ESTIMATION OF UREA IN SILO

Author

Prem Baboo
Sr. Manager (Prod)
National Fertilizers. Ltd., Vijaipur, India

Abstract

The packing arrangement of a powder/granules bed depends on the nature and extent
of friction among the particles/granules. The bulk volume of a prills depends on packing
arrangement of particles, and the packing arrangement in turn depends on inter -
particular or inter-granular friction or in other words, bulk volume of a given prills
depends on the inter-particular friction.

Introduction

We explore the notion of angle of repose for granular materials. Slowly pour a couple of
kilogram of granular material like urea. Through successive avalanches, a conical pile
will form. Measure the angle between the pile and the table: this is the angle of repose.
You will find values between 30◦ and 40◦. For urea case it is about 27-300. Now, repeat
the experiment with other granular materials: wheat, pea’s sugar salt, etc. The angles
will be different. Granular heaps of particles created by deposition of mono-disperse
particles raining from an extended source of finite size are characterized by a non -
homogeneous field of density. It was speculated that this in homogeneity is due to the
transient shape of the sediment during the process of co nstruction of the heap, thus
reflecting the history of the creation of the heap. In this paper, we consider the effect of
cohesion on the stability of a granular urea heap and compute the maximum angle of
stability of the heap and volume of the conical heap then density of the granular urea.
The granular medium used is composed of macroscopic lead beads of diameter 2 mm.
The particles are dropped from a height of up to 5 m above the heap. Experimental
results show that impacting particles must have a minimum energy to create a crater on
top of the heap. The depth of the crater created first increases linearly for a given range
of initial energies of particles and then tends to saturate for higher energies. We give
qualitative explanations for the experimental results.
Some Thumb rule for estimation of urea quantity in Silo
The angle of repose or critical angle of repose, of a granular material is the steepest
angle of descent or dip relative to the horizontal plane to which a material can be piled
without slumping. At this angle, the material on the slope face is on the verge of sliding.
In recent years, pressure distributions under heaps of dry grains have received much
attention due to the pressure minimum which was observed experimentally in granular
cones without bed displacements . In granular wedges, no or only small pressure
minima could be observed.. In granular matter, many effects such as the grain’s
material, Young’s modulus, surface roughness, coefficient of friction and history of the
construction influence the properties of heaps , Due to the rich phenomenology, the
pressure distribution under a heap has become a kind of paradigm in granular media
research. In this paper, we focus on the effect of the shape of sand-heaps on the
pressure distribution by taking into account only the geometry of the heaps.

To simplify matters, we will assume a homogeneous density of the heaps, and we also
assume that the mass density in the cone is the same as the mass density in the wedge.
Later on, we will question this assumption in the comparison with experimental data,
but for the simplicity of the derivation the densities will be set to unity. Because
experimentally the angle of repose is practically the same for wedges as for cones, we
do not use the angle of repose α, of the heap of height h and base length 2r explicitly.

h/r = tan α

Level measurement of urea Heap

Following conditions for measurements of heap mass

1. Simple heap in conical form

2. Triangular cross section with length L
3. Urea filled Bottom portion parallel with silo plus above conical
1 Simple conical shape

Fig. No.-1

Volume of the conical heap =1/3 .πr2 h

Mass = Density x Volume

Density of Urea Prills about 776 kg/m3

INTEGRATION OF CONE
The contour of the heap is position-dependent and (see Fig. 4) has the dimension of a
length. We will denote the maximum height of the heap as h. If the contour Ccone of a
cone with diameter 2r and maximum height h is given as Ccone = Ccone(x; y); one can
obtain the contour Cwedge of a wedge (see Fig. 2) with base width 2r by superposition

C wedge (y) =1/2 ………………………………….(1)

Cwedge(y) depends only on y and not on x due to the translation invariance of the wedge
along the x-axis. Eq. (1) is an average over the contour along the x-direction. The
prefactor in Eq. (1) 1/2r enters in front of the integral, because the units of the
integration increment dx must be compensated. In terms of units, a prefactor α 1/ r is
the only possibility to fulfill the condition that the contour of The resulting pressure is
given as the intensity of the point clouds.

Fig No. -2 Sketch for the integration process for a cone: Averaging over the height
distorts the straight slopes of the cone.
Fig. No.-3 Outline of a cone with straight slopes and a wedge constructed by
infinitesimally adding cones with straight slopes in a experiment.

The wedge has the same units as the contour as the cone, which, as has been mentioned
above, has the dimension of a length.

The integration bounds ∓√ 1 − (y/r)2 in Eq. (2) result from the circular base of the cone
and depend on the geometry at the base of the heap. For the integration of a pyramid
with a square base of 2r X 2r; the integration would range from −r to r: In the following
text, we take the radius of the cone (and therefore the width of the wedge) to be r = 1
for simplicity, so
x/r → x …………………………(2)
y/r →y …………………………(3)
h→r ………………………….(4)
C … (x,Y)/h → C…(x,y) …………....(5)
Fig No.4, Averaging the cone to a wedge with normalization factor 1/2r reduces the
height of the heap from 2h to h in the middle of the wedge.

The old names will be retained for the new quantities. Any prefactors for the height of
the heap or the angle of repose will be omitted, because due to the normalizations the
height of the wedge is given automatically by the height of the corresponding cone . All
functions for the contours and pressure will be 0 outside the heap. If a wedge is built by
infinitesimally integrating cones with straight slopes

C cone 9x,y) = 1-√(x2+y2) ………………………………………………………………………...(6)

The profle of the wedge Cwedge(y) can be described as

Cwedge(y) =r/h √1-y2 –ln(√1-y2 + 1)/2 + y2ln(-√1-y2 + 1)/2 ………………….(7)

approximation for the slopes of a a

Which is plotted in Fig. 4. This seems to be still a reasonable
wedge". This wedge constructed from a cone with straight slopes has no straight slopes,
because one has to integrate different conical sections at each y: “On average", the
critical angle is nevertheless preserved.

Fig. No.5 (Building a wedge out of cones for the heap shape (above) and the
corresponding pressure distribution (below).
2. Triangular cross section with length L

Mass of urea -{(Area of Triangular cross section X Length of total heap) +1/6 .πr 2.h} X
density

1/6. πr 2h is the end of the heap(half of the cone) and one closed to the silo.

3. Urea filled Bottom portion parallel with silo plus above conical
Volume= {(1/2.(a+b)h1.L +(1/2.h2.b)}
And Mass=Volume X Density

Fig. No. -7
Volume of the Silo
2/3.a.H X Length of the silo

For 50000 ton capacity

Silo Dimensions are
Length of the Silo about-260 meter
Height of the Silo (H) =20 meter
Breadth of the Silo(a) =50 meter
Parabolic RCC roof area =17000 m2
 Fig. No-8, urea silo

Conclusion
The estimation of Urea lying in the closed silo is the roughly calculation. There is no
symmetrical shape. The concepts of plasticity, differential inclusions and solution
selection appear naturally in the present setting. While this question is at the crossroad
of several of the most active fields of research in applied mathematics such as stochastic
analysis, multi-scale and multi-physics modelling, there is still to date no widely
accepted model of the sort. Even in the simplest case of linear superposition of
pressures, the pressure distribution of cones seems to differ markedly from that of
wedges.

References

Influence of the geometry on the pressure distribution of granular heaps by Hans-Georg

Matuttis, Alexander Schinner Granular Matter 1, 195{201 c Springer-Verlag 1999