pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.07082 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-08 · ⚛️ physics.comp-ph · cs.NA· math.NA

Recognition: unknown

Granular mixing and flow dynamics in horizontal stirred bed reactors

Sahar Pourandi , Igor Ostanin , Thomas Weinhart
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 16:49 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.comp-ph cs.NAmath.NA
keywords granular mixingDEM simulationhorizontal stirred bed reactoraxial dispersionpolyolefin productionLacey indexparticle circulationfill level effects
0
0 comments X

The pith

DEM simulations show that higher rotation speeds accelerate axial mixing in horizontal stirred bed reactors while higher fill levels slow it down.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper applies discrete element method simulations to a lab-scale horizontal stirred bed reactor filled with modeled polypropylene powder. It quantifies how rotation speed and fill level shape particle motion, cross-sectional and axial mixing via the Lacey index, circulation through cycle times, and axial dispersion from trajectories. Higher speeds improve homogenization and dispersion while higher fills impede them, exposing clear trade-offs among mixing, circulation, and transport. These relations matter because HSBRs produce polyolefins whose uniformity and quality depend on controlled residence times and solids blending.

Core claim

In calibrated DEM simulations of an industrial-grade polypropylene powder inside a lab-scale HSBR, axial mixing rates increase with rotation speed and decrease with fill level; cross-sectional mixing depends chiefly on speed; cycle times shorten under both higher speed and higher fill; axial dispersion coefficients rise with speed yet fall with fill level; and a diffusion model reproduces the observed axial Lacey index evolution.

What carries the argument

Discrete Element Method simulations that track individual particle contacts and trajectories, combined with Lacey index calculations in axial and cross-sectional planes, cycle-time statistics, and dual methods for extracting axial dispersion coefficients.

If this is right

  • Raising rotation speed shortens both mixing times and cycle times while increasing axial dispersion.
  • Increasing fill level lengthens axial mixing times and reduces dispersion even though cycle times become shorter.
  • Cross-sectional mixing improves mainly with speed and becomes less sensitive to fill level once speed is high.
  • A diffusion model based on the computed dispersion coefficients accurately tracks the axial Lacey index, supporting predictive use of the simulation approach.
  • Operating conditions must be chosen to balance faster homogenization against changes in residence time distribution.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The identified trade-offs could be used to select operating points that achieve target product uniformity without excessive residence time spread in scaled-up reactors.
  • Similar simulation setups could test whether the same speed and fill dependencies appear in other horizontal granular mixers such as rotary drums.
  • Real-time adjustment of speed and fill based on inline mixing sensors might maintain consistent output when feed properties vary.
  • Extending the trajectory analysis to include radial segregation would reveal whether the reported axial effects are accompanied by unwanted particle size or density sorting.

Load-bearing premise

The calibrated contact parameters for the polypropylene powder correctly represent real particle interactions and resulting flow inside the reactor.

What would settle it

Direct laboratory measurements of axial homogenization times or Lacey index curves at several rotation speeds and fill levels, compared against the simulated trends, would confirm or refute the reported dependencies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.07082 by Igor Ostanin, Sahar Pourandi, Thomas Weinhart.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Lab–scale HSBR geometry. The column is fixed, and the agitator rotates. The interaction between particles and the reactor walls was modeled using the same contact properties as those applied for particle–particle interactions. To investigate the influence of reactor parameters, simulations were con￾ducted for combinations of four fill levels and six rotation speeds, as shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/fu… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Initial particle labeling used for mixing analysis: (a) axial (z–direction) labeling; (b) cross–sectional (xy–plane) labeling for the HSBR at 40% fill level and 40 rpm rotation speed. 2.3.2. Cycle time Cycle–time analysis has been employed as a practical tool to investigate particle circulation dynamics in mechanically agitated granular systems, par￾ticularly horizontal stirred bed reactors (HSBRs). Van de… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Sample particle trajectory in the xy–plane (blue), particle positions at t c i,k (red), and shaft center (yellow). Trajectories are linearly interpolated between simulation time steps. Cycle Time Verification via Coarse–Graining Analysis. To verify the trajectory￾based measurement of the mean cycle time, a continuum coarse–graining (CG) analysis was also implemented using the fstatistics tool of the Mer￾cu… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Lacey index in the axial direction (left) and cross–sectional direction (right) for the HSBR at a fill level of 40% and rotation speed of 40 rpm. To visually illustrate the progression of mixing, Figures 5 and 6 present simulation snapshots of particle distributions at selected time points in the axial and cross–sectional directions, respectively. These snapshots comple￾ment the Lacey index results by prov… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Simulation snapshots of axial mixing evolution in the HSBR at a fill level of 40% and rotation speed of 40 rpm. 25 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Simulation snapshots of cross–sectional mixing evolution in the HSBR at a fill level of 40% and rotation speed of 40 rpm. Mixing Time. To quantify the mixing behavior observed in both the axial (z) and cross–sectional (xy) directions, the time evolution of the Lacey index was fitted to an exponential model of the form [56–58]: Mfit(t) = 1 − exp  − t − t0 tm  (24) Here, t denotes time, t0 is the offset ti… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Fitted exponential curves (solid lines) and simulated Lacey index data (markers) for the axial direction (left) and cross–sectional direction (right) at a fill level of 40% and rotation speed of 40 rpm. The uncertainties in tm and t0 were obtained from the covariance matrix of the nonlinear least-squares fit, following the standard procedure described in Reference [60]. The error bars represent one standar… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Cycle time distribution (blue) and mean value (red) for the HSBR at a fill level of 40% and rotation speed of 40 rpm. To verify this trajectory-based measurement, a continuum coarse–graining (CG) analysis was performed using the framework detailed in Section 2. DEM particle data from the first 120 s of the simulation were coarse–grained on a 50 × 50 grid in the xy–plane using a Gaussian kernel of width equ… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Coarse–grained angular velocity field ω(x, y) obtained using MercuryCG. The color map represents the local angular velocity magnitude for the HSBR operated at a fill level of 40% and rotation speed of 40 rpm. The mean cycle time will be further analyzed in Section 3.2 to assess how fill level and rotation speed influence the particle angular motion and circulation dynamics. 3.1.3. Axial dispersion coeffici… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Comparison of the axial Lacey index computed from DEM particle positions with the axial Lacey indices predicted by the diffusion model using the time–based (Einstein) and cycle–based dispersion coefficients. In the following section (Section 3.2), the effect of operating conditions on axial dispersion is examined. In particular, the time–based axial dispersion coefficient Dz is analysed as a function of f… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Effect of the fill level and rotation speed on the parameter t z m for axial mixing. Second, we studied the effect of rotation speed and fill level on the pa￾rameter t xy m , for cross–sectional (xy–direction) mixing. We observed that t xy m decreases consistently with increasing rotation speed for all fill levels. How￾ever, the effect of fill level differs significantly compared to the axial mixing case.… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Effect of the fill level and rotation speed on the parameter t xy m for cross–sectional mixing. 34 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p034_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Comparison of cycle time obtained from DEM simulations using two particle scale factors with experimental measurements [9]. 3.2.3. Axial Dispersion Coefficient [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p036_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Comparison of axial dispersion coefficient obtained from DEM simulations with two scaling factors and experimental measurements [9]. 4. Conclusions and outlook This study investigated the influence of rotation speed and fill level on key aspects of particle dynamics and mixing efficiency within a lab–scale hor￾izontal stirred bed reactor (HSBR). Using Discrete Element Method (DEM) simulations validated ag… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Horizontal stirred bed reactors (HSBRs) are used in gas--phase polyolefin production, where efficient solids mixing and controlled residence time distributions are essential for product quality and stability. Despite their industrial relevance, the influence of operating conditions on granular flow and mixing in HSBRs is not well understood. Discrete Element Method (DEM) simulations are used to study the effects of rotation speed and fill level on particle motion, mixing, and axial transport in a lab--scale HSBR. An industrial--grade polypropylene powder is modelled using calibrated contact parameters. Mixing is quantified using the Lacey index in axial (z) and cross--sectional (xy) directions. Particle circulation is characterised via cycle--time analysis and a coarse--grained angular velocity field. Axial dispersion coefficients are obtained from particle trajectories using both Einstein--type and cycle--based approaches, and validated with a diffusion model predicting the axial Lacey index. Results show that axial mixing depends strongly on rotation speed and fill level: higher rotation speeds accelerate homogenization, while higher fill levels slow mixing. Cross--sectional mixing is mainly sensitive to rotation speed, with fill--level effects diminishing at higher speeds. Cycle time decreases with increasing rotation speed and fill level, indicating enhanced circulation. Axial dispersion increases with rotation speed but decreases with fill level, with consistent results across methods. These findings reveal trade--offs between axial mixing, circulation, and dispersion, highlighting the need to balance operating conditions and demonstrating the capability of DEM to support HSBR optimisation.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript uses DEM simulations to study granular mixing and flow in a lab-scale horizontal stirred bed reactor (HSBR) for gas-phase polyolefin production. An industrial-grade polypropylene powder is modeled with calibrated contact parameters. Mixing is quantified via the Lacey index in axial (z) and cross-sectional (xy) directions; circulation is characterized by cycle-time analysis and coarse-grained angular velocity; axial dispersion coefficients are computed from trajectories using Einstein-type and cycle-based methods and cross-validated against a diffusion model for the axial Lacey index. The central results are that axial mixing accelerates with higher rotation speed and slows with higher fill level, cross-sectional mixing is mainly sensitive to speed, cycle times decrease with both parameters, and axial dispersion increases with speed but decreases with fill level.

Significance. If the calibrated contact parameters accurately represent real particle interactions under the simulated conditions, the work provides quantitative insights into operating-condition trade-offs that affect homogenization and residence-time distribution in HSBRs, an industrially relevant system. The internal consistency across independent methods (Lacey index, two dispersion calculations, and diffusion-model prediction) is a methodological strength that supports the reliability of the reported numerical trends. The study demonstrates DEM's applicability to HSBR optimization and could guide process design, provided the parameter set is shown to reproduce experimental behavior.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and contact-model section] Abstract and the section describing the contact model: the central claim that axial mixing depends strongly on rotation speed and fill level rests on DEM trajectories computed with a set of calibrated contact parameters for the polypropylene powder. No quantitative experimental validation is reported (e.g., comparison of simulated vs. measured cycle times, Lacey-index evolution, or axial dispersion in the lab-scale reactor), so it remains unclear whether the observed speed/fill-level dependencies reflect physical behavior or are sensitive to the particular calibration choice.
  2. [Methods section on DEM setup] Methods section on DEM setup and parameter calibration: the manuscript states that contact parameters were calibrated for the industrial-grade powder but provides insufficient detail on the calibration procedure, quantitative fitting metrics, mesh-sensitivity checks, error bars on derived quantities, or rules for data exclusion. These omissions limit independent verification of the robustness of the reported trends in mixing and dispersion.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Figures] Figure captions and legends could more explicitly label the specific rotation speeds and fill levels used in each panel to make the trends easier to compare at a glance.
  2. [Results on axial dispersion] Notation for the two dispersion-coefficient methods (Einstein-type vs. cycle-based) should be introduced with a brief equation or definition when first used to aid readers unfamiliar with granular dispersion analysis.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed review of our manuscript. We respond point-by-point to the major comments below, indicating the revisions we intend to make.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and contact-model section] Abstract and the section describing the contact model: the central claim that axial mixing depends strongly on rotation speed and fill level rests on DEM trajectories computed with a set of calibrated contact parameters for the polypropylene powder. No quantitative experimental validation is reported (e.g., comparison of simulated vs. measured cycle times, Lacey-index evolution, or axial dispersion in the lab-scale reactor), so it remains unclear whether the observed speed/fill-level dependencies reflect physical behavior or are sensitive to the particular calibration choice.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the work is simulation-based and does not include direct quantitative comparison of the reported mixing metrics or dispersion coefficients against experimental measurements in the lab-scale HSBR. The contact parameters were calibrated to reproduce standard bulk properties of the industrial polypropylene powder (angle of repose and bulk density). To address concerns about parameter sensitivity, the revised manuscript will include a limited sensitivity analysis on key contact parameters and will expand the discussion to note that the observed trends are corroborated by multiple independent analysis methods (Lacey index, Einstein-type and cycle-based dispersion, and diffusion-model validation). The abstract will be updated to explicitly state the simulation nature of the findings and the reliance on calibrated parameters. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Methods section on DEM setup] Methods section on DEM setup and parameter calibration: the manuscript states that contact parameters were calibrated for the industrial-grade powder but provides insufficient detail on the calibration procedure, quantitative fitting metrics, mesh-sensitivity checks, error bars on derived quantities, or rules for data exclusion. These omissions limit independent verification of the robustness of the reported trends in mixing and dispersion.

    Authors: We thank the referee for highlighting these gaps in methodological detail. In the revised version we will expand the DEM setup and calibration subsection to describe the calibration procedure in full, report quantitative fitting metrics (e.g., deviation from experimental angle-of-repose values), present mesh-sensitivity results, add error bars to the Lacey-index and dispersion-coefficient plots, and specify the data-exclusion criteria applied to particle trajectories. These additions will improve reproducibility and allow independent assessment of the robustness of the reported trends. revision: yes

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • Absence of quantitative experimental validation of the simulated mixing and dispersion results against direct measurements in the lab-scale reactor, as no such experimental data were collected in this study.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: results derive from DEM trajectories and independent internal checks, not from fitted inputs by construction

full rationale

The paper calibrates contact parameters as model inputs, then computes mixing metrics (Lacey index), cycle times, and axial dispersion coefficients directly from simulated particle trajectories. These outputs are cross-validated using two independent dispersion estimators (Einstein-type and cycle-based) plus a separate diffusion model that predicts the axial Lacey index evolution; none of these steps reduce the reported speed/fill-level trends to the calibration data by algebraic identity or statistical forcing. No self-citations are invoked as load-bearing uniqueness theorems, and no ansatz or renaming of known results is presented as a derivation. The central claims therefore remain independent of the input parameters once the simulation is run.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the fidelity of the DEM contact model and the calibration of particle interaction parameters for polypropylene; these are domain assumptions rather than derived quantities.

free parameters (1)
  • contact parameters
    Calibrated for industrial-grade polypropylene powder as stated; specific values and fitting procedure not detailed in abstract.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Discrete element method with calibrated contacts faithfully reproduces granular flow and mixing in HSBRs
    Invoked for all reported trends on mixing indices, cycle times, and dispersion coefficients.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5577 in / 1314 out tokens · 77193 ms · 2026-05-10T16:49:18.158900+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    J. W. Shepard, J. L. Jezl, E. F. Peters, R. D. Hall, Divided horizontal reactor for the vapor phase polymerization of monomers at different hydrogen levels, US Patent 3,957,448 (May 18 1976). 41

    1976

  2. [2]

    M. Caracotsios, Theoretical modelling of amoco’s gas phase horizon- tal stirred bed reactor for the manufacturing of polypropylene resins, Chemical engineering science 47 (9-11) (1992) 2591–2596. doi:10.1016/ 0009-2509(92)87098-B

    1992

  3. [3]

    J. B. Soares, T. F. McKenna, Polyolefin reaction engineering, John Wi- ley & Sons, 2013. doi:10.1002/9783527646944

    work page doi:10.1002/9783527646944 2013

  4. [4]

    Pourandi, P

    S. Pourandi, P. C. van der Sande, I. Ostanin, T. Weinhart, Calibration of a DEM contact model for wet industrial granular materials, Powder Technology 476 (2026) 122404. doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2026.122404

    work page doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2026.122404 2026

  5. [5]

    Gorbach, S

    A. Gorbach, S. Naik, W. Ray, Dynamics and stability analysis of solid catalyzed gas-phase polymerization of olefins in continuous stirred bed reactors, Chemical engineering science 55 (20) (2000) 4461–4479. doi: 10.1016/S0009-2509(00)00080-4

    work page doi:10.1016/s0009-2509(00)00080-4 2000

  6. [6]

    J. J. Zacca, J. A. Debling, W. Ray, Reactor residence time distribu- tion effects on the multistage polymerization of olefinsi. basic principles and illustrative examples, polypropylene, Chemical Engineering Science 51 (21) (1996) 4859–4886. doi:10.1016/0009-2509(96)00258-8

    work page doi:10.1016/0009-2509(96)00258-8 1996

  7. [7]

    C. J. Dittrich, S. M. Mutsers, On the residence time distribution in reac- tors with non-uniform velocity profiles: The horizontal stirred bed reac- tor for polypropylene production, Chemical engineering science 62 (21) (2007) 5777–5793. doi:10.1016/j.ces.2007.06.031

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ces.2007.06.031 2007

  8. [8]

    Tian, X.-P

    Z. Tian, X.-P. Gu, L.-F. Feng, J.-P. Corriou, G.-H. Hu, Modeling and simulation of polypropylene particle size distribution in industrial hori- 42 zontal stirred bed reactors, Journal of applied polymer science 125 (4) (2012) 2668–2679. doi:10.1002/app.36473

    work page doi:10.1002/app.36473 2012

  9. [9]

    P. C. van der Sande, E. C. Wagner, J. de Mooij, G. M. Meesters, J. R. van Ommen, Particle dynamics in horizontal stirred bed reactors charac- terized by single-photon emission radioactive particle tracking, Chemi- cal Engineering Journal 482 (2024) 149100. doi:10.1016/j.cej.2024. 149100

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cej.2024 2024

  10. [10]

    P. C. van der Sande, C. de Vries, E. C. Wagner, A. C. Vögtlander, G. M. Meesters, J. R. van Ommen, Flow behavior of polypropylene reactor powder in horizontal stirred bed reactors characterized by x- ray imaging, Chemical Engineering Journal 500 (2024) 156891. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2024.156891

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cej.2024.156891 2024

  11. [11]

    Pourandi, P

    S. Pourandi, P. C. van der Sande, T. Weinhart, I. Ostanin, A math- ematical model for the dynamic angle of repose of a granular ma- terial in the rotating drum, Powder Technology 446 (2024) 120176. doi:10.1016/J.POWTEC.2024.120176

    work page doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2024.120176 2024

  12. [12]

    P. A. Cundall, O. D. Strack, A discrete numerical model for granular as- semblies, geotechnique 29 (1) (1979) 47–65. doi:10.1680/geot.1979. 29.1.47

    work page doi:10.1680/geot.1979 1979

  13. [13]

    Weinhart, L

    T. Weinhart, L. Orefice, M. Post, M. P. van Schrojenstein Lantman, I. F. Denissen, D. R. Tunuguntla, J. Tsang, H. Cheng, M. Y. Shaheen, H. Shi, et al., Fast, flexible particle simulationsan introduction to mercurydpm, 43 Computer physics communications 249 (2020) 107129. doi:10.1016/ j.cpc.2019.107129

    work page arXiv 2020

  14. [14]

    A. R. Thornton, T. Plath, I. Ostanin, H. Götz, J.-W. Bisschop, M. Has- san, R. Roeplal, X. Wang, S. Pourandi, T. Weinhart, Recent advances in mercurydpm, Mathematics in Computer Science 17 (2) (2023) 13. doi:10.1007/s11786-023-00562-x

    work page doi:10.1007/s11786-023-00562-x 2023

  15. [15]

    Di Renzo, F

    A. Di Renzo, F. P. Di Maio, Comparison of contact-force models for the simulation of collisions in DEM-based granular flow codes, Chemical engineering science 59 (3) (2004) 525–541. doi:10.1016/j.ces.2003. 09.037

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ces.2003 2004

  16. [16]

    Luding, Cohesive, frictional powders: contact models for ten- sion, Granular matter 10 (4) (2008) 235–246

    S. Luding, Cohesive, frictional powders: contact models for ten- sion, Granular matter 10 (4) (2008) 235–246. doi:10.1007/ s10035-008-0099-x

    2008

  17. [17]

    Wensrich, A

    C. Wensrich, A. Katterfeld, Rolling friction as a technique for modelling particle shape in dem, Powder Technology 217 (2012) 409–417. doi: 10.1016/j.powtec.2011.10.057

    work page doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2011.10.057 2012

  18. [18]

    Roessler, A

    T. Roessler, A. Katterfeld, Scaling of the angle of repose test and its influence on the calibration of dem parameters using upscaled particles, Powder technology 330 (2018) 58–66. doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2018. 01.044

    work page doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2018 2018

  19. [19]

    S. C. Thakur, J. P. Morrissey, J. Sun, J. Chen, J. Y. Ooi, Micromechan- ical analysis of cohesive granular materials using the discrete element 44 method with an adhesive elasto-plastic contact model, Granular Matter 16 (2014) 383–400. doi:10.1007/s10035-014-0506-4

    work page doi:10.1007/s10035-014-0506-4 2014

  20. [20]

    Y. J. Huang, O. J. Nydal, B. Yao, Time step criterions for nonlin- ear dense packed granular materials in time-driven method simulations, Powder technology 253 (2014) 80–88. doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2013. 10.010

    work page doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2013 2014

  21. [21]

    Z. Yan, S. Wilkinson, E. Stitt, M. Marigo, Discrete element modelling (DEM) input parameters: understanding their impact on model pre- dictions using statistical analysis, Computational Particle Mechanics 2 (2015) 283–299. doi:10.1007/s40571-015-0056-5

    work page doi:10.1007/s40571-015-0056-5 2015

  22. [22]

    Lommen, D

    S. Lommen, D. Schott, G. Lodewijks, DEM speedup: Stiffness effects on behavior of bulk material, Particuology 12 (2014) 107–112. doi: 10.1016/j.partic.2013.03.006

    work page doi:10.1016/j.partic.2013.03.006 2014

  23. [23]

    P. M. C. Lacey, Developments in the theory of particle mixing, Jour- nal of applied chemistry 4 (5) (1954) 257–268. doi:10.1002/jctb. 5010040504

    work page doi:10.1002/jctb 1954

  24. [24]

    Lacey, The mixing of solid particles, Chemical Engineering Research and Design 75 (1997) S49–S55

    P. Lacey, The mixing of solid particles, Chemical Engineering Research and Design 75 (1997) S49–S55. doi:10.1016/S0263-8762(97)80004-4

    work page doi:10.1016/s0263-8762(97)80004-4 1997

  25. [25]

    Füvesi, C

    B. Füvesi, C. Goniva, S. Luding, V. Magnanimo, Mixing indices in up- scaled simulations, Powder Technology 456 (2025) 120775. doi:10. 1016/j.powtec.2025.120775

    work page arXiv 2025

  26. [26]

    R. J. Brandao, R. M. Lima, R. L. Santos, C. R. Duarte, M. A. 45 Barrozo, Experimental study and dem analysis of granular segrega- tion in a rotating drum, Powder Technology 364 (2020) 1–12. doi: 10.1016/j.powtec.2020.01.036

    work page doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2020.01.036 2020

  27. [27]

    Jiang, Y

    M. Jiang, Y. Zhao, G. Liu, J. Zheng, Enhancing mixing of particles by baffles in a rotating drum mixer, Particuology 9 (3) (2011) 270–278. doi:10.1016/j.partic.2010.06.008

    work page doi:10.1016/j.partic.2010.06.008 2011

  28. [28]

    P. Liu, R. Yang, A. Yu, Dem study of the transverse mixing of wet particles in rotating drums, Chemical Engineering Science 86 (2013) 99–107. doi:10.1016/j.ces.2012.06.015

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ces.2012.06.015 2013

  29. [29]

    Zhang, N

    Z. Zhang, N. Gui, L. Ge, Z. Li, Numerical study of particle mixing in a tilted three-dimensional tumbler and a new particle-size mixing index, Advanced Powder Technology 30 (10) (2019) 2338–2351. doi: 10.1016/j.apt.2019.07.017

    work page doi:10.1016/j.apt.2019.07.017 2019

  30. [30]

    Widhate, H

    P. Widhate, H. Zhu, Q. Zeng, K. Dong, Mixing of particles in a rotating drum with inclined axis of rotation, Processes 8 (12) (2020) 1688. doi: 10.3390/pr8121688

    work page doi:10.3390/pr8121688 2020

  31. [31]

    A. V. Patil, J. Hofsteenge, J. M. Bujalski, S. T. Johansen, Dpm model segregation validation and scaling effect in a rotary drum, Com- putational Particle Mechanics 9 (4) (2022) 693–707. doi:10.1007/ s40571-021-00438-6

    2022

  32. [32]

    van Sleeuwen, S

    R. van Sleeuwen, S. Pantaleev, M. Ebrahimi, et al., Efficient dem model- ing of solid flavor particle mixing in a rotary drum, Powder Technology 437 (2024) 119559. doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2024.119559. 46

    work page doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2024.119559 2024

  33. [33]

    X. Tang, S. Wang, X. Jin, Y. Shen, Super-quadric cfd-dem modelling of chip-like particle-liquid flow in a rotary drum, Powder Technology 435 (2024) 119363. doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2024.119363

    work page doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2024.119363 2024

  34. [34]

    L. Xu, X. Wu, M. Liu, S. Bao, B. Liu, Z. Lu, Studying on the upper limit of the coarse-grained dem model for simulating mixing processes in a rolling drum with complex wall boundary, Advanced Powder Technology 35 (1) (2024) 104307. doi:10.1016/j.apt.2023.104307

    work page doi:10.1016/j.apt.2023.104307 2024

  35. [35]

    J. Song, N. Naeem, H. Fan, G. Li, M. Li, Y. Guo, J. Lin, J. Tie, Flow and mixing of elongated particles in rotating drums of different sizes, Frontiers in Chemical Engineering 7 (2025) 1636010. doi:10.3389/ fceng.2025.1636010

    work page arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    Chandratilleke, X

    G. Chandratilleke, X. Jin, Y. Shen, Dem study of effects of particle size and density on mixing behaviour in a ribbon mixer, Powder Technology 392 (2021) 93–107. doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2021.06.058

    work page doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2021.06.058 2021

  37. [37]

    X. Jin, G. R. Chandratilleke, S. Wang, Y. Shen, Dem investigation of mixing indices in a ribbon mixer, Particuology 60 (2022) 37–47. doi: 10.1016/j.partic.2021.03.005

    work page doi:10.1016/j.partic.2021.03.005 2022

  38. [38]

    G. R. Chandratilleke, A. Yu, R. Stewart, J. Bridgwater, Effects of blade rake angle and gap on particle mixing in a cylindrical mixer, Powder Technology 193 (3) (2009) 303–311. doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2009.03. 007

    work page doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2009.03 2009

  39. [39]

    G. R. Chandratilleke, A. Yu, J. Bridgwater, K. Shinohara, A particle- 47 scale index in the quantification of mixing of particles, AIChE journal 58 (4) (2012) 1099–1118. doi:10.1002/aic.12654

    work page doi:10.1002/aic.12654 2012

  40. [40]

    G. R. Chandratilleke, A. Yu, J. Bridgwater, A dem study of the mixing of particles induced by a flat blade, Chemical Engineering Science 79 (2012) 54–74. doi:10.1016/j.ces.2012.05.010

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ces.2012.05.010 2012

  41. [41]

    Halidan, G

    M. Halidan, G. Chandratilleke, S. Chan, A. Yu, J. Bridgwater, Pre- diction of the mixing behaviour of binary mixtures of particles in a bladed mixer, Chemical Engineering Science 120 (2014) 37–48. doi: 10.1016/j.ces.2014.08.048

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ces.2014.08.048 2014

  42. [42]

    Chandratilleke, A

    R. Chandratilleke, A. Yu, J. Bridgwater, K. Shinohara, Flow and mix- ing of cohesive particles in a vertical bladed mixer, Industrial & Engi- neering Chemistry Research 53 (10) (2014) 4119–4130. doi:10.1021/ ie403877v

    2014

  43. [43]

    D. K. Chibwe, G. M. Evans, E. Doroodchi, B. J. Monaghan, D. J. Pin- son, S. J. Chew, Particle near-neighbour separation index for quantifica- tion of segregation of granular material, Powder Technology 360 (2020) 481–492. doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2019.10.079

    work page doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2019.10.079 2020

  44. [44]

    Korkerd, Z

    K. Korkerd, Z. Zhou, R. Zou, P. Piumsomboon, B. Chalermsinsuwan, Effect of immersed tubes configurations on mixing and heat transfer of mixed biomass and silica sand in a bubbling fluidized bed using cfd- dem and statistical experimental design analysis, Powder Technology 437 (2024) 119542. doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2024.119542. 48

    work page doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2024.119542 2024

  45. [45]

    Godlieb, N

    W. Godlieb, N. Deen, J. Kuipers, Characterizing solids mixing in dem simulations, in: 6th International Conference on Multiphase Flow, ICMF 2007, 2007

    2007

  46. [46]

    Kamesh, S

    R. Kamesh, S. Vaddagani, C. Sumana, K. Y. Rani, S. R. Gopireddy, N. A. Urbanetz, Six-directional sampling method and mean mixing indices for solids blending performance analysis of dem simulations, Powder Technology 398 (2022) 117051. doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2021. 117051

    work page doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2021 2022

  47. [47]

    Norouzi, R

    H. Norouzi, R. Zarghami, N. Mostoufi, Insights into the granular flow in rotating drums, Chemical engineering research and design 102 (2015) 12–25. doi:10.1016/j.cherd.2015.06.010

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cherd.2015.06.010 2015

  48. [48]

    Weinhart, A

    T. Weinhart, A. R. Thornton, S. Luding, O. Bokhove, From discrete particles to continuum fields near a boundary, Granular Matter 14 (2) (2012) 289–294. doi:10.1007/s10035-012-0317-4

    work page doi:10.1007/s10035-012-0317-4 2012

  49. [49]

    S. Yang, Y. Sun, J. Wang, A. Cahyadi, J. W. Chew, Influence of oper- ating parameters and flow regime on solid dispersion behavior in a gas– solid spout-fluid bed, Chemical Engineering Science 142 (2016) 112–125. doi:10.1016/j.ces.2015.11.038

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ces.2015.11.038 2016

  50. [50]

    S. Yang, L. Zhang, K. Luo, J. W. Chew, Dem investigation of the axial dispersion behavior of a binary mixture in the rotating drum, Powder Technology 330 (2018) 93–104. doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2018.02.021

    work page doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2018.02.021 2018

  51. [51]

    Einstein, Über die von der molekularkinetischen theorie der wärme geforderte bewegung von in ruhenden flüssigkeiten sus- 49 pendierten teilchen, Annalen der physik 4 (1905)

    A. Einstein, Über die von der molekularkinetischen theorie der wärme geforderte bewegung von in ruhenden flüssigkeiten sus- 49 pendierten teilchen, Annalen der physik 4 (1905). doi:10.1002/andp. 19053220806

    work page doi:10.1002/andp 1905

  52. [52]

    Einstein, Investigations on the Theory of the Brownian Movement, Courier Corporation, 1956

    A. Einstein, Investigations on the Theory of the Brownian Movement, Courier Corporation, 1956

    1956

  53. [53]

    K. Luo, S. Yang, K. Zhang, M. Fang, J. Fan, Particle dispersion and circulation patterns in a 3d spouted bed with or without draft tube, Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 52 (28) (2013) 9620–9631. doi:10.1021/ie303555g

    work page doi:10.1021/ie303555g 2013

  54. [54]

    Ingram, J

    A. Ingram, J. Seville, D. Parker, X. Fan, R. Forster, Axial and radial dispersion in rolling mode rotating drums, Powder technology 158 (1-3) (2005) 76–91. doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2005.04.030

    work page doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2005.04.030 2005

  55. [55]

    Pallarès, F

    D. Pallarès, F. Johnsson, A novel technique for particle tracking in cold 2-dimensional fluidized bedssimulating fuel dispersion, Chemical Engi- neering Science 61 (8) (2006) 2710–2720. doi:10.1016/j.ces.2005. 11.030

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ces.2005 2006

  56. [56]

    P. Liu, R. Yang, A. Yu, The effect of liquids on radial segregation of granular mixtures in rotating drums, Granular Matter 15 (4) (2013) 427–436. doi:10.1007/s10035-013-0392-1

    work page doi:10.1007/s10035-013-0392-1 2013

  57. [57]

    Halidan, G

    M. Halidan, G. Chandratilleke, K. Dong, A. Yu, Mixing performance of ribbon mixers: Effects of operational parameters, Powder Technology 325 (2018) 92–106. doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2017.11.009

    work page doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2017.11.009 2018

  58. [58]

    Herman, J

    A. Herman, J. Gan, A. Yu, The effect of rotation speed and mixer size on granular flow and mixing in bladed mixers, in: EPJ Web of 50 Conferences, Vol. 249, EDP Sciences, 2021, p. 03036. doi:10.1051/ epjconf/202124903036

    work page arXiv 2021

  59. [59]

    J. C. Lagarias, J. A. Reeds, M. H. Wright, P. E. Wright, Conver- gence properties of the nelder–mead simplex method in low dimen- sions, SIAM Journal on optimization 9 (1) (1998) 112–147. doi: 10.1137/S1052623496303470

    work page doi:10.1137/s1052623496303470 1998

  60. [60]

    W. H. Press, Numerical recipes 3rd edition: The art of scientific com- puting, Cambridge university press, 2007. 51

    2007