Sunteți pe pagina 1din 7

# High Temperature, Vol. 39, No. 1, 2001, pp. 104–110. Translated from Teplofizika Vysokikh Temperatur, Vol.

## HEAT AND MASS TRANSFER

AND PHYSICAL GASDYNAMICS

## A Comparison of Two Approaches to Derivation

of Boundary Conditions for Continuous Equations
of Particle Motion in Turbulent Flow
V. M. Alipchenkov*, L. I. Zaichik*, and O. Simonin**
* IVTAN (Institute of High Temperatures) Scientific Association, Russian Academy of Sciences,
Moscow, 127412 Russia
** Institut de Mechanique des Fluides, Toulouse, 31400 France

Abstract—The paper deals with the boundary conditions for continuous equations of conservation of mass,
momentum, and turbulent stresses of the disperse phase in a two-phase flow. The boundary conditions and some
assumptions made in deriving them are verified by comparison with the results of numerical solution of the
kinetic equation for the probability density function (PDF) of the particle velocity.

## INTRODUCTION KINETIC EQUATION FOR PDF

The derivation of the boundary conditions for equa- We will treat the motion of particles in the wall
tions of particle motion is one of the most important region of a turbulent fluid flow. The kinetic equation for
the PDF of the velocity of particles was derived in [3, 9]
and complex problems in the theory of two-phase tur- in modeling the turbulent field of velocity of a carrier
bulent flows. Such boundary conditions must be flow by a Gaussian random process with a known auto-
derived as a result of analysis of the interaction of par- correlation function. Because the velocity field in the
ticles with the walls bounding a two-phase flow. A vicinity of the wall is characterized by small values of
more detailed description of the particle/wall interac- time scales, this random process may be interpreted as
tion may be made using the Lagrangian trajectory δ-correlated in time. This is permissible on condition of
method of modeling, (for example, ). The use of the smallness of the time of interaction of particles with
Eulerian continuum method of modeling leads to some energy-containing turbulent vortexes (Lagrangian
loss of information about details of the particle/surface microscale calculated along the particle trajectory) TLp
interaction in determining the parameters of the dis- compared with the time of dynamic relaxation of parti-
perse phase in the wall region as a result of summation cle τu. Note that the opposite limiting case of small par-
of momenta, energy, and other parameters of incident ticles (τu ! TLp) is of no great interest from the stand-
and reflected flows of particles . point of deriving the boundary condition, because, in
this case, no-slip conditions take place much as in the
In order to derive the boundary conditions for the case of fluid flow. Therefore, the kinetic equation in the
equation of motion for the disperse phase within the wall region is represented as
continuous two-fluid approach, one needs, as in the
case of deriving the boundary conditions in the kinetic ∂P ∂P ∂  -----------------
- + F k P
Uk – v k
------ + v k -------- + ---------
theory of rarefied gases, to determine the PDF of the ∂t ∂x k ∂ v k  τu 
velocity of particles in the wall region. In order to solve (1)
∂ P
2
this problem, two approaches are usually used at T Lp
present. The first approach is based on solving the = -------
- 〈 u ' u ' 〉 -----------------
-,
τu
2 i k
∂v i∂v k
kinetic equation for the PDF by the perturbation
method [3–5], and the second approach is based on the where t is the time, xk is a space coordinate, vk is the
use of a preassigned PDF in the form of binormal dis- particle velocity, Uk is the averaged velocity of carrier
tribution [6–8]. This paper contains the results of com- flow, Fk is the acceleration due to an external force (for
parison between these two approaches to the derivation
of the boundary conditions for the mean and pulsation example, gravity), and 〈 u 'i u 'k 〉 denotes the Reynolds tur-
velocity of the disperse phase, as well as of comparison bulent stresses in fluid.
with numerical solutions of the equation for the PDF of Equation (1) has the form of the Fokker–Planck
particles in the wall layer of a turbulent flow. equation in the theory of Brownian motion and is valid

## 0018-151X/01/3901-0104\$25.00 © 2001 MAIK “Nauka /Interperiodica”

A COMPARISON OF TWO APPROACHES 105

for heavy particles whose density exceeds considerably τ u v 'y  v 'x  d 〈 v 'x 〉
2 2
τ u v 'y
that of the continuous carrier phase. In this case, the × 1 + ---------------
-  1 – ------------ ---------------- + ---------------
-
6 〈 v 'x 〉  〈 v 'x 〉  dy
2
6 〈 v 'y 〉
2 2
only substantial interfacial force acting from the ambi-
ent medium on a moving particle is that of aerodynamic
 v 'y  d 〈 v 'y 〉 v 'x v 'y 〈 v 'x v 'y〉
2
drag. The particle relaxation time τu may depend on the
2
(3)
relative velocity between the particle and medium. ×  3 – ------------ ---------------- + ------------------------------
- ,
 〈 v 'y 〉  dy
2 2
〈 v 'x 〉 〈 v 'y 〉
2
Therefore, Eq. (1) is not confined to the effective range
of Stokes’ law and is valid at high values of the Stokes 1
number of flow past the particle. In addition, the Φ = ∫ Pdv, V i = ---- v i P dv,
Φ ∫
particle size is assumed to be small compared with Kol-
1
mogorov’s microscale; however, the particles are
assumed to be sufficiently inertial to satisfy the condi- Φ ∫
〈 v 'i v 'j〉 = ---- 〈 ( v i – V i ) ( v j – V j )〉 P dv.

tion of τu > TLp. And, finally, the volume concentration Here, Φ and Vi denote the averaged volume concen-
of the disperse phase is likewise assumed to be low tration and the averaged velocity of the disperse phase,
enough to disregard interparticle collisions. respectively; and 〈 v 'i v 'k 〉 denotes the turbulent stresses
The particle/wall interaction is described by the fol- due to the involvement of particles in the pulsation
lowing function: motion of a carrier flow. Expression (3) may be used to
describe the velocity distribution of particles both for
the entire flow and for particles incident on the wall,
π w = χδ ( v x2 – φ x v x1 )δ ( v y2 + φ y v y1 ), (2) i.e., P1(vy < 0) = P(vy). According to Eq. (2), the veloc-
ity distribution of reflected particles is
χ v –v
------x, ---------y .
relating the values of the particle velocity before colli-
P 2 ( v x, v y ) = ----------P
2 1 φ
(4)
sion with the wall (subscript 1) with those after colli- φxφy x φy 
sion (subscript 2). Here, δ is the delta function, and x
and y are coordinates in the directions parallel and per- The boundary condition for some quantity ψ may be
pendicular to the wall. The reflection coefficient χ in found as a result of equating the flow of this quantity in
Eq. (2) characterizes the precipitation effect and is the wall region to the sum of incident and reflected
equal to the probability of recoil and return to the flow flows,
∞ 0 ∞
of a particle that collided with the wall. For particles
which are fully absorbed by the surface, χ = 0; in the
absence of precipitation, χ = 1. The collision coeffi-
∫ ψ v P dv y y = ∫ ψ v P dv + ∫ ψ v P dv .
y 1 y y 2 y (5)
–∞ –∞ 0
cients φx and φy describe the effect of the loss of We assume ψ = 1 in Eq. (5) to derive the expression
momentum during particle/wall interaction. For sim- for the particle velocity Vy (precipitation rate) normal to
plicity, collisions of particles with the surface are the wall,
treated disregarding slip and rotation; however, this
2
analysis may be readily extended to cover a more gen- 2 〈 v 'y 〉 1
eral case including the known model with rotation of V y = – A ( 1 – χ ) ---------------
- , A = ------------. (6)
π 1+χ
particles.
On substituting ψ = vx into Eq. (5), we find the
boundary condition for the velocity Vx parallel to the
SOLUTION OF EQUATION FOR PDF wall,
BY THE PERTURBATION METHOD 2 2
τ u 〈 v 'y 〉 dV x 2 〈 v 'y 〉
----------------- --------- = Bχ ( 1 – φ x ) --------------- -V x,
In [3–5], the boundary conditions for the mean and 2 dy π (7)
pulsation velocities of the disperse phase are found 2
from the solution of Eq. (1) by the perturbation method. B = ----------------------------------------.
( 1 + χ ) ( 1 + χφ x )
This solution is given in the form of an asymptotic
expansion using an equilibrium Gaussian distribution 2 2
The substitution of ψ = v 'x and ψ = v 'y into Eq. (5)
as the first term. In view of the first two terms, this
expansion is represented as leads to the boundary conditions for the pulsation
2 2
velocity 〈 v 'x 〉 and 〈 v 'y 〉,

Φ  v 'x
2
v 'y 
2 2
τ u 〈 v 'y 〉 d 〈 v 'x 〉
2
 1 – χφ 2 〈 v 'y 〉 
2 2
P = --------------------------------------- exp  – ---------------
- – -
--------------- ----------------- ---------------- =  V y + -----------------x-2 ---------------
2
- 〈 v 'x 〉 , (8)
4π 〈 v 'x 〉 〈 v 'y 〉
2 2 2  2 〈 v '
x
2
〉 2 〈 v y 
'
2
〉 3 dy  1 + χφ x π 

## HIGH TEMPERATURE Vol. 39 No. 1 2001

106 ALIPCHENKOV et al.

## BINORMAL REPRESENTATION FOR PDF

 1 – χφ y 2 〈 v 'y 〉 
2 2
d 〈 v 'y 〉
2
τ u ---------------- =  V y + 2 ------------------2 ---------------- . (9) In [6–8], the boundary conditions were derived
dy  1 + χφ y π  using the binormal velocity distribution of particles on
the surface. The velocity of particles moving towards
The boundary conditions (6)–(9) are valid only for a the wall and away from the wall are described by the
close-to-equilibrium flow, i.e., for the case of an insig- distributions
nificant deviation of the PDF from the Gaussian veloc-
ity distribution. This requirement places a fairly serious  vy 
2

## 2 P ( v y < 0 ) = N 1 exp  – ----------------

- ,
limitation of Vy ! 〈 v 'y 〉1/2, according to which the mean  2 〈 v y〉 1
2

## value of velocity normal to the surface must be much (13)

less than the pulsation component. Consequently, in  vy 
2

accordance with Eq. (6), the reflection coefficient χ P ( v y > 0 ) = N 2 exp  – ----------------
- .
 2 〈 v y〉 2
2
must not differ greatly from unity.
By simplifying the appropriate differential equation It must be emphasized that the distribution given by
following from Eq. (1), one can derive the following Eq. (13) depends on the complete normal component of
simple expression for the tangential stress of inertial velocity as distinct from the expansion given by Eq. (3),
particles (τu @ TLp) in the wall region: which is a function of the pulsation component of
velocity. The coefficients N1 and N2, as well as the mean
2
τ u 〈 v 'y 〉 dV x squares of velocity of incident and reflected particles,
〈 v 'x v 'y〉 = – ----------------- --------- . (10) are determined from relation (4) and the normalization
2 dy
conditions
In view of Eq. (10), the boundary condition (7) is 0 ∞
represented in the form of a relation for the tangential
stress of the disperse phase on the wall, Φ = Φ1 + Φ2 , Φ1 = ∫ P dv , y Φ2 = ∫ P dv . y
–∞ 0
2
2χ ( 1 – φ x ) 2 〈 v 'y 〉 Hence follows
〈 v 'x v 'y〉 = – ---------------------------------------
- ---------------
-V x. (11)
( 1 + χ ) ( 1 + χφ x ) π Φφ y χ
2
N 1 = -------------
- ----------------- , N 2 = -----2 N 1 ,
In the limiting case of inertialess particles (τu 0), χ + φ y π 〈 v 2y〉 1 φy (14)
the “no-slip” conditions
〈v y〉 φy 〈 y〉 1 .
2 2 2
= v
2 2
V x = 〈 v 'x 〉 = 〈 v 'y 〉 = 0 Note further that, in fact, it is necessary to determine
follow from Eqs. (7)–(9). only the PDF of the particles incident on the wall,
because the PDF of the reflected particles may be
In the absence of precipitation (χ = 1) and in the related to the distribution of particles moving towards
presence of an absolutely elastic interaction of particles the wall by relation (4).
with the wall (φx = φy = 1), the boundary conditions (7)– Equations (13) and (14) yield the following expres-
(9) transform to sion for the precipitation rate:
2 2
dV d 〈 v 'x 〉 d 〈 v 'y 〉 2φ y 〈 v y〉
2
---------x = ---------------
- = ---------------
- = 0. V y = –( 1 – χ ) ---------------------------------------------
-, (15)
dy dy dy π ( 1 + χφ y ) ( φ y + χ )
Note that the boundary condition (6) was first where 〈 v y 〉 is the perfect mean square of velocity of
2
derived by Razi Naqvi et al.  for Brownian parti-
cles. In addition, the following expression for the dep- particles on the wall,
osition rate was derived in  on the basis of the Φ 1 〈 v y〉 1 + Φ 2 〈 v y〉 2
2 2
2
〈 v y〉 = V y + 〈 v 'y 〉 = -----------------------------------------------
2 2
assumption of a normal velocity distribution of parti- -
cles: Φ
φ y ( 1 + χφ y ) 2
2 〈 v 'y 〉
2 - 〈 v y〉 1 .
= ---------------------------
V y = – f ---------------
-, (12) φy + χ
π
A comparison of expressions (6) and (15) reveals
where f is the fraction of particles moving towards the differences of two types between them. First, according
wall (it was assumed in  that f = 1/2). It is obvious to Eq. (6), Vy is a function of χ alone, while, in accor-
that formulas (6) and (12) prove to be identical for χ = dance with Eq. (15), Vy depends on two parameters χ
(1 – f )/(1 + f ) = 1/3. and φy , which appears to be more substantiated from

## HIGH TEMPERATURE Vol. 39 No. 1 2001

A COMPARISON OF TWO APPROACHES 107

A B
4
1.6 5
6 4
7
1.2 3
2 3
3 4
0.8 1 2 5

1 1 2
0.4 6
0 0.5 χ

0 0.5 χ
Fig. 1. The coefficient A (1) in Eq. (6) and (2, 3) in Eq. (16)
as a function of the parameters χ and φy. (2) φy = 0.5, Fig. 2. The coefficient B (1, 2) in Eq. (7) and (3–6) in
(3) φy = 1; (4–7) solutions of Eq. (28): (4) ε = 0.01, φy = 1; Eq. (20) as a function of the parameters χ, φx, and φy: (1) φx =
(5) 0.01, 0.5; (6) 0.1, 1; (7) 0.1, 0.5. 0, (2) φx = 1; (3) φx = 0, φy = 0.5; (4) 1, 0.5; (5) 0, 1; (6) 1, 1.

## the physical standpoint. Second, formula (6) predicts gives

the dependence of Vy on the pulsation component of
1 – χφ 2φ y ( φ y + χ ) 〈 v y〉
2
2
energy 〈 v 'y 〉, while Eq. (15) points to the dependence 〈 v x v y〉 = – -------------------x- ---------------------------------------
-V x. (18)
φ y + χφ x π ( 1 + χφ y )
of Vy on the total energy 〈 v For comparing these for-
y 〉.
2

mulas, we will write Eq. (15) in the form We use the correlation 〈vxvy〉 = VxVy + 〈 v 'x v 'y 〉 and
Eq. (15) to find from Eq. (18) the pulsation component
2 of tangential stress on the wall,
2 〈 v 'y 〉
V y = – A ( 1 – χ ) ---------------
-,
π 〈 v 'x v 'y〉
(19)
1 – χφ 1 – χ 2φ y ( φ y + χ ) 〈 v y〉
2
φy
1/2
= –  -------------------x- – -------------- ---------------------------------------
-V x.
A = ---------------------------------------------------------------, (16)  φ y + χφ x φ y + χ π ( 1 + χφ y )
( φ y + χ ) ( 1 + χφ y ) Γ
1/2 1/2 1/2

## In view of Eq. (10), we derive from Eq. (19) the fol-

2(1 – χ) φy
2 lowing boundary condition for Vx:
Γ = 1 – ---------------------------------------------
-.
π ( 1 + χφ y ) ( φ y + χ ) 2 2
τ u 〈 v 'y 〉 dV x 2 〈 v 'y 〉
----------------- --------- = Bχ ( 1 – φ x ) ---------------
-V x,
Figure 1 gives the coefficient A as a function of χ. 2 dy π
(20)
One can see that formulas (6) and (16) give close values ( 1 + φ y )φ y
1/2
for Vy with the parameters χ and φy differing little from B = ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1/2
-Γ .
( φ y + χφ x ) ( φ y + χ ) ( 1 + χφ y )
1/2 1/2
unity. The difference between Eqs. (6) and (16)
increases as χ and φy decrease, and their ratio reaches a Figure 2 gives a comparison of expressions (7) and
value of π/ ( π – 2 ) at χ = 0. (20). One can see that the dependence of the coefficient
B on χ is qualitatively the same as A(χ), i.e., the values
In order to find the tangential stress on the wall, an determined by Eqs. (7) and (20) coincide in the equilib-
assumption is made of the statistical independence of rium case (χ = φy = 1), and the difference between them
distributions in vx and vy in fractions of incident and increases as χ and φy decrease.
reflected particles. Then, the total tangential stress is Further, by using Eq. (13) to describe the PDF, one
can express triple correlation of the particle velocity in
Φ 1 V x1 V y1 + Φ 2 V x2 V y2 terms of the second moment,
〈 v x v y〉 = -----------------------------------------------------. (17)
Φ
8 2 3/2
〈 v y〉 = – C --- 〈 v y〉 ,
3

## The substitution of Eq. (13) into Eq. (17) in view of π

the relations (21)
( 1 – χφ y ) ( φ y + χ )
2 1/2
C = -----------------------------------------------
-.
V x = ( Φ 1 V x1 + Φ 2 V x2 )/Φ, V x2 = φ x V x1 φ y ( 1 + χφ y )
1/2 3/2

## HIGH TEMPERATURE Vol. 39 No. 1 2001

108 ALIPCHENKOV et al.

## P In view of Eqs. (22) and (24), Eq. (23) produces the

(‡) following approximation for the third moment of parti-
0.4 cle velocity:
2
2 d 〈 v y〉
2
0.3 3 〈 v y〉 = – Dτ u 〈 v y〉 --------------
3
-
dy
0.2
(25)
2T Lp 2 
+ V y  D 〈 v y〉 + ----------
- 〈 u 'y 〉 .
2
 τu 
0.1
1
Expression (25), where 〈 v y 〉 is determined with the
3
0
3 aid of Eq. (21), may be interpreted as the boundary con-
(b)
dition for the second moment.

## 2 1 NUMERICAL SOLUTION OF EQUATION

FOR PDF
We will treat the solution of kinetic equation (1) in
1 2 a steady-state one-dimensional formulation at Uy =
Fy = 0,
3
∂P ∂ v y P T Lp 2 ∂ 2 P
0 τ u v y ------ = ------------
- + -------- 〈 u 'y 〉 ---------2 . (26)
–2 –1 0 1 w ∂y ∂v y τu ∂v y

Fig. 3. The distribution of velocity for the cases of (a) com- In order to simplify the analysis, we will assume the
plete adsorption and (b) inelastic collision: (a) χ = 0, φy = 1; time of interaction of particles with turbulent vortexes
(b) χ = 1, φy = 0.5; (1) Y = 0, (2) Y = 0.5, (3) Y = 1. TLp and the intensity of turbulent pulsations of velocity
2
of fluid 〈 u 'y 〉 in Eq. (26) to be constant quantities. The
assumptions made are based on the fact that the fairly
On the other hand, the value of 〈 v y 〉 in the wall
3
inertial particles react weakly to the characteristics of
region may be determined from the conservation equa- flow in the wall region, and their behavior is largely
tion for the third moment. defined by the average (over the entire region) charac-
teristics of flow. In this formulation, Eq. (26) was
With Uy = Fy = 0, Eq. (1) yields the following equa- solved by Swailes and Reeks  for the calculation of
tions for the first and third moments of the wall-normal precipitation of particles from a turbulent flow. Our
particle velocity component: numerical solutions are directed to verify the assump-
tions made in deriving the above-identified boundary
dΦ 〈 v y〉 Φ
2
conditions. Therefore, Eq. (26) is solved with the
-------------------- + ----V y = 0, (22)
dy τu boundary condition on the surface corresponding to
relations (2) and (4) for the description of the “parti-
cle/wall” interaction,
dΦ 〈 v y〉 3Φ  3 2T Lp
4
-------------------- + ------- 〈 v y〉 – -----------V y 〈 u 'y 〉 = 0.
2
(23)
τ  τ  χ
P ( v y > 0 ) = -----2 P  – ------y for y = 0.
dy u u v
(27)
The fourth correlation moment of velocity in φy  φy 
Eq. (23) is expressed in terms of the second moments,
according to Eq. (13), as Equation (26) is represented in a dimensionless
form,
2 2
χ(1 – φy ) ∂P ∂wP ∂ P
2
w ------ = ε  ----------- + ---------2 ,
〈v
2 2 y
y〉 = 3D 〈 v y〉 ,
4
D = 1 + -----------------------------
-. (24) Y = --- ,
φ y ( 1 + χφ y )
2
∂Y  ∂w ∂w  h
(28)
v τ u  1/2
w = ------y  -------
For particles fully absorbed by the surface (χ = 0) or 2 1/2 h
- , u0 = 〈 u 'y 〉 , ε = ----------------------------
-.
in the case of elastic collisions (φy = 1), when D = 1, u 0  T Lp u 0 ( τ u T Lp )
1/2
relation (24) assumes the equality to zero of the fourth-
order cumulant, i.e., transforms to the well-known Here, Y is the dimensionless distance from the wall,
hypothesis of Millionshchikov of the correlation w is the dimensionless normal component of the parti-
between the fourth and second moments. cle velocity, h is the thickness of the wall layer being

## HIGH TEMPERATURE Vol. 39 No. 1 2001

A COMPARISON OF TWO APPROACHES 109

## C the wall is described by the normal distribution

2
P = ---------- exp  – ------ for – ∞ < w < ∞.
1 w
1
2π  2
3
4 In the limiting case of ε 0, corresponding to
0.5 5 very inertial particles, the solution of Eq. (28) with
6 boundary conditions (27) and (29) is provided by the
2 binormal distribution (13),
2
P ( w < 0 ) = ---------- exp  – ------ ,
1 w
2π  2
0 0.5 χ (30)
χ  w2 
Fig. 4. The coefficient C in Eq. (21) (1, 2) as a function of P ( w > 0 ) = ----------------2 exp  – --------2 .
the parameters χ and φy. (3) ε = 0.01, φy = 1; (4) 0.01, 0.5; 2πφ y  2φ y
(5) 0.1, 1; (6) 0.1, 0.5.
For small but finite values of the parameter ε, the
solution (30) satisfies Eq. (28) in the entire prediction
D region except for a narrow boundary layer in the vicin-
ity of w = 0.
1 In order to verify the assumptions made in deriving
1.4 the boundary conditions, the numerical solutions of
3 Eq. (28) were obtained for values of the parameter ε
4 equal to 0.01 and 0.1 for the absorbing (or reflecting)
1.2 5 and elastic (or inelastic) boundaries, respectively. Fig-
6
ure 3 gives the distribution of the particle velocity for
2 the cases of complete adsorption of particles and
1.0
inelastic collision. Figures 1, 4, and 5 give the predicted
values of the coefficients A, C, and D, respectively. It is
obvious that the results of numerical solution of
0 0.5 χ Eq. (28) for all values of ε are in good agreement with
the values determined by formulas (16), (21), and (24)
Fig. 5. The coefficient D in Eq. (24) (1, 2) as a function of for these coefficients.
the parameters χ and φy . The points correspond to designa-
tions in Fig. 4.
CONCLUSION
treated, and u0 is the intensity of turbulence of the car- Based on the results of comparison with numerical
rier flow. The parameter ε proves to be proportional to solution of the kinetic equation, one can make the fol-
lowing conclusions.
(TLp /τu)1/2, because, in the absence of the effect of inter-
section of trajectories, the time of interaction of parti- Strictly speaking, the approach based on solving the
cles with turbulent vortexes is equal to the time macros- equation for the PDF by the perturbation method is
cale of turbulence, which may be estimated at h/u0. valid only for not overly small values of the parameters
χ, φx, and φy , when the velocity distribution for particles
The probability density of the velocity of particles is close to the equilibrium Gaussian distribution. Nev-
moving towards the wall is assumed to be uniform, and, ertheless, this method enables one to derive qualita-
therefore, it satisfies the right-hand side of Eq. (28). tively correct boundary conditions for momental equa-
tions of the PDF for all values of χ, φx, and φy, whose
Therefore, the boundary condition for Eq. (28) on the
accuracy decreases with the reflection coefficient and
external boundary of the prediction region is preas- collision coefficient for momentum.
signed as
The approach associated with the binormal PDF
2 remains valid in the entire range of variation of the
P = ---------- exp  – ------ for Y = 1,
1 w coefficients χ, φx, and φy from zero to unity, and the
w < 0. (29)
2π  2 accuracy of this approach increases with the particle
inertia. By and large, this approach is more correct than
In the equilibrium case, when χ = φy = 1, the PDF of the quasi-equilibrium approach, because it is based on
the velocity of particles incident on and reflected from a more realistic distribution of the particle velocity.

## HIGH TEMPERATURE Vol. 39 No. 1 2001

110 ALIPCHENKOV et al.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 6. Zaichik, L.I. and Gusev, I.N., Turbulent Flow and Pre-
cipitation of Particles in Channels, in Engineering Tur-
This study received financial support from the Rus- bulence Modelling and Experiments, Amsterdam:
sian Foundation for Basic Research (grant no. 99-02- Elsevier, 1990, p. 907.
17001). 7. He, J. and Simonin, O., Non-Equilibrium Prediction of
the Particle-Phase Stress Tensor in Vertical Pneumatic
Conveying, Proc. 5th Int. Symp. on Gas-Solid Flows,
REFERENCES ASME FED, 1993, vol. 166, p. 253.
1. Sommerfeld, M., Int. J. Multiphase Flow, 1992, vol. 18, 8. Shraiber, A. and Naumov, V., Proc. Est. Acad. Sci. Phys.
no. 6, p. 905. Math., 1994, vol. 43, no. 4, p. 222.
2. Zaichik, L.I. and Pershukov, V.A., Izv. Ross. Akad. Nauk 9. Reeks, M.W., Phys. Fluids A, 1991, vol. 3, no. 3, p. 446.
Mekh. Zhidk. Gaza, 1996, no. 5, p. 3. 10. Razi Naqvi, K., Mork, K.J., and Waldenström, S., Phys.
3. Derevich, I.V. and Zaichik, L.I., Izv. Ross. Akad. Nauk Rev. Lett., 1982, vol. 49, no. 5, p. 304.
Mekh. Zhidk. Gaza, 1988, no. 5, p. 96. 11. Binder, J.L. and Hanratty, T.J., Int. J. Multiphase Flow,
4. Derevich, I.V. and Eroshenko, V.M., Inzh. Fiz. Zh., 1991, 1991, vol. 17, no. 1, p. 1.
vol. 61, no. 4, p. 546. 12. Swailes, D.C. and Reeks, M.W., Phys. Fluids A, 1994,
5. Zaichik, L.I., ERCOFTAC Bull., 1998, no. 36, p. 16. vol. 3, no. 3, p. 446.