See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282317056

Simulation of silo filling and discharge using

ANSYS and comparison with experimental data

Article in Computers and Electronics in Agriculture October 2015

DOI: 10.1016/j.compag.2015.09.014

CITATIONS READS

4 523

3 authors, including:

Eutiquio Gallego Angel Ruiz

Universidad Politcnica de Madrid Universidad de Len
46 PUBLICATIONS 277 CITATIONS 6 PUBLICATIONS 38 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Design and structural calculation of conical steel roofs for silos View project

Rural roads View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Angel Ruiz on 18 November 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.
 Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 118 (2015) 281289

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers and Electronics in Agriculture

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compag

Original papers

Simulation of silo filling and discharge using ANSYS and comparison

with experimental data
Eutiquio Gallego a,, Angel Ruiz b, Pedro J. Aguado b
a
Department of Agricultural Engineering, BIPREE Research Group, ETSI Agronomica, Alimentaria y de Biosistemas, Technical University of Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain
b
Department of Agricultural Engineering and Sciences, ESTI Agricultural, University of Leon, Av. Portugal 41, 24071 Len, Spain

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Silos are structures widely used in the industrial and agricultural sectors. Despite the advances in
Received 6 July 2015 research during the last century, many uncertainties still remain. Some of the still unresolved questions
Received in revised form 7 September 2015 in silos are the knowledge about the laws which control the behavior of materials stored in silos or the
Accepted 11 September 2015
phenomena produced during the discharge process, when the highest thrust forces exerted by the stored
Available online 25 September 2015
materials on the walls appear.
Numerical methods have been extensively employed for the understanding of these complex
Keywords:
structures. Among them, the Finite Element Method is a suitable technique to determine the stresses
Silos
Finite Element Model
and displacements appeared on the walls or the bulk solid both for filling and discharge of the silo.
Experimental tests However, numerical models must be validated by experimental assays. Due to the high investment
Normal pressures required, there are very few experimental installations in the world with full-scale silos for determining
Discharge the actions produced by the stored materials. Therefore, very few assays can be found in the literature.
In this article, it has been accomplished a comparison of the results obtained in several assays con-
ducted using an experimental cylindrical silo with those calculated using a Finite Element Model
(FEM) developed by using ANSYS software package. A mid-scale test silo was used to carry out the assays,
which is equipped to measure the normal wall pressures and the friction forces. The numerical pressures
predicted by the FEM are quite close of those experimentally obtained, both for filling and discharge. In
addition, the mean vertical pressure obtained at transition is the same for both sets of results during the
filling process. Some differences appear during the initial instants of the discharge, when the numerical
model predicts higher mean vertical pressures at transition than those experimentally measured. The
FEM predicts higher peak pressures than the experimental ones measured, and at a location closer to
the transition than the real position of the sensor placed in the hopper to detect this peak.
2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction phenomenon which depends of the type of flow of the material

Since the emergence of the first tower silos used for storing
granular materials at the end of the 19th century, many studies
have been developed on these structures. However, many uncer-
tainties still remain (Dogangun et al., 2009; Ayuga, 2008;
Nielsen, 2008) since the laws which control the behavior of mate-
rials stored in silos are not totally understood. The highest thrust
forces exerted by the stored materials on the walls occur during
discharge (Ramirez et al., 2010; Hrtl et al., 2008; EN 1991-4,
2006; Ayuga et al., 2001; Zhong et al., 2001; Askegaard and
Munch-Andersen, 1985). The emptying of a silo is also a complex
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: eutiquio.gallego@upm.es (E. Gallego), aruip@unileon.es (A.
Ruiz), pedro.aguado@unileon.es (P.J. Aguado).
(Chen et al., 2007; Jenike and Johanson, 1969).
Analytical approaches on the topic of lateral vertical wall fric-
tion forces analysis were proposed during the 1970s and 1980s by
many authors (Hatfield and Bartali, 1988; Briassoulis and Curtis,
1985; Drescher and Vgenopoulou, 1985; Lvin, 1971) in order to
improve the predictions made by the theory proposed by Janssen
(1895). The improvement of computers occurred during the second
half of the 20th century led to a widespread use of numerical
methods for the understanding of the phenomena occurring in
silos.
The numerical methods are very useful for the understanding of
these complex structures, because it is possible to simultaneously
simulate the existence of a flexible wall and the material stored in
the silo, or to consider non-linear material models for the bulk
solid, among others. The Finite Element Method is a suitable
technique to determine the stresses and displacements appeared

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2015.09.014
0168-1699/ 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
282 E. Gallego et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 118 (2015) 281289
Table 1
Experimentally determined parameters.
Material parameter
Grain specific weight, c (kN/m )3
Grain modulus of elasticity, E (kPa)
Effective angle of internal friction of bulk material, /i
Wall friction coefficient, l
Angle of repose
Grain Poissons ratio, m
Table 2
Parameters taken from the literature.
Material parameter
Steel specific weight, cs (kN/m3)
Steel modulus of elasticity, Es (kPa)
Steel Poissons ratio, ms
Angle of dilatancy of bulk material, wi
Cohesion, c (kPa)
on the walls or the bulk solid both for filling and discharge of the
silo (Ooi and Rotter, 1990; Briassoulis, 2000; Gallego et al., 2010),
or to analyze phenomena such as buckling (Iwicki et al., 2011), silo
quaking (Wensrich, 2002), silo honking (Wilde et al., 2010), burst-
ing (Piskoty et al., 2005), geometric imperfections (Teng et al.,
2005) or eccentric hoppers (Guaita et al., 2003; Vidal et al., 2006).
The Discrete Element Method is also increasingly being used for
analyzing silos because it allows simulating the individual particles
stored in the silo (Kobyka and Molenda, 2014; Mellmann et al.,
2014; Parafiniuk et al., 2013; Gonzlez-Montellano et al., 2012).
Numerical models must be validated by experimental assays. In
addition, these assays are essential to clarify certain aspects of the
laws governing these phenomena and to obtain some parameters
required for simulations (Couto et al., 2013).
Some researchers have conducted assays on model silos made
to scale (Ahn et al., 2008; Askegaard and Munch-Andersen, 1985;
Chou and Hsu, 2003; Chou et al., 2002; Coetzee and Els, 2009;
Grudzien et al., 2011, 2010; Nedderman and Tzn, 1979;
Niedostatkiewicz et al., 2009; Rotter et al., 1989; Sielamowicz
et al., 2005, 2006; Sielamowicz and Czech, 2010; Sielamowicz
et al., 2010; Wu et al., 2009; Wjcik and Tejchman, 2009) for
F
F
STORAGE
TEST SILO
F D
D 1
1 D
Fig. 1. Experimental facilities. 1: Slide gate; 2: screw conveyor; 3: AC motor; F: filling; D: discharge.
studying the actions produced by the stored materials in silos.
However, it is well-known that errors of scale have often led to
Value results which differ considerably from behavior at full scale
8.39 (Chen et al., 2007; Nielsen and Askegaard, 1977).
10,674 Due to the high investment required, there are very few exper-
30.17 imental installations in the world with full-scale silos (Brown et al.,
0.20 2000; Hrtl et al., 2008; Ramirez et al., 2010; Schurich et al., 2001;
34.22
0.250.42
Teng and Chan, 2001; Teng et al., 2005; Zhong et al., 2001) for
determining the actions produced by the stored materials. There-
fore, very few assays can be found in the literature (Hrtl et al.,
2008; Teng et al., 2005; Askegaard and Munch-Andersen, 1985;
Chen et al., 2005, 2007; Ooi and Rotter, 1990; Rotter et al., 2002;
Wu et al., 2009; Yang and Hsiau, 2001).
Value The flow pattern can be of two types, mass flow or funnel flow
(EN 1991-4, 2006). The type of flow is primarily governed by the
78.60
2.1
108 forces acting on the walls, and the parameters which exert most
0.30 influence are the angle of the hopper and the angle of friction
8.0 between the material and the hopper wall. In mass flow, all the
2 material moves, and this type of flow is both typical of smooth
walled hoppers with large outlets as well as being the most com-
monly employed in industrial processes because it is the most effi-
cient discharge system and avoids dead zones that can alter the
properties of the material stored (Wjcik et al., 2012).
In this article, we compare the results of several assays con-
ducted using an experimental cylindrical silo with those obtained
using a Finite Element Model developed by using ANSYS software
package (ANSYS, 2012).
A mid-scale test silo was used to carry out the assays, which is
equipped to measure the normal wall pressures and the friction
forces. This installation permits to obtain most of the parameters
governing in the calculation of the actions on silos. The silo was
designed, built and validated by the same research team responsible
for the present paper, and has been described and validated in detail
in two previous publications (Couto et al., 2012; Ruiz et al., 2012).
2. Materials and methods
2.1. The granular material
The granular material used to generate the actions due to the
stored material, was common wheat (Triticum aestivum), Galera
SILO 2
D
3
F D
2 F D
F
F 3
 E. Gallego et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 118 (2015) 281289 283

m K=1 K 1
The value of the grain specific weight was calculated when the
silo was completely filled, during the static condition derived from
the repose state. The silo volume was known and the slope angle of
the stored material was also measured. So, the specific weight of
the stored material was obtained from vertical load cell readings
from level L0 using Eq. (2).
F L0A F L0B F L0C WT
d 2
Vc Vh Vc Vh
Vertical load cells can register at any moment the total vertical
loads caused by the bulk solid. However, it was not possible to
measure the change in volume of the bulk solid during the filling
or discharge processes. Thus, it was not possible to experimentally
obtain the variation of the bulk density during filling or discharge.
The values obtained are shown in Table 1.

3. The Finite Element Model

z 3.1. Geometry
dc=1000
150 ANSYS software package (ANSYS, 2012) was used to develop the
GA7 3-D numerical model that accurately reproduces the dimensions
and shape of the test silo, thus considering the real binhopper
250 geometry existing. It is important to bear in mind that the diffi-
GA6 culty of simulating this type of junction may lead to unexpected
pressures, especially for discharge analysis (Keiter and Rombach,
250 2001). Because of this, a finer mesh was used for the transition.
GA5
An element size of 0.10 m was used for the entire silo, excepting
250 hc=2000 for the transition between the hopper and the bin, where an ele-
ph GA4 ment size of 0.025 m was employed. In addition, the numerical
model developed also took into account the real thickness of the
250 silo wall (0.03 m).
GA3
pw 3.2. Elements used and contact simulation
250
pv GA2
The element type used in ANSYS to represent the grain is an
250 eight node isoparametric element (SOLID185), which is of
GA1
Lagrangian type and it can support important features, e.g., large
zt deformations, birth and death options or plasticity. The nodal
pn GA0 degrees of freedom for this element are only translations. The silo
wall has been modeled by using SHELL281element, which has
ht =480 eight nodes with six degrees of freedom at each node: translations
=34.3
e0=0 h =738 in the x, y, and z axes, and rotations about the x, y, and z-axes. This
h
element is suitable for analyzing linear, large rotation, or large
strain nonlinear applications, and the MindlinReissner shell
x
theory is formulated, thus considering the effects arisen from the
real wall thickness. The element formulation is based on
logarithmic strain and true stress measures.
dh=350 The Coulombs friction model was used to describe the interac-
tion between the silo wall and the bulk solid. Thus, the grain to
Fig. 2. Dimensions of the test silo and position of the panels for measuring the
wall friction coefficient is the only parameter required to simulate
normal wall pressures.
this interaction, since the adherence between the wheat grains and
the smooth steel silo wall was considered negligible because the
R2 variety, with a minimum purity of 98%. The mechanical proper- material was dried before testing. A surface-to-surface contact
ties of this material were previously determined experimentally in algorithm was used in ANSYS to simulate this interaction, by using
the School of Agricultural Engineering of the University of Leon the four node isoparametric element types CONTA173 and
(Couto et al., 2013), laboratories in accordance with test methods TARGET170 that overlap the boundary surface of the bulk solid
proposed in Annex C of Eurocode EN 1991-4 (2006). and the inner surface of the silo wall, respectively. A further
As explained by Moya et al. (2006), the Poissons coefficient, m, description of grain wall contact simulation in silos can be found
for the bulk solid was deduced from the experimental tests con- in Gallego et al. (2010).
ducted by using the relation shown in Eq. (1), where K is the lateral
pressure ratio. The values for the lateral pressure ratio were 3.3. Loads and constrains
obtained from the experimental tests conducted, leading to values
for the Poissons coefficient of 0.25 for the filling process, and 0.42 The only load considered in the analysis was the full weight of
for the discharge process. the bulk material wheat, whose specific weight (8.397 kN/m3) was
284 E. Gallego et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 118 (2015) 281289
Fig. 3. Measurement of normal cylinder wall pressures (a) and vertical forces (b).
experimentally measured. The constrains applied to the numerical
model were as follows:
- For filling simulations, all nodes placed at silo bottom were fully
restrained, and the vertical displacement of wall nodes placed
at binhopper transition was also impeded due to the ring
stiffener and the columns existing.
- For discharge simulations, the constrains applied to the grain
nodes placed at silo bottom were removed to allow a free flow
of the bulk solid. However, the constrains applied to wall nodes
at silo bottom were maintained because of the ring stiffener
attached to the silo wall. The vertical displacement of wall
nodes placed at binhopper transition remained impeded
during the discharge phase.
The NewtonRaphson procedure was used to solve the set of
non-linear equations formulated for the filling process, while the
direct and implicit integration method of Newmark was used to
solve the discharge analysis.
3.4. Material model
An elastoplastic material model was used to simulate the
behavior of the bulk solid stored inside the silo. The common iso-
tropic and linear model was used to represent the elastic behavior,
while the perfect plasticity criterion of Drucker and Prager (1952)
was used to define the plastic part. Therefore only two material
parameters are needed to define the elastic behavior: the Poissons
ratio, m, and the modulus of elasticity, E. On the other hand, three
material parameters are required to define the plastic part of the
model: the angle of internal friction, /, the cohesion, c, and the
angle of dilatancy, w.
An isotropic and linear elastic model was also used to represent
the behavior of the steel wall. No plasticity was considered for the
steel wall since the predicted wall stresses were very far from the
yield stress. Thus, only two material parameters are again needed
to define the behavior of the steel wall: the Poissons ratio, ms, and
the modulus of elasticity, Es.
With respect to the values used for the mechanical parameters
of the bulk solid, some of them (specific weight, modulus of elastic-
ity, effective angle of internal friction and wall friction coefficient)
were taken from Table 1, while others (cohesion and angle of dila-
tancy) were adopted from literature (Moya et al., 2006, 2002).
Those related to steel were also taken from the literature. The
values taken from the literature are shown in Table 2.
4. Experimental tests
4.1. Description of the experimental facilities
The experimental facilities consist of a test silo containing the
instrumentation for measuring the different parameters used in
this paper and another silo for storing the material. The tested
material is transferred using two screw conveyors (Fig. 1).
The geometry and dimensions of the test silo are shown in
Fig. 2.
The silo walls are of 3 mm thick stainless steel, whilst the
reinforcement rings are 50 mm wide and 10 mm thick. Therefore,
the silo walls must be considered rigid. According to the Eurocode
classification, it corresponds to a slender silo, since the cylinder
height/diameter ratio is equal to 2 (hc/dc = 2).
To measure normal wall pressures 150
150 mm openings
were located along a vertical generatrix of the test silo (Fig. 2).
Panels of the same curvature as the walls were inserted, leaving
a gap of approximately 1 mm around the edges. These panels were
attached to double bending beam load cells (Fig. 3-a).
Vertical forces caused by friction of the stored material against
the vertical cylinder, were measured by three tension/compression
load cells located in the bottom part of the cylinder walls (Fig. 3-b).
Vertical cylinder is separated from the hopper by a gap of approx-
imately 1 mm between their reinforcing rings, so that the vertical
cylinder is only supported by the load cells (L1 cells in Fig. 3). These
cells are placed 120 degrees apart around the circumference of the
cylinder.
The total weight of the silo is measured by another group of
three load cells located under the reinforcing ring of the hopper
(L1 cells in Fig. 3). Further information about this experimental sta-
tion is given in two previous articles published by the research
team (Couto et al., 2012; Ruiz et al., 2012).
4.2. Description of the tests
The silo was loaded and then, after a pause of approximately
5 min, the material was discharged. Filling was performed using
a vertical tube, so that the grain was dropped by gravity centrally.
Unloading was also performed centrally. The silo outlet slide gate
was fully opened for discharge, thus producing free-flowing dis-
charge during the initial moments until the screw feeder hopper
was filled (Fig. 4); subsequently, discharge occurred at the constant
flow produced by the screw conveyor. A flexible material was
located between the hopper and the transporting system in order
 E. Gallego et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 118 (2015) 281289 285

Fig. 4. Description of the assays.

to prevent vibrations caused by rotation of the screw conveyor 5. Results and discussion
device from being transmitted to the test silo.
Values for normal wall pressures are obtained directly from Fig. 5 shows the comparison of wall normal pressures of the fill-
readings provided by the load cells located at the cylinder and hop- ing process experimentally measured, those obtained with the FE
per generatrix, by dividing the force value obtained by each cell by model and those calculated using Eurocode 1, Part 4 (EN 1991-4,
the panel surface. For example, to obtain the cylinder wall pressure 2006). It can be seen that the experimental normal pressures are
at the point where double bending beam load cell 1 is located (cell slightly greater than those predicted by the FE model. In addition,
GA1), at instant t, Eq. (3) is used. the normal pressures predicted by Eurocode are only slightly
greater than the experimental values for the bin part.
F GA1;t
phGA1;t 3
SG
The mean vertical pressure of the cylinder (measured in the
silohopper transition) by unit of length at each instant t, was
obtained by dividing the forces provided by the three tension/com-
pression load cells located at low part of the vertical cylinder by
the perimeter of its plan-cross section (Eq. (4)).

F L1A;t F L1B;t F L1C;t

nzSk;t 4
U
The mean value of the frictional force exerted on the cylinder
wall by stored material was obtained by dividing the forces pro-
vided by the three tension/compression load cells by the cylinder
surface in contact with the stored material (Eq. (5)).

F L1A;t F L1B;t F L1C;t

pw;t 5
Sc;t
The grain-wall friction coefficient was obtained by dividing pw,t
by the mean value of normal cylinder wall pressure (Eq. (6)).

pw;t
lm 6
Phm;t
The lateral pressure ratio K (ratio of mean horizontal to mean
vertical pressure) was obtained (Eq. (7)) by dividing the mean
value of normal cylinder wall pressure by the vertical stress in
the stored material, taking both values at the silohopper union.

phct;t
Kt 7
pv t;t

K coefficient was obtained under static and dynamic conditions

at each time of the test. Fig. 5. Comparison of normal pressures over the silo wall for the filling process.
286 E. Gallego et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 118 (2015) 281289
Fig. 6. Comparison of normal pressures over the silo wall for the discharge process.
The comparison of normal pressures for the hopper shows that
Eurocode predicts higher pressures than those calculated accord-
ing to the Finite Element Model, except for the transition. At this
point, the peak pressure predicted by the Eurocode is 13.96 kPa,
lower than the value obtained with the FE model (19.36 kPa).
On the other hand, it is also interesting to note that some differ-
ences exist with respect to the peak pressure appeared just below
the binhopper transition between both sets of results. The FE
model predicts that the peak pressure is located 0.04 m below
the transition, while the experimental sensor GA0 used to detect
the peak pressure is placed 0.08 m below the transition. The lateral
pressure registered by sensor GA0 is quite similar to the one pre-
dicted by the FE model at the same location (8.75 kPa vs
Fig. 7. Comparison of vertical pressures just above the bin hopper transition.
9.21 kPa). However, the peak pressure predicted by the FE model
(19.36 kPa) is considerably greater than the one measured by sen-
sor GA0 (8.75 kPa).
Fig. 6 shows the comparison between the wall normal pressures
experimentally measured, those obtained with the FE model for
the beginning of the discharge process and those obtained using
Eurocode 1, Part 4. It can be seen that there is a good agreement
between the experimental and numerical sets of results. In this
case, the normal pressures predicted by the FE model are slightly
greater than those experimentally measured, but small differences
can be observed (less than 20% in most cases). The sensor GA4
(placed at 1.32 m above outlet) is the only one which measures a
wall normal pressure significantly lower with respect to the value
predicted by the FE model (3.50 kPa vs 5.4 kPa).
For the discharge process, Eurocode predicts significant higher
normal pressures than those reported by the experimental tests
or those numerical calculated. This pattern is more evident for
the bin, where Eurocode predicts normal pressures up to 70%
greater than those experimentally measured. However, the exper-
imental peak pressure registered immediately below the transition
(18.65 kPa) is nearly the same than the one predicted by Eurocode
(18.6 kPa). Normal pressures calculated according to Eurocode are
also significantly greater than those obtained with the FE model at
hopper.
Again, the FE model predicts for the discharge process that the
peak pressure would appear 0.04 m above the location of sensor
GA0. The value of the peak pressure experimentally measured
(18.65 kPa) is now closer to the one predicted by the FE model
(21.64 kPa).
The curve of wall normal pressures obtained with the FE model
exhibits some leaps, especially at the silo wall closer to the bin
hopper transition. Some authors have observed that the presence
of shear zones influences the pressures exerted on silo walls
(Slominski et al., 2007). These shear zones cause fluctuations in
the lateral pressures on the walls and may recur throughout the
height of the silo, causing discontinuities or peaks in the curve of
normal pressures on the wall (Wjcik and Tejchman, 2009). The
use of a hypoplastic material model for the grain could improve
the smoothness of the lateral pressure curve (Gallego et al.,
2010), thus avoiding the appearance of fluctuations on the wall
normal pressures.
This is due to the presence of internal shear zones that transfer
the loads to the walls, thus reducing the vertical pressures in the
central part of the silo bin. In the transition (Fig. 7), this effect is
 E. Gallego et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 118 (2015) 281289 287

Fig. 8. Comparison of vertical pressures obtained with the FE model at different heights above outlet for the filling process.

Fig. 9. Comparison of vertical pressures obtained with the FE model at different heights above outlet for the initial phase of the discharge process.

more pronounced because the arch endings are located in a zone
where the material changes the sliding direction, hindering its
movement and increasing the supported loads.
The mean value of the vertical pressures predicted by the FE
model (12.0 kPa) for filling analysis is almost the same than the
experimental value (12.3 kPa). However, the FE model predicts
an increase of vertical pressures during the first stages of the dis-
charge process that is not experimentally detected. Thus, FE results
predict an increase of vertical pressures up to 25% during discharge
(mean value of 15 kPa), while the vertical pressure experimentally
measured remains nearly constant for the initial steps of discharge.
Fig. 8 shows the vertical pressure distribution through a silo
diameter obtained for the filling process with the FE model. Verti-
cal pressures remain nearly constant in the silo bin for silo heights
far from the binhopper transition, while arching distributions
tend to form at silo heights closer to the transition. As it could be
expected, lower vertical pressures are predicted for greater silo
heights above the outlet. The peak vertical pressure predicted is
at the binhopper transition, when this arching effect caused by
the settlement of bulk solid against the walls is maximized.
If the vertical pressure distribution is observed at locations
placed at the silo hopper, then a reversed pattern can be observed.
In this case, vertical pressures are greater at the silo center, and a
decrease of vertical pressures is observed when approaching to
the silo wall hopper. In addition, vertical pressures also decrease
at the hopper if the distance to the transition increases.
The formation of arching distributions in the bin part of the silo
induces a reduction of vertical pressures at silo heights placed at
the hopper.
Fig. 9 shows the evolution suffered by the vertical pressures at
different silo heights for the beginning of the discharge process. It
can be observed that the greater changes in the values or distribu-
tions of the vertical pressures occur for those locations closer to the
binhopper transition.
6. Conclusions
An experimental setup has been developed for a silo with 2.5 m
in height to determine the lateral pressures exerted by the stored
material. Thus, a Finite Element Model has been developed to
simulate the conditions of the experimental setup by employing
the commercial software package ANSYS.
The normal pressures predicted by the Finite Element Model are
very close to the experimental values registered, both for filling
288 E. Gallego et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 118 (2015) 281289
and discharge processes. The lateral pressures experimentally
measured at the silo bin are slightly greater than the predicted
numerical values during the filling process, while lower values
are reported for the silo discharge.
The predictions made by Eurocode match quite well the exper-
imental and numerical results for the filling process. Eurocode
overestimate normal pressures throughout the silo wall for the dis-
charge process, but the peak pressure predicted is close to the one
experimentally measured and slightly lower than the value
obtained with the FE model.
The results obtained with the numerical model show that the
peak pressure is located just below the transition, and above the
location of sensor GA0. Thus, this implies that the peak of lateral
pressures provided by sensor GA0 could have been underesti-
mated, especially for the filling process. However, there is not a
significant difference between the peak lateral pressure experi-
mentally measured and the one predicted by the Finite Element
Model.
The Finite Element Model predicts an increase of vertical pres-
sures during the initial steps of discharge. This effect has not been
experimentally observed. The vertical pressure distribution
obtained with the numerical model at different silo heights shows
that greater values are obtained at the silo wall with respect to the
silo center, especially for locations closer to the transition. This
effect is produced by the formation of an arching structure of the
bulk solid, that makes some loads are transferred to the silo walls.
On the other hand, this effect is reversed below the transition,
where lower vertical pressures are predicted at silo walls than
for the silo center.
The Finite Element Model shows a decrease of vertical pressures
in the central part of the cross section during the discharge. This
effect starts near the outlet and progresses to the top. This has been
reported by other authors (Slominski et al., 2007), and is caused by
the loss of the material discharged when the silo outlet is removed.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank the Spanish Research and Technology Com-
mission (CICYT) (Research Projects AGL2005-07430-C02-01/AGR,
AGL2012-39994-C03-0, AGL2012-39994-C03-01 and AGL2012-
39994-C03-02) and the Regional Executive of Castilla y Len
(Research Project LE020A10-2) for financing this research.
Appendix A. Nomenclature
The nomenclature employed here follows the Eurocode and
therefore the definition of parameters such as A, K, F, nzSk, U, lm,
c and / is omitted. However, this article also includes specific
aspects which are not considered in the code, and these different
parameters are defined as follows:
phGA1;t normal wall pressure at time t on the load cell GA1
(kN/m2)
pv t;t vertical stress in the stored material at the silo
hopper transition at time t (kN/m2)
phct;t mean value of normal cylinder wall pressure at
instant t at the silohopper union (kN/m2)
W weight of stored material (kN)
WI weight after filling
WII weight after discharge 1
WS weight at the start of the phase
WE weight at the end of the phase
Vc internal cylinder volume (m3)
Vh internal hopper volume (m3)
WT total weight of the stored material
f grain flow during discharge (kg/s)
U perimeter of the plan-cross section of the vertical
walled segment
SG cylinder wall surface acting on each load cell (m2)
SG0 hopper wall surface acting on each load cell (m2)
nzSk;t mean value of vertical stress per perimeter unit at the
silohopper transition at instant t (kN/m)
F GA1;t value of the force recorded by load cell GA1 at instant
t (kN)
F L0X;t vertical force exerted on the load cells located at level
L0 at each instant t (kN)
F L1X;t vertical force exerted on the load cells located at level
L1 at each instant t (kN)
Sc;t cylinder surface in contact with stored material at
instant t (m2)
phm;t mean value of normal cylinder wall pressure at
instant t (kN/m2)
References
Ahn, H., Basaranoglu, Z., Yilmaz, M., Bugutekin, A., Gl, M.Z., 2008. Experimental
investigation of granular flow through an orifice. Powder Technol. 186, 6571.
ANSYS. 2012. ANSYS Users Manual. Ver. 13.0. Swanson Analysis Systems Inc.,
Houston.
Askegaard, V., Munch-Andersen, J., 1985. Results from tests with normal and shear
stress cells in a medium-scale model silo. Powder Technol. 44 (2), 151157.
Ayuga, F., Guaita, M., Aguado, P.J., Couto, A., 2001. Discharge and the eccentricity of
the hopper influence on the silo wall pressures. J. Eng. Mech.-ASCE 127 (10),
10671074.
Ayuga, F., 2008. Some unresolved problems in the design of steel cylindrical silos.
In: Chen, J.F., Teng, J.G. (Eds.), Structures and Granular Solids: From Scientific
Principles to Engineering Applications. CRC Press-Taylor & Francis Group, Boca
Raton, USA, pp. 123133.
Briassoulis, D., 2000. Finite element analysis of a cylindrical silo shell under
unsymmetrical pressure distributions. Comput. Struct. 78 (13), 271281.
Briassoulis, D., Curtis, J., 1985. Design and analysis of silos for friction forces. J.
Struct. Eng. 11 (6), 13771398.
Brown, C.J., Lahlouh, E.H., Rotter, J.M., 2000. Experiments on a square planform steel
silo. Chem. Eng. Sci. 55 (20), 43994413.
Chen, J.F., Rotter, J.M., Ooi, J.Y., Zhong, Z., 2007. Correlation between the flow pattern
and wall pressures in a full scale experimental silo. Eng. Struct. 29 (9), 2308
2320.
Chen, J.F., Rotter, J.M., Ooi, J.Y., Zhong, Z., 2005. Flow pattern measurement in a full
scale silo containing iron ore. Chem. Eng. Sci. 60 (11), 30293041.
Chou, C.S., Hsu, J.Y., 2003. Kinematic model for granular flow in a two-dimensional
flat-bottomed hopper. Adv. Powder Technol. 14, 313331.
Chou, C.S., Hsu, J.Y., Lau, Y.D., 2002. The granular flow in a two-dimensional flat-
bottomed hopper with eccentric discharge. Physica A 308, 4658.
Coetzee, C.J., Els, D.N.J., 2009. Calibration of discrete element parameters and the
modelling of silo discharge and bucket filling. Comput. Electron. Agric. 65, 198
212.
Couto, A., Ruiz, A., Aguado, P., 2012. Design and instrumentation of a mid-size test
station for measuring static and dynamic pressures in silos under different
conditions Part I: Description. Comput. Electron. Agric. 85, 164173.
Couto, A., Ruiz, A., Aguado, P.J., 2013. Experimental study of the pressures exerted
by wheat stored in slender cylindrical silos, varying the flow rate of material
during discharge. Comparison with Eurocode 1. Part 4. Powder Technol. 237,
450467.
Dogangun, A., Karaca, Z., Durmus, A., Sezen, H., 2009. Cause of damage and failures
in silo structures. J. Perform. Constructed Facil. 23, 6571.
Drescher, A., Vgenopoulou, I., 1985. A theoretical analysis of channeling in bins and
hoppers. Powder Technol. 42 (2), 181191.
Drucker, D.C., Prager, W., 1952. Soil mechanics and plastic analysis or limit design.
Quart. Appl. Math. 10 (2), 157165.
EN 1991-4. 2006. Eurocode 1: Actions on structures. Part 4: Silos and Tanks.
Brussels, European Committee for Standardization.
Gallego, E., Rombach, G.A., Neumann, F., Ayuga, F., 2010. Simulations of granular
flow in silos with different finite element programs: ANSYS vs. SILO. Trans.
ASABE 53 (3), 819829.
Gonzlez-Montellano, C., Gallego, E., Ramrez-Gmez, A., Ayuga, F., 2012. Three
dimensional discrete element models for simulating the filling and emptying of
silos: analysis of numerical results. Comput. Chem. Eng. 40, 2232.
Grudzien, K., Niedostatkiewicz, M., Adrien, J., Tejchman, J., Maire, E., 2011.
Quantitative estimation of volume changes of granular materials during silo
flow using X-ray tomography. Chem. Eng. Process. 50, 5967.
 E. Gallego et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 118 (2015) 281289
Grudzien, K., Romanowski, A., Chaniecki, Z., Niedostatkiewicz, M., Sankowski, D.,
2010. Description of the silo flow and bulk solid pulsation detection using ECT.
Flow Meas. Instrum. 21, 198206.
Guaita, M., Couto, A., Ayuga, F., 2003. Numerical simulation of wall pressure during
discharge of granular material from cylindrical silos with eccentric hoppers.
Biosyst. Eng. 85 (1), 101109.
Hrtl, J., Ooi, J.Y., Rotter, J.M., Wojcik, M., Ding, S., Enstad, G.G., 2008. The influence
of a cone-in-cone insert on flow pattern and wall pressure in a full-scale silo.
Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 86 (4), 370378.
Hatfield, F., Bartali, E., 1988. Static forces and moments in a grain silo. J. Struct. Eng.
10, 28142819.
Iwicki, P., Wjcik, M., Tejchman, J., 2011. Failure of cylindrical steel silos composed
of corrugated sheets and columns and repair methods using a sensitivity
analysis. Eng. Fail. Anal. 18, 20642083.
Janssen, H.A., 1895. Versuch ber Getreidedruck in Sillozellen. Z. VDI 39, 1045
1049.
Jenike, A.W., Johanson, J.R., 1969. On the theory of bin loads. Trans. ASME J. Eng. Ind.
91 (1), 339344.
Keiter, T.W.R., Rombach, G.A., 2001. Numerical aspects of FE simulations of granular
flow in silos. J. Eng. Mech. 127 (10), 10441050.
Kobyka, R., Molenda, M., 2014. DEM simulations of loads on obstruction attached to
the wall of a model grain silo and of flow disturbance around the obstruction.
Powder Technol. 256, 210216.
Lvin, J., 1971. Analytical evaluation of pressures of granular materials on silo walls.
Powder Technol. 4 (5), 280285.
Mellmann, J., Hoffmann, T., Frll, C., 2014. Mass flow during unloading of
agricultural bulk materials from silos depending on particle form, flow
properties and geometry of the discharge opening. Powder Technol. 253, 4652.
Moya, M., Ayuga, F., Guaita, M., Aguado, P., 2002. Mechanical properties of granular
agricultural materials. Trans. ASAE 45 (5), 15691577.
Moya, M., Guaita, M., Aguado, P., Ayuga, F., 2006. Mechanical properties of granular
agricultural materials. Part 2. Trans. ASABE 49 (2), 479489.
Nedderman, R.M., Tzn, U., 1979. A kinematic model for the flow of granular
materials. Powder Technol. 22, 243253.
Niedostatkiewicz, M., Tejchman, J., Chaniecki, Z., Grudzien, K., 2009. Determination
of bulk solid concentration changes during granular flow in a model silo with
ECT sensors. Chem. Eng. Sci. 64, 2030.
Nielsen, J., 2008. From silo phenomena to load models. In: Chen, J.F., Teng, J.G. (Eds.),
Structures and Granular Solids: From Scientific Principles to Engineering
Applications. CRC Press-Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, USA, pp. 4957.
Nielsen, J., Askegaard, V., 1977. Scale errors in model tests on granular media with
special reference to silo models. Powder Technol. 16, 123130.
Ooi, J.Y., Rotter, J.M., 1990. Wall pressures in squat steel silos from simple finite
element analysis. Comput. Struct. 37 (4), 361374.
Parafiniuk, P., Molenda, M., Horabik, J., 2013. Discharge of rapeseeds from a model
silo: Physical testing and discrete element method simulations. Comput.
Electron. Agric. 97, 4046.
Piskoty, G., Michel, S.A., Zgraggen, M., 2005. Bursting of a corn silo An
interdisciplinary failure analysis. Eng. Fail. Anal. 12, 915929.
View publication stats
289
Ramirez, A., Nielsen, J., Ayuga, F., 2010. Pressure measurements in steel silos with
eccentric hoppers. Powder Technol. 201 (1), 720.
Rotter, J.M., Brown, C.J., Lahlouh, E.H., 2002. Patterns of wall pressure on filling a
square planform steel silo. Eng. Struct. 24 (2), 135150.
Rotter, J.M., Jumikis, P.T., Fleming, S.P., Porter, S.J., 1989. Experiments on the
buckling of thin-walled model silo structures. J. Constr. Steel Res. 13, 271299.
Ruiz, A., Couto, A., Aguado, P., 2012. Design and instrumentation of a mid-size test
station for measuring static and dynamic pressures in silos under different
conditions Part II: Construction and validation. Comput. Electron. Agric. 85,
174187.
Schurich, T., Frll, C., Enstad, G.G., 2001. Full scale silo tests and numerical simulations
of the cone in cone concept for mass flow. In: Alah, Kalman (Ed.), Handbook of
Powder Technology. Elsevier Science B.V, Amsterdam, pp. 175180.
Sielamowicz, I., Blonski, S., Kowalewski, T.A., 2005. Optical technique DPIV in
measurements of granular material flows, part 1 of 3 plane hoppers. Chem.
Eng. Sci. 60, 589598.
Sielamowicz, I., Bloski, S., Kowalewski, T.A., 2006. Digital particle image
velocimetry (DPIV) technique in measurements of granular material flows,
part 2 of 3 converging hoppers. Chem. Eng. Sci. 61, 53075317.
Sielamowicz, I., Czech, M., 2010. Analysis of the radial flow assumption in a
converging model silo. Biosyst. Eng. 106, 412422.
Sielamowicz, I., Czech, M., Kowalewski, T.A., 2010. Empirical description of flow
parameters in eccentric flow inside a silo model. Powder Technol. 198, 381394.
Slominski, C., Niedostatkiewicz, M., Tejchman, J., 2007. Application of particle image
velocimetry (PIV) for deformation measurement during granular silo flow.
Powder Technol. 173, 118.
Teng, J.G., Chan, F., 2001. Plastic buckling strength of T-section transition ringbeams
in steel silos and tanks. Eng. Struct. 23 (3), 280297.
Teng, J.G., Lin, X., Rotter, J.M., Ding, X.L., 2005. Analysis of geometric imperfections
in full-scale welded steel silos. Eng. Struct. 27, 938950.
Vidal, P., Gallego, E., Guaita, M., Ayuga, F., 2006. Simulation of the filling pressures of
cylindrical steel silos with concentric and eccentric hoppers using 3-
dimensional finite element models. Trans. ASABE 49 (6), 18811895.
Wensrich, C., 2002. Selected case studies on the silo quacking problem. Bulk Solids
Handling 22, 117122.
Wilde, K., Tejchman, J., Rucka, M., Niedostatkiewicz, M., 2010. Experimental and
theoretical investigations of silo music. Powder Technol. 198, 3848.
Wjcik, M., Tejchman, J., Enstad, G.G., 2012. Confined granular flow in silos with
inserts. Full-scale experiments. Powder Technol. 222, 1536.
Wjcik, M., Tejchman, J., 2009. Modeling of shear localization during confined
granular flow in silos within non-local hypoplasticity. Powder Technol. 192 (3),
298310.
Wu, J., Binbo, J., Chen, J., Yang, Y., 2009. Multi-scale study of particle flow in silos.
Adv. Powder Technol. 20 (1), 6273.
Yang, S.-C., Hsiau, S.-S., 2001. The simulation and experimental study of granular
materials discharged from a silo with the placement of inserts. Powder Technol.
120 (3), 244255.
Zhong, Z., Ooi, J.Y., Rotter, J.M., 2001. The sensitivity of silo flow and wall stresses to
filling method. Eng. Struct. 23 (7), 756767.