4.7 Article

Why do wet-particles adhere to a high-speed roll in a three-roll mill?

期刊

PHYSICS OF FLUIDS
卷 31, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1063/1.5085693

关键词

-

资金

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science [18J12267]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [18J12267] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A three-roll mill is used in various engineering fields to manufacture high-value-added products. This mill has three horizontally positioned rolls with different rotational velocities. In the mill, viscous materials (or pastes) pass through the narrow gap between the rolls to be mixed, refined, dispersed, and/or homogenized. The viscous materials tend to consist of wet-particles connected by liquid bridges. Although viscous materials always adhere to a faster roll in the three-roll mill, the mechanism has not yet been clarified. Herein, the adhesion mechanism is clarified scientifically by numerical simulation. In the calculations, a Lagrangian method, such as the discrete element method, is used to analyze the specific phenomena in the particle particle and the particle wall interaction. A latest liquid bridge force model is used in this study to examine the effect of a wide range of liquid volumes on the adhesion phenomena. In the calculation, a lump of wet-particles is fed into the gap between the two rolls and the roll speed is changed to investigate its influence on the adhesion phenomena. Through numerical examples, it is proven that wet-particles always adhere to a fast roll because the liquid bridge force that acts on the faster roll is larger than that on the slower roll after the compression force is released. This is because the extension of the wet-particles is larger on the faster roll because of the speed difference between the two rolls. Consequently, the adhesion mechanism of the wet-particles in the three-roll mill is proven scientifically to be the force balance due to the liquid bridge force. Published under license by AlP Publishing

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据