bench suspension tests was in the range 2.92–5.49 m/s. This indicates that the suspension characteristics of the residual film particles in the simulation were similar to those of the residual film material used in the test bench. Therefore, the residual film particles were in agreements with the simulation results.
Analysis of simulation results
The mass ratio composition of the residual film–impurity mixture was 43% soil, 21%, straw and 36% residual film, and the feeding rate was set to 200 kg/h. Particle factory were added to the simulation software to produce particles in this ratio. The simulation process is presented in
Figure 9(a). The starting point was toward the left side of the trommel screen. Monitoring areas (thickness = 300 mm) were designed adjacent to each other. The maximum collision force between the residual film–impurity mixture and the screen surface of the trommel screen was derived for each region at different times. The line graph shown in
Figure 9(b) plots location vs. maximum force on the screen surface of the tumbler screen. The maximum collision force occurred in the area shown in the red solid box in
Figure 9(a). Further, it was determined that the maximum collision force occurred in the lower end of the red solid box, which was where the material first collided with the drum screen surface when it was fed into the device. The magnitude of the collision force in
Figure 9(b) shows that a very small force was generated by the collision between the residual film–impurity mixture and the right side of the trommel screen. When the residual film–impurity mixture was not successfully depolymerized in the red solid line box (
Figure 9(a)), it was challenging to depolymerize with the backward movement of the device. This caused a sudden increase in the impurity content in the membrane collection box. Therefore, to ensure effective depolymerization of the residual film–impurity mixture, in-depth analysis of the material feeding to the stage of collision with the trommel screen is required.
The flow-solid coupling simulation test can thus accurately represent the force of the trommel screen to some extent. Analysis of the forces at different locations of the trommel screen at different times determined the location of the maximum collision force. Therefore, to ensure the effective decoupling of the residual film–impurity mixture, an in-depth analysis of the material feeding to the stage of collision with the trommel screen is crucial.