Advertisement

Environmental Earth Sciences

, Volume 64, Issue 1, pp 73–83 | Cite as

CFD simulation of blasting dust for the design of physical barriers

  • Susana Torno
  • Javier TorañoEmail author
  • Mario Menéndez
  • Malcolm Gent
Original Article

Abstract

A computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model has been developed to simulate the dispersion of dust generated in blasting located in limestone quarries. This is a complex phenomenon that has been studied through the use of several digital video recordings of blasts and dust concentration field measurements by ‘light scattering’ dust collectors. In addition, the subsequent simulation of the dispersion of the dust cloud by means of multiphase CFD has also been studied. CFD calculations were carried out using software Ansys CFX 10.0, through transitory models with Lagrangian particle models crossing an Eulerian air continuous phase. This paper presents results obtained by model simulations where physical barriers are set close to the blasting, with the aim of decreasing the dust cloud dispersal and the associated environmental impact.

Keywords

Air pollution Bench blasting Dust dispersion modelling Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) Discrete Lagrangian methods 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge the help and advice from the Ansys CFX Technical Support Team in the development of these studies, and we are grateful to the Spanish Ministry of Education and Science that granted these studies through funds of the National R+D Plan of the Ministry of Education and Science, 2004–2007 period, in the framework of the Research Project CTM2005-00187/TECNO, “Prediction models and prevention systems in the particle air pollution in an industrial environment”.

References

  1. Almeida SM, Eston SM, De Assunçao JV (2002) Characterization of suspended particulate material in mining areas in Sao Paulo, Brazil. Int J Surf Min Reclam Environ 16(3):171–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. ANSYS (2005) CFX-Solver, Release 10.0: modeling book. ANSYS, Ontario, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  3. Appleton TJ, Kingman SW, Lowndes IS, Silvester SA (2006) The development of a modelling strategy for the simulation of fugitive dust emissions from in-pit quarrying activities: a UK case study. Int J Surf Min Reclam Environ 20(1):57–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baik JJ, Kang YS, Kim JJ (2007) Modeling reactive pollutant dispersion in an urban street canyon. Atmos Environ 41(5):934–949CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cowherd C, Grelinger MA (2006) Development of an emission reduction term for near-source dust depletion. In: Proceedings of the 15th international emission inventory conference, New Orleans, Louisiana, pp 1–9Google Scholar
  6. Cravero C, Oliviero M, Papalia K (2004) Computational aerodynamics of buildings with a block structured CFD Code. In: Proceedings of the European congress on computational methods in applied sciences and engineering (ECCOMAS), Jyväskylä, Finland, pp 1–13Google Scholar
  7. Environmental Protection Agency, US EPA (1998a) AP-42, 13.2.5.1, miscellaneous sources. US EPA, USA, p 2Google Scholar
  8. Environmental Protection Agency, US EPA (1998b) Revision of Emission factors for AP-42 Section 11.9 Western Surface Coal Mining, B-43. US EPA, USAGoogle Scholar
  9. Faeth GM (1987) Mixing, transport and combustion in sprays. Process Energy Combust Sci 13:293–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Holmes NS, Morawska L (2006) A review of dispersion modeling and its application to the dispersion of particles: an overview of different dispersion models available. Atmos Environ 40:5902–5928CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jones T, Morgan A, Richards R (2003) Primary blasting in a limestone quarry: physicochemical characterization of the dust clouds. Miner Mag 67(2):153–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (2005) Environmental Science and Services Division (800)662-9278. Emission Calculation Fact, Sheet # 9841 (Rev. 11/05)Google Scholar
  13. Parsons DR, Walkerb IJ, Wiggs GFS (2004) Numerical modeling of flow structures over idealized transverse aeolian dunes of varying geometry. Geomorphology 59:149–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Patankar SV (1980) Numerical heat transfer and fluid flow. Mathematical description of physical phenomena. McGraw-Hill, USA, pp 11–23Google Scholar
  15. Potter MC, Wiggert DC (2001) Mechanics of fluids. Differential form of the fundamental law. Brooks/Cole, Pacific Grove, CA, pp 180–205Google Scholar
  16. Reed WR (2005) Significant dust dispersion models for mining operations. Information Circular 9478. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). NIOSH-Publications Disseminations, Columbia Parkway, CincinnatiGoogle Scholar
  17. Shaw CT (1992) Using computational fluid dynamic. Numerical solutions to partial differential equations. Prentice Hall, USA, pp 15–32Google Scholar
  18. Silvester SA, Lowndes IS, Kingman SW (2004) The ventilation of an underground crushing plant. Min Technol IMM Trans Min Metal Sect A 113:201–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sklavounos S, Rigas F (2004) Validation of turbulence models in heavy gas dispersion over obstacles. J Hazard Mater 108:9–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Tanaka T, Yamamoto Y, Potthoff M, Tsuji Y (1997) Fluids engineering division summer meeting (CD-ROM), paper no. FED SM97-3630, Vancouver, Canada, June 1997Google Scholar
  21. Temmerman L, Chen W, Leschziner MA (2004) A comparative study of separation from a three-dimensional hill using large eddy simulation and second-moment-closure RANS modeling. In: Proceedings of the European congress on computational methods in applied sciences and engineering (ECCOMAS), Jyväskylä, Finland, pp 1–10Google Scholar
  22. Tiwary A, Morvan HP, Colls JJ (2005) Modelling the size-dependent collection efficiency of hedgerows for ambient aerosols. J Aerosol Sci 37:990–1015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Toraño J, Rodriguez R, Diego I (2006) Surface velocity contour analysis in the airborne dust generation due to open storage piles. In: Proceedings of the European conference on computational fluid dynamics (ECCOMAS CFD), Egmond aan Zee: TU Delft, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  24. Toraño J, Rodriguez R, Diego I, Rivas JM, Pelegry A (2007) Influence of the pile shape on wind erosion CFD emission simulation. Appl Math Model 31(11):2487–2502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Toraño J, Torno S, Menéndez M, Gent M (2009) Dust emission calculations in open storage piles protected by means of barriers, CFD and experimental tests. Environ Fluid Mech 9:493–507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Torno S, Toraño J, Allende C, Rodríguez R (2010) Dust emission reduction for open storage mineral piles by fences. CFD modelling. WIT Tran Ecol Environ 136:121–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tsuji Y (2000) Activities in discrete particle simulation in Japan. Powder Technol 113:278–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. White FM (1991) Viscous fluid flow. Differential relation for a fluid particle. McGraw Hill, USA, pp 228–280Google Scholar
  29. Yamamoto Y, Tanaka T, Tsuji Y (1998) LES of gas-particle turbulence channel flow (the effect of inter-particle collision on structure of particle distribution). In: Proceedings of the third international conference on multiphase flow ICMF98, Lyon, FranceGoogle Scholar
  30. Zhang SF (1988) A critical evaluation of the Von Karman constant from a new atmospheric surface layer experiment. Ph.D. Thesis. Washington UniversityGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Susana Torno
    • 1
  • Javier Toraño
    • 1
    Email author
  • Mario Menéndez
    • 1
  • Malcolm Gent
    • 1
  1. 1.Mining and Civil Works Research Group, School of MinesUniversity of OviedoOviedoSpain

Personalised recommendations