此帖终结！！！此帖终结！！！此帖终结！！！
想得有点简单了，coalChemistryFoam和DPMFoam求解的方程有差别，coalChemistryFoam是two-way coupling，DPMFoam是four-way coupling，cfd-online论坛上有人讲了这个问题，简单的添加CollidingCloud是行不通的。
感谢！！！
粘帖原文
“Dear cmigueis,
Thank you for your quick reply.
First of all, I mean that your work can model reacting dilute two-phase flow, but not reacting dense two-phase flow. We can see in DPMFoam solver, there is an “alphac” in the mass and momentum equations of Ueqn.H, which mean the void fraction (voidage). However, in coalChemistryFoam, there isn’t a void fraction. That is, even though you implement coal cloud collisions into coalChemitryFoam, it look like DPM model in ANSYS Fluent, but not a CFD-DEM model with reaction, you should also implement “alphac”(voidage) into mass, momentum and energy equations.
For more details, you can have a look at article “Ku X, Li T, Løvås T. CFD–DEM simulation of biomass gasification with steam in a fluidized bed reactor [J]. Chemical Engineering Science, 2015, 122: 270-283.” or “Zhou H, Flamant G, Gauthier D. DEM-LES simulation of coal combustion in a bubbling fluidized bed Part II: coal combustion at the particle level [J]. Chemical Engineering Science, 2004, 59(20): 4205-4215.”, in these work, four-way coupling CFD-DEM with reaction were adopted to simulate a fluidized bed. The former is accomplished on OpenFOAM framework.
In my opinion, if you want to model dense phase reacting flow like above literature, I think DPMFoam combined with coalChemistryFoam can achieve it, which is the work I want to do and I am doing. Generally speaking, DPMFoam has already had parcels collisions and it is CFD-DEM method which can be used in cold fluidized bed modeling. If you only model pulverized coal combustion (that is, reacting dilute two-phase flow), four-way coupling is not necessary.
Best regards! ”
