Li et al 2020c - Revision history

Scipediacontent at 11:35, 22 October 2020

2020-10-22T11:35:38Z

Scipediacontent at 11:32, 22 October 2020

2020-10-22T11:32:46Z

Scipediacontent at 11:28, 22 October 2020

2020-10-22T11:28:00Z

Scipediacontent at 11:26, 22 October 2020

2020-10-22T11:26:33Z

Rimni at 11:17, 16 October 2020

2020-10-16T11:17:06Z

Rimni at 11:16, 16 October 2020

2020-10-16T11:16:44Z

Rimni at 12:16, 9 October 2020

2020-10-09T12:16:35Z

Show changes

Rimni at 10:45, 9 October 2020

2020-10-09T10:45:32Z

Rimni at 10:43, 9 October 2020

2020-10-09T10:43:27Z

Rimni at 10:43, 9 October 2020

2020-10-09T10:43:11Z

@@ Line 437: / Line 437: @@
 {| style="text-align: center; border: 1px solid #BBB; margin: 1em auto; width: auto;max-width: auto;"
 |-
-|style="padding:10px;"|  [[Image:Li_et_al_2020c_8005_fig6.png|center|288px]]
+|style="padding:10px;"|  [[Image:Li_et_al_2020c_8005_fig6.png|288px]]
 |- style="text-align: center; font-size: 75%;"
 | colspan="1" style="padding-bottom:10px;"| '''Figure 6'''. Comparison of curvature width
@@ Line 453: / Line 453: @@
 {| style="text-align: center; border: 1px solid #BBB; margin: 1em auto; width: auto;max-width: auto;"
 |-
-|style="padding:10px;"|  [[Image:Li_et_al_2020c_2193_fig8.png|center|300px]]
+|style="padding:10px;"|  [[Image:Li_et_al_2020c_2193_fig8.png|300px]]
 |- style="text-align: center; font-size: 75%;"
 | colspan="1" style="padding-bottom:10px;"| '''Figure 8'''. Comparison of secondary water seal width
@@ Line 467: / Line 467: @@
- As are shown from [[#img-5|Figure 5]]  to [[#img-9|Figure 9]], the experimental results and the simulation results have the same change rule, and only the absolute values are different. And the difference are mainly reflected in the value of the flushing capacity in the simulation, which is larger than that in the experiment. On the one hand, it is caused by the inconsistency of physical experiment model and simulation calculation model, on the other hand, it is also affected by the accuracy of coupling algorithm in simulation calculation. Although the simulation law and the experimental law are different in the absolute value, the factors that cause the difference all have the same effect on the absolute value of flushing capacity under all parameters, and as a whole, it can reflect the range of structural parameters with better flushing performance. Therefore, it is practicable to study the regularity of the flushing performance of structural parameters of different siphon pipes. The numerical simulation method is not limited by the fixed size of model, it can study the flushing process in a wider range of structural parameters. And it is also convenient to obtain data which is not easy to get in physical experiments, and it is helpful to further study the flushing mechanism and reduce the development cycle and cost.
+As are shown from [[#img-5|Figure 5]]  to [[#img-9|Figure 9]], the experimental results and the simulation results have the same change rule, and only the absolute values are different. And the difference are mainly reflected in the value of the flushing capacity in the simulation, which is larger than that in the experiment. On the one hand, it is caused by the inconsistency of physical experiment model and simulation calculation model, on the other hand, it is also affected by the accuracy of coupling algorithm in simulation calculation. Although the simulation law and the experimental law are different in the absolute value, the factors that cause the difference all have the same effect on the absolute value of flushing capacity under all parameters, and as a whole, it can reflect the range of structural parameters with better flushing performance. Therefore, it is practicable to study the regularity of the flushing performance of structural parameters of different siphon pipes. The numerical simulation method is not limited by the fixed size of model, it can study the flushing process in a wider range of structural parameters. And it is also convenient to obtain data which is not easy to get in physical experiments, and it is helpful to further study the flushing mechanism and reduce the development cycle and cost.
 Because of the size limitation of experimental platform, there is no study about the effect of diameter change of siphon pipes on the flushing performance. Therefore, we can use CFD-DEM method to simulate the flushing process under different diameters. The simulation results are shown in [[#img-10|Figure 10]].
-<div id='img-1'></div>
+<div id='img-10'></div>
 {| style="text-align: center; border: 1px solid #BBB; margin: 1em auto; width: auto;max-width: auto;"
 |-

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:32, 22 October 2020
Line 467:		Line 467:


−	As are shown from [[#img-5\|Figure 5]] to [[#img-9\|Figure 9]], the experimental results and the simulation results have the same change rule, and only the absolute values are different. And the difference are mainly reflected in the value of the flushing capacity in the simulation, which is larger than that in the experiment. On the one hand, it is caused by the inconsistency of physical experiment model and simulation calculation model, on the other hand, it is also affected by the accuracy of coupling algorithm in simulation calculation. Although the simulation law and the experimental law are different in the absolute value, the factors that cause the difference all have the same effect on the absolute value of flushing capacity under all parameters, and as a whole, it can reflect the range of structural parameters with better flushing performance. Therefore, it is practicable to study the regularity of the flushing performance of structural parameters of different siphon pipes. The numerical simulation method is not limited by the fixed size of model, it can study the flushing process in a wider range of structural parameters. And it is also convenient to obtain data which is not easy to get in physical experiments, and it is helpful to further study the flushing mechanism and reduce the development cycle and cost.	+	As are shown from [[#img-5\|Figure 5]] to [[#img-9\|Figure 9]], the experimental results and the simulation results have the same change rule, and only the absolute values are different. And the difference are mainly reflected in the value of the flushing capacity in the simulation, which is larger than that in the experiment. On the one hand, it is caused by the inconsistency of physical experiment model and simulation calculation model, on the other hand, it is also affected by the accuracy of coupling algorithm in simulation calculation. Although the simulation law and the experimental law are different in the absolute value, the factors that cause the difference all have the same effect on the absolute value of flushing capacity under all parameters, and as a whole, it can reflect the range of structural parameters with better flushing performance. Therefore, it is practicable to study the regularity of the flushing performance of structural parameters of different siphon pipes. The numerical simulation method is not limited by the fixed size of model, it can study the flushing process in a wider range of structural parameters. And it is also convenient to obtain data which is not easy to get in physical experiments, and it is helpful to further study the flushing mechanism and reduce the development cycle and cost.

	Because of the size limitation of experimental platform, there is no study about the effect of diameter change of siphon pipes on the flushing performance. Therefore, we can use CFD-DEM method to simulate the flushing process under different diameters. The simulation results are shown in [[#img-10\|Figure 10]].		Because of the size limitation of experimental platform, there is no study about the effect of diameter change of siphon pipes on the flushing performance. Therefore, we can use CFD-DEM method to simulate the flushing process under different diameters. The simulation results are shown in [[#img-10\|Figure 10]].

@@ Line 705: / Line 705: @@
 {| style="text-align: center; border: 1px solid #BBB; margin: 1em auto; width: auto;max-width: auto;"
 |-
-|style="padding:10px;"|  [[Image:Draft_Li_210280261-image33-c.png|336px]]
+|style="padding:10px;"|  [[Image:Li_et_al_2020c_9293_fig11.png|336px]]
 |- style="text-align: center; font-size: 75%;"
 | colspan="1" style="padding-bottom:10px;"| '''Figure 11'''. The flushing capacity under different groups

@@ Line 429: / Line 429: @@
 {| style="text-align: center; border: 1px solid #BBB; margin: 1em auto; width: auto;max-width: auto;"
 |-
-|style="padding:10px;"|  [[Image:Draft_Li_210280261-image27-c.png|294px]]
+|style="padding:10px;"|  [[Image:Li_et_al_2020c_1136_fig5.png|294px]]
 |- style="text-align: center; font-size: 75%;"
 | colspan="1" style="padding-bottom:10px;"| '''Figure 5'''. Comparison of inclination angle
@@ Line 437: / Line 437: @@
 {| style="text-align: center; border: 1px solid #BBB; margin: 1em auto; width: auto;max-width: auto;"
 |-
-|style="padding:10px;"|  [[Image:Draft_Li_210280261-image28-c.png|center|288px]]
+|style="padding:10px;"|  [[Image:Li_et_al_2020c_8005_fig6.png|center|288px]]
 |- style="text-align: center; font-size: 75%;"
 | colspan="1" style="padding-bottom:10px;"| '''Figure 6'''. Comparison of curvature width
@@ Line 445: / Line 445: @@
 {| style="text-align: center; border: 1px solid #BBB; margin: 1em auto; width: auto;max-width: auto;"
 |-
-|style="padding:10px;"|  [[Image:Draft_Li_210280261-image29-c.png|288px]]
+|style="padding:10px;"|  [[Image:Li_et_al_2020c_1932_fig7.png|288px]]
 |- style="text-align: center; font-size: 75%;"
 | colspan="1" style="padding-bottom:10px;"| '''Figure 7'''. Comparison of curvature length
@@ Line 453: / Line 453: @@
 {| style="text-align: center; border: 1px solid #BBB; margin: 1em auto; width: auto;max-width: auto;"
 |-
-|style="padding:10px;"|  [[Image:Draft_Li_210280261-image30-c.png|center|300px]]
+|style="padding:10px;"|  [[Image:Li_et_al_2020c_2193_fig8.png|center|300px]]
 |- style="text-align: center; font-size: 75%;"
 | colspan="1" style="padding-bottom:10px;"| '''Figure 8'''. Comparison of secondary water seal width
@@ Line 461: / Line 461: @@
 {| style="text-align: center; border: 1px solid #BBB; margin: 1em auto; width: auto;max-width: auto;"
 |-
-|style="padding:10px;"|  [[Image:Draft_Li_210280261-image31-c.png|306px]]
+|style="padding:10px;"|  [[Image:Li_et_al_2020c_3354_fig9.png|306px]]
 |- style="text-align: center; font-size: 75%;"
 | colspan="1" style="padding-bottom:10px;"| '''Figure 9'''. Comparison of secondary water seal height

@@ Line 727: / Line 727: @@
 ==References==
 <div class="auto" style="text-align: left;width: auto; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;font-size: 85%;">
 [1] Shi-Yi Z.,  Zi-Jian L.,  Zhi-Wei P. Optimized design of toilet siphon pipeline based on fluent and its validated test. Journal of System Simulation, 20:4412, 2008.

@@ Line 726: / Line 726: @@
 ==References==
 [1] Shi-Yi Z.,  Zi-Jian L.,  Zhi-Wei P. Optimized design of toilet siphon pipeline based on fluent and its validated test. Journal of System Simulation, 20:4412, 2008.
@@ Line 761: / Line 764: @@
 [17]  Chu K.W.,  Kuang S.B.,  Yu A.B.,   Vince A. Particle scale modelling of the multiphase flow in a dense medium cyclone: effect of fluctuation of solids flowrate. Minerals Engineering, 33:34-45, 2012.
-[18]  Chaumeil F.,   Crapper M. Using the DEM-CFD Method to predict Brownian particle deposition in a constricted tube. Particuology, 15:94-106, 2014.
+[18]  Chaumeil F.,   Crapper M. Using the DEM-CFD method to predict Brownian particle deposition in a constricted tube. Particuology, 15:94-106, 2014.

@@ Line 721: / Line 721: @@
 # It is worth to further study about how to use CFD-DEM coupling method for quantitative analysis of the toilet flushing performance.
-==Acknowledgement==
+==Acknowledgements==
-The authors gratefully acknowledged the support from National Natural Science Foundation of China (51775113). Fujian university-industry cooperation project (2017H6002).Research start-up funds of FuJian University of Technology (GY-Z160139).Fuzhou Science and technology project (2020-GX-16).No part of this paper has published or submitted elsewhere. The authors declared that they have no conflicts of interest to this work. All authors have seen the manuscript and approved to submit to your journal.
+The authors gratefully acknowledged the support from National Natural Science Foundation of China (51775113). Fujian university-industry cooperation project (2017H6002). Research start-up funds of FuJian University of Technology (GY-Z160139). Fuzhou Science and technology project (2020-GX-16). No part of this paper has published or submitted elsewhere. The authors declared that they have no conflicts of interest to this work. All authors have seen the manuscript and approved to submit to your journal.
 ==References==

@@ Line 420: / Line 420: @@
 where <math>V_B</math> is the volume of all tested water balls that are washed away and <math>V_W</math> is the volume of water used in the flushing process. According to the formula of the flushing capacity, the flushing capacity can be understood as the volume of tested water balls that are washed away by a unit volume of water.
-==4 The discussion of flushing performance==
+==4. The discussion of flushing performance==
 ===4.1 Verification of simulation law===