JournalofMiningWorldExpressVolume3Issue1,January2014www.mwejournal.

org
doi:10.14355/mwe.2014.0301.03

EffectofBaffleDesignParametersonFluid
DynamicResponseofaCoalClassifier
HamidKhoshdast*1,HamiKhoshdast2,VahidehShojaei1
MiningEngineeringDepartment,CollegeofMiningandIndustry,BahonarUniversity,Zarand,7761156391Iran
MechanicalEngineeringDivision,INVENTIVEMineralProcessingResearchCenter,Zarand,7761156391Iran

1
2

khoshdast_hamid@yahoo.com;khoshdast@uk.ac.ir

*1

Abstract
The effect of baffle design parameters including length,
slope, shape, and installation position on fluid dynamic
behavior of a coal classifier was simulated using
computationalfluiddynamicapproach.Generalresponseof
classifieratdifferentconditionswasinterpretedbyreferring
to turbulent patterns inside the sorting column and fluid
velocitymagnitudeinproductsoutlets.Resultsshowedthat
the effect of design parameters is directly influenced by
other operating factors such as feed pulp flowrate. The
velocityofdischargestreamscanbeusedfortheprediction
of particle size variations of products due to any change in
fluiddynamicpatterninclassier.
Keywords
HydraulicClassifier;Coal;Baffle;ComputationalFluidDynamic;
Modeling

twoproducts.Anoverflowconsistingofparticleswith
terminalvelocitieslesserthanthevelocityofthefluid
and an underflow or spigot product of particles with
terminal velocities greater than the rising velocity
(WillsandNapierMunn,2006).
Numerous researches are available in which the
influence of different operating parameters on the
performance of wet hydraulic classifiers has been
investigated (Bhardwaj et al., 1987; Klumpar, 1992;
Heiskanen, 1996; Honaker and Mondal, 2000; King,
2001;Galvinetal.,2005;Zhouetal.,2006;Fengetal.,
2008;GalvinandZhou,2012;JohanssonandEvertsson,
2012;Taoetal.,2012).Theeffectsoftheseparameters
on the cut point (d50) as a representative criteria of
classifierperformancecanbesummarizedasfollows:

The cut point is directly influenced by feed

particlesize;

As solid content increases, the cut point

increases due to the effect of hinderedsettling
condition;

Density difference between the particles has a

pronounced effect on classification, especially
incoarsersizeranges.Ingeneral,thecutpoint
decreasesasdensityoftheparticlesincreases;

Thecutpointincreasesbyincreasinghydraulic
(feed)flowrate;

Atconstantfeedflowrate,twophenomenalead
to decreasing the cut point by increasing
volume of the classifier. First, large classifiers
provide a sorting column with less turbulent
regime inside the classifier. Second, particles
retention time decreases with increase of
volume.Bothoftheseeffectsimproveefficiency
ofclassificationprocess;therefore,thecutpoint
isinverselyrelatedtovolumeoftheclassifier.

Introduction
Classification is a method of separating mixtures of
mineralsintotwoormoreproductsonthebasisofthe
velocity with which the grains fall through a fluid
medium. In mineral processing, this is usually water,
and wet classification is generally applied to mineral
particles which are considered too fine to be sorted
efficientlybyscreening(WillsandNapierMunn,2006).
Hydraulic classifiers are used in many coal and
mineral applications such as fine coal classification,
theremovalofclayfinesfromsiliceoussands,particle
sizecontrolinclosedcircuitswithmills,finecontrolin
taconite pellet washing, dewatering of coal tailing
prior to centrifugation, silica removal from iron ores,
cement purification, etc. (Taggart, 1945; Sarrafi, 1987;
Kelly and Spottiswood, 1989; Priester et al., 1993;
Vijayendra,1995;Nematollahi,2002).
Classifiers consist essentially of a sorting column in
which a fluid is rising at a uniform rate. Particles
introduced into the sorting column either sink or rise
according to whether their terminal velocities are
greaterorlesserthantheupwardvelocityofthefluid.
The sorting column therefore separates the feed into

These parameters influence the fluid velocity and the

turbulent condition in sorting column. One practical
solutionistoinstallabarrier,namelybaffle,insidethe
column to control and moderate turbulent stream of

15

www.mwejournal.orgJournalofMiningWorldExpressVolume3Issue1,January2014

ModelingProcedure

input pulp. The design features of baffle are key

factors which directly affect the performance of
classifier.

The effect of structural adjustment of baffle on

hydraulicresponseofacoalclassifierwasinvestigated
using computational fluid dynamic (CFD) approach.
Design parameters included baffle length, l (0, 1.95
and 3.9 m), slope of baffle sheet, (30 and 60 degree
for length 1.95 m), baffle curvature (flat and curved),
and installation position. For each condition, two
different pulp flowrate was considered (0.05 and 1.55
m3/s). Fluid property was fixed for a pulp with 15
wt.% solid content (practical value was 162 wt.%).
The studied classifier was fed by a fine feed with
characteristic size (d80) of about 40020 m. Fig. 1
shows a schematic illustration of classifier studied in
thispaper.

The aim of this paper is to investigate the effect of

designmanipulationofbafflesstructureandposition
on hydraulic behavior of a classifier at Zarand coal
washing plant (Kerman, Iran) using computational
fluiddynamicapproach.
Modeling of Hydraulic Classifier
TheoryoftheModel
Itiswellknownthatthebestchoiceformodelingflow
patterns in waterbase separators is to apply
incompressibleNavierStokesequationincombination
withaturbulentflowmodel.Topredictthefluidflow
pattern in a classifier the governing equation consists
of the continuity and momentum balance equations
fortheliquidphaseasfollow:

.v 0 (1)

.(vv ) p .( ) g (2)

where is the fluid density, g is the gravity, v is the

velocityoffluidandpisthestaticpressure.Thestress
tensorcanbecalculatedasbelow:

effective t (4)

effective (v) .v2 (3)

where and effective are dynamic and effective
viscosities, respectively (Singh et al., 2006; Bhaskar et
al., 2007). The momentum equation can be solved
using a turbulent flow (TF) model. The standard k
dispersed turbulence model is a TF model commonly
used for engineering purposes. Variables k and
characterize turbulent kinetic energy and turbulent
dissipation rate, respectively. The k model is solved
basedonequations:
k

n!

( k )
( kui )
( i )
Gk (5)
t
xi
r ! n r ! x j
k x j
i k

( )
( ui )
( )
x j
t
xi
x j

2
C1 (Gk ) C2 (6)
k
k

whereGkisthekineticenergyduetovelocitygradient
and t is the viscosity of turbulent flow. These
parameterscanbecalculatedasfollows:
Gk ui' u 'j

t C

u j
xi

k2

FIG.1SCHEMATICSOFHYDRAULICCLASSIFIERATZARAND
COALWASHINGPLANT

The simulation used the steady state, pressure based,

implicit formulation of Fluent 6.3 software which
employs finite volume method and the physical
meshing of the classifier was constructed in pre
processor Gambit 2.3. The initial and boundary
conditions were set on the basis of practical data

(7)

(8)

where u is the velocity vector and C1, C2, k, and

Cnareconstantvalues(NakhaeiandSam,2009).

16

JournalofMiningWorldExpressVolume3Issue1,January2014www.mwejournal.org

measured in the plant: pulp velocity of 0.009758 and

0.3026 m/s for pulp flowrates of 0.05 and 1.55 m3/s,
respectively,pulpdensityof1.099kg/m3andviscosity
of1.022103kg/ms,andatmosphericpressure(1atm).
In order to approximate more accurate results the
residual convergence and iteration values were fixed
at1105and10000,respectively(DehghaniSanij,2008;
Golshahifar,2009).

values are in good agreement with experimental

measurements. This confirms the accuracy of the
modelchosen.

ValidationoftheModel
The validation process of the model was done using
the experimental data reported by Shariat and
coworkers (Shariat et al., 2010) from a laboratory
hydraulic classifier. In this regard, the water velocity
in overflow discharge gate was plotted against
predicted values. As shown in Fig. 2, the predicted

FIG.2COMPARISONBETWEENEXPERIMENTALDATAAND
SIMULATIONRESULTS

(a)l=0m,Q=0.05m3/s(b)l=1.95m,Q=0.05m3/s(c)l=3.9m,Q=0.05m3/s

(d)l=0m,Q=1.55m3/s(e)l=1.95m,Q=1.55m3/s(f)l=3.9m,Q=1.55m3/s
FIG.3VELOCITYPATTERNINSIDETHECLASSIFIERFORDIFFERENTBAFFLELENGTHSANDPULPFLOWRATES

17

www.mwejournal.orgJournalofMiningWorldExpressVolume3Issue1,January2014

FIG.4PULPVELOCITYMAGNITUDEATOVERFLOWANDUNDERFLOWDISCHARGESFORDIFFERENTBAFFLELENGTHS

(a)=60,Q=0.05m3/s(b)=30,Q=0.05m3/s

(c)=60,Q=1.55m3/s(d)=30,Q=1.55m3/s
FIG.5VELOCITYPATTERNINSIDETHECLASSIFIERFORDIFFERENTBAFFLESLOPESANDPULPFLOWRATES

turbulency inside the column decreases by increasing

the baffle length, especially at high pulp flowrate.
These models clearly show the action of baffle to
control the turbulent environment. The variation in
pulp velocity of overflow and underflow is shown in
Fig.4.Baffledecreasestheturbulencybybreakingand

Simulation Results and Discussion

EffectofBaffleSheetLength
Fluid velocity patterns inside the classifier simulated
fordifferentbafflelengthsareshowninFig.3.Asseen,

18

JournalofMiningWorldExpressVolume3Issue1,January2014www.mwejournal.org

particle size distribution in products directly follows

thefluidvelocityinoutlets,itwouldbeexpectedthat
the fraction of coarse particles in overflow product
increases by increasing of baffle length. This means
that classifier cutsize should be controlled by
manipulationoffeedflowrateand/orsolidcontent(i.e.
pulpdensityandviscosity).

dispersing the pulp stream lines. Long baffle

moderates the turbulency in sorting column and this,
in turn, decreases the underflow velocity. In contrast,
long baffle prevents pulp to freely flow inside the
column. Therefore, stream lines concentrate above
baffle sheet and are directed to overflow outlet. This
will increase the velocity of overflow. Since the

FIG.6PULPVELOCITYMAGNITUDEATOVERFLOWANDUNDERFLOWDISCHARGESFORDIFFERENTBAFFLESLOPES

(a)Flatsheet,Q=0.05m3/s(b)Curvedsheet,Q=0.05m3/s

(c)Flatsheet,Q=1.55m3/s(d)Curvedsheet,Q=1.55m3/s
FIG.7VELOCITYPATTERNINSIDETHECLASSIFIERFORFLATANDCURVEDBAFFLES

19

www.mwejournal.orgJournalofMiningWorldExpressVolume3Issue1,January2014

EffectofBaffleSlope

forcontrollingtheparticlesdistribution.

Effect of baffle slope on fluid dynamic response of

classifierisshowninFig.5.Atlowpulpflowrateand
baffleslope,streamlinesaredirectedtowardoverflow
outletandthus,thesortingcolumnexperienceslower
turbulency. Under this condition, fluid velocity
decreases and increases in overflow and underflow,
respectively (Fig. 6). At high pulp flowrate, classifier
givesdifferentvelocitypatterns.Athigherslope,there
is enough space above baffle sheet for formation of
pulp vortex, whereas at lower slope, high speed
stream of pulp will directly encounter the classifier
wallandflowstowardthesortingcolumn.Therefore,
both turbulency inside the column and underflow
velocityincrease(Fig.6).AsseenfromFig.6,changing
ofbaffleslopeathighpulpflowrateshaslessaffected
the fluid velocity in outlets and consequently,
products particle size. This result offers that at high
flowrates, changing of bafflelengthismore preferred

EffectofBaffleCurvature
Fig. 7 shows the effect of baffle sheet curvature on
classifiervelocitypattern.Atlowerpulpflowrate,the
effect of curved baffle on column turbulency and
therefore, velocity of product streams (Fig. 8) can be
neglected.However,streamdensityabovethecurved
baffle has fairly increased. In contrast, baffle
deformation has significantly increased turbulent
pattern inside the classifier fed by high speed pulp
Curvedformofbafflemakesfluidstreamstoflowinto.
sorting column faster than flat baffle and to form a
vortex pattern (capillary effect). Increased turbulency
inside the column will then increase the underflow
velocity to some extent. In addition, limited space
above curved baffle would break fluid stream lines
above the baffle and consequently, decrease the
velocityinoverflowoutlet(Fig.8).

FIG.8PULPVELOCITYMAGNITUDEATOVERFLOWANDUNDERFLOWDISCHARGESFORDIFFERENTBAFFLESHAPES

PositionA

PositionB

PositionC

FIG.9DIFFERENTPOSITIONSCONSIDEREDFORCFDSIMULATIONOFCURVEDBAFFLE

20

JournalofMiningWorldExpressVolume3Issue1,January2014www.mwejournal.org

(a)P(A),Q=0.05m3/s(b)P(B),Q=0.05m3/s(c)P(C),Q=0.05m3/s

(d)P(A),Q=1.55m3/s(e)P(B),Q=1.55m3/s(f)P(C),Q=1.55m3/s
FIG.10EFFECTOFBAFFLEPOSITIONONVELOCITYPATTERNINSIDETHECLASSIFIERFORDIFFERENTPULPFLOWRATES

FIG.11PULPVELOCITYMAGNITUDEATOVERFLOWANDUNDERFLOWDISCAHRGESFORDIFFERENTBAFFLEPOSITIONS

equivalentradius.ThesepositionsareillustratedinFig.
9. As seen from simulation results shown in Fig. 10,
turbulency has been enhanced for positions B and C
since feed pulp directly flows to the sorting column.
Under these conditions, it would be expected that

EffectofBafflePosition
Effect of baffle position on fluid dynamic of classifier
was also investigated. Three different installation
points were considered for a curved baffle with

21

www.mwejournal.orgJournalofMiningWorldExpressVolume3Issue1,January2014

underflow velocity increases and the velocity in

overflowoutletdecreases(Fig.11).Itisalsoseenfrom
Fig. 11 that at high feed flowrate, the velocity in
underflowoutletisnearlyequalforpositionsBandC.
Thiscouldlikelybeinterpretedasfollows;forboth
classifiers, the velocity offeed pulpisequaland very
fast which directly flows into column after encounter
the curved interior face of baffles and a turbulent
saturated environment is formed inside the sorting
column.Thissaturatedstreampatternisnotobserved
forpositionA.

Secondary Classifier. International Journal of Mineral

Processing21(1987):217223.
DehghaniSanij M.A. Numerical Simulation with Fluent 6.3
Software.Tehran:NaghooseAndishehPublisher,2008.
Feng,Y.,Liu,J.andS.Liu.EffectsofOperatingParameters
on Flow Field in a Turbo Air Classifier. Minerals
Engineering21(2008):598604.
Galvin, K.P. and J. Zhou. Application of the Reflux
Classifier for Measuring Gravity Recoverable Product.
In Separation Technology, edited by C.A. Young and
G.H.Luttrell,153162.NewYork:SME,2012.

Conclusions

Galvin, K.P., Callen, A., Zhou, J. and E. Doroodchi.

The following points can be highlighted from the

presentstudy:
1.

2.

Performance of the Reflux Classifier for Gravity

SeparationatFullScale.MineralsEngineering18(2005):

CFDbasedsimulationgivesusefulinformation
about fluid dynamic response of hydraulic
classifier following any operating and/or
designmanipulation.

1924.
Golshahifar M. Practical Fluent. Tehran: Sanei Shahmirzadi
Publication,2009.

The action of baffle to reduce the turbulence

conditionsinsidetheclassifierisdependenton
various parameters. Baffle for a specific
classifier should be designed on the basis of
operating parameters and requested perform
ance of the classification practice. CFD
approach could be a useful tool for optimum
selectionofbaffledesignaspects.

3.

Effects of design parameters are directly

influencedbyoperatingfactors.

4.

Results obtained from changing baffle

installationpositionmayleadtotheconclusion
that the velocity and thus, volumetric rate of
products streams is independent from
hydraulic and turbulent conditions inside the
classifier when feed stream is directed to
sortingcolumnwithoutanyintermediate.

Heiskanen, K.G.H. Developments in wet classifiers.

InternationalJournalofMineralProcessing4445(1996):
2942.
Honaker, R.Q. and K. Mondal. Dynamic Modeling of Fine
Coal Separations in a HinderedBed Classifier. Coal
Preparation21(2000):211232.
Johansson, R. and M. Evertsson. An Empirical Study of a
Gravitational Air Classifier. Minerals Engineering 31
(2012):1016.
Kelly E.G., and Spottiswood. Introduction to Mineral
Processing.QueensLand:JohnWiley&Sons,1989.
King, R.P. Modeling & Simulation of Mineral Processing
Systems.England:ButterworthHeinemann,2001.
Klumpar, I.V. Measuring and Optimizing Air Classifier
Performance.SeparationTechnology2(1992):124135.

There are many other operating parameters such as

pulp solid content, feed particle size distribution, etc.
that affect the hydraulic performance of classifiers.
Furtherstudiesarerequiredtoinvestigatetheseeffects.

Nakhaei F., and A. Sam. Modeling Stream Patterns in

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Nematollahi H. Mineral Processing. Tehran: Tehran

Technical supports from Zarand Coal Washing Plant

andINVENTIVEMineralProcessingResearchCenter
areacknowledged.

Priester M.,Hentschel T., and B. Benthin.Tools for Mining:

HydrocyclonesUsingFluentSoftware.Paperpresented
at the third Mining Engineering Conference, Yazd,Iran,
2009.
UniversityPress,2002.
Techniques and Processes for Small Scale Mining.
Munich:Friedr.Vieweg&SohnVerlagsgesellschaftmbH,

REFERENCES

1993.

Bhardwaj, O.P., Bandyopadhyay, A. and T.C. Rao. Plant

Sarrafi A.R. Mineral Separation Device Supported by

PerformanceStudiesonaHydraulicConeClassifierasa

Hydrocyclone Mechanism with Closed Circuit. Kerman:

22

JournalofMiningWorldExpressVolume3Issue1,January2014www.mwejournal.org

Industrialandscientificresearchorganization,1987.

Tao,Y.,Wang,L.,Li,Z.andM.Sun.StudyonCoarseSlime

Shariat E., Khoshdast H., Sam A., and S.A. Jarkani.

Separation by Teeter Bed Separator in Chenglao Coal

Combined Experimental and Simulation Analysis on

Preparation Plant. In Separation Technology, edited by

Performance of a Bench Scale Hydraulic Classifier.

C.A.YoungandG.H.Luttrell,177180.NewYork:SME,

Paper presented at the second National Conference of

2012.
Vijayendra H.G. Handbook of Mineral Processing. New

ModernResearchesinChemicalEngineering,Mahshahr,
Iran,2010.

Delhi:NewDelhiPublication,1995.

SinghV.,SrivastavaS.,ChavalR.,VitankarV.,BasuB.,and

Wills B.A., and T. NapierMunn. Mineral Processing

M.C. Agrawal. Simulation of GasSolid Flow and

Technology.

Design Modifications of Cement Plant Cyclones. Paper

Technology,2006.

presented at the fifth International Conference of CFD

Elsevier

Science

and

Zhou, J., Walton, K., Laskovski, D., Duncan, P. and K.P.

ProcessIndustries,QueensLand,Australia,2006.

Galvin. Enhanced Separation of Mineral Sands Using

Taggart A.F. Handbook of Mineral Dressing. New York:

the Reflux Classifier. Minerals Engineering 19 (2006):

15731579.

JohnWilley&Sons,1945.

Amsterdam:

23