| Literature DB >> 33266569 |
Abstract
The flocculation of cohesive sediment plays an important role in affecting morphological changes to coastal areas, to dredging operations in navigational canals, to sediment siltation in reservoirs and lakes, and to the variation of water quality in estuarine waters. Many studies have been conducted recently to formulate a turbulence-induced flocculation model (described by a characteristic floc size with respect to flocculation time) of cohesive sediment by virtue of theoretical analysis, numerical modeling, and/or experimental observation. However, a probability study to formulate the flocculation model is still lacking in the literature. The present study, therefore, aims to derive an explicit expression for the flocculation of cohesive sediment in a turbulent fluid environment based on two common entropy theories: Shannon entropy and Tsallis entropy. This study derives an explicit expression for the characteristic floc size, assumed to be a random variable, as a function of flocculation time by maximizing the entropy function subject to the constraint equation using a hypothesis regarding the cumulative distribution function of floc size. It was found that both the Shannon entropy and the Tsallis entropy theories lead to the same expression. Furthermore, the derived expression was tested with experimental data from the literature and the results were compared with those of existing deterministic models, showing that it has good agreement with the experimental data and that it has a better prediction accuracy for the logarithmic growth pattern of data in comparison to the other models, whereas, for the sigmoid growth pattern of experimental data, the model of Keyvani and Strom or Son and Hsu model could be the better choice for floc size prediction. Finally, the maximum capacity of floc size growth, a key parameter incorporated into this expression, was found to exhibit an empirical power relationship with the flow shear rate.Entities:
Keywords: Shannon entropy; Tsallis entropy; cohesive sediment; entropy; flocculation; probability distribution
Year: 2018 PMID: 33266569 PMCID: PMC7512407 DOI: 10.3390/e20110845
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Entropy (Basel) ISSN: 1099-4300 Impact factor: 2.524
Figure 1The flocculation element with floc size growth = floc size entering the flocculation element, = floc size exiting the element, and = the capacity of floc size growth.
The information on the collected experimental data in the literature.
| Experimental Data Number | Experimental Material | Turbulence-Generating Environment | Flow Shear Condition |
|
| Data Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | Detroit river sediment | Couette-flow chamber | 4 | 87 | Burban et al. [ | |
| T2 | 4 | 25.21 | ||||
| T3 | Polystyrene latex | Couette-flow system formed by two cylinders | 2.17 | 39.54 | Oles [ | |
| T4 | 2.17 | 36.65 | ||||
| T5 | 2.17 | 26.52 | ||||
| T6 | 2.17 | 14.47 | ||||
| T7 | Polystyrene particle | Baffled stirred tank | 0.87 | 13.54 | Spicer and Pratsinis [ | |
| T8 | 0.87 | 41.90 | ||||
| T9 | 0.87 | 84.20 | ||||
| T10 | 0.87 | 67.01 | ||||
| T11 | Latex particle | Couette-flow system | 2 | 46.06 | Serra et al. [ | |
| T12 | 2 | 38.84 | ||||
| T13 | 2 | 30 | ||||
| T14 | 2 | 19.87 | ||||
| T15 | 2 | 11.74 | ||||
| T16 | Latex particle | Couette-flow system | 2 | 41.36 | Serra and Casamitjana [ | |
| T17 | 2 | 37.73 | ||||
| T18 | 2 | 35.23 | ||||
| T19 | Activated sludge | Baffled batch vessel | 15 *** | 121.27 | Biggs and Lant [ | |
| T20 | 15 *** | 100.56 | ||||
| T21 | 15 *** | 58.66 | ||||
| T22 | 15 *** | 24.14 | ||||
| T23 | Polystyrene latex particle | Couette-flow system | 0.81 | 70.94 | Selomulya et al. [ | |
| T24 | 0.81 | 67.76 | ||||
| T25 | 0.81 | 38.07 | ||||
| T26 | Hay river sediment, Canada | Annular flume | Bed shear stress = 0.123 Pa | 19.1 | 128.97 | Stone and Krishnappan [ |
| T27 | Bed shear stress = 0.212 Pa | 19.1 | 178.1 | |||
| T28 | Bed shear stress = 0.323 Pa | 19.1 | 161.84 | |||
| T29 | Polystyrene latex particle | Flask shaking table | 2.1 | 7.88 | Colomer et al. [ | |
| T30 | 2.1 | 9.34 | ||||
| T31 | 2.1 | 9.05 | ||||
| T32 | 2.1 | 9.68 | ||||
| T33 | 2.1 | 10.42 |
The “***” symbol indicated that the measured size by Biggs and Lant [14] at the beginning of the flocculation experiment is actually the floc size of 15 microns rather than the size of the primary particle (the primary particle size is actually 4 microns).
Figure 2The comparison of the proposed entropy-based expression (Equation (12)) with thirty-three experimental data sets from the literature. In each figure, the magenta circles denote the measured data and the black line represents the proposed expression. For the cases of T23, T24, and T25 from Selomulya et al. [60], the horizontal axis is not the flocculation time but a quantity , where is the absolute temperature in the flocculation time (the unit is Kelvin), and we cannot obtain the value of the flocculation time from their paper.
The comparison results of the proposed entropy-based expression with the collected experimental data in the literature.
| Experimental Data Number | Data Source | Fitting Result | Entropy Function | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| T1 | Burban et al. [ | 0.975 | 0.054 | 4.170 | 4.419 | 82.988 |
| T2 | 0.995 | 0.023 | 0.640 | 3.054 | 21.163 | |
| T3 | Oles [ | 0.944 | 0.213 | 3.134 | 3.621 | 37.343 |
| T4 | 0.948 | 0.160 | 2.341 | 3.540 | 34.451 | |
| T5 | 0.989 | 0.080 | 0.960 | 3.193 | 24.309 | |
| T6 | 0.982 | 0.044 | 0.512 | 2.510 | 12.219 | |
| T7 | Spicer and Pratsinis [ | 0.962 | 0.076 | 1.053 | 2.539 | 12.591 |
| T8 | 0.964 | 0.069 | 3.280 | 3.714 | 41.006 | |
| T9 | 0.999 | 0.014 | 1.511 | 4.423 | 83.318 | |
| T10 | 0.978 | 0.039 | 4.038 | 4.192 | 66.125 | |
| T11 | Serra et al. [ | 0.981 | 0.118 | 2.445 | 3.786 | 44.037 |
| T12 | 0.962 | 0.121 | 3.028 | 3.607 | 36.813 | |
| T13 | 0.976 | 0.045 | 1.261 | 3.332 | 27.964 | |
| T14 | 0.958 | 0.044 | 0.954 | 2.883 | 17.814 | |
| T15 | 0.850 | 0.076 | 1.078 | 2.276 | 9.637 | |
| T16 | Serra and Casamitjana [ | 0.899 | 0.121 | 3.606 | 3.673 | 39.335 |
| T17 | 0.952 | 0.104 | 2.600 | 3.576 | 35.702 | |
| T18 | 0.956 | 0.072 | 2.019 | 3.503 | 33.200 | |
| T19 | Biggs and Lant [ | 0.980 | 0.027 | 3.403 | 4.666 | 106.261 |
| T20 | 0.967 | 0.037 | 4.126 | 4.449 | 85.548 | |
| T21 | 0.960 | 0.036 | 2.087 | 3.776 | 43.637 | |
| T22 | 0.972 | 0.017 | 0.521 | 2.213 | 9.031 | |
| T23 | Selomulya et al. [ | 0.845 | 0.124 | 7.607 | 4.250 | 70.116 |
| T24 | 0.899 | 0.041 | 3.623 | 4.204 | 66.935 | |
| T25 | 0.979 | 0.019 | 1.106 | 3.618 | 37.233 | |
| T26 | Stone and Krishnappan [ | 0.887 | 0.085 | 13.304 | 4.699 | 109.861 |
| T27 | 0.974 | 0.035 | 8.351 | 5.069 | 158.994 | |
| T28 | 0.984 | 0.023 | 5.988 | 4.961 | 142.733 | |
| T29 | Colomer et al. [ | 0.993 | 0.021 | 0.189 | 1.754 | 5.607 |
| T30 | 0.992 | 0.035 | 0.286 | 1.980 | 7.102 | |
| T31 | 0.993 | 0.038 | 0.304 | 1.939 | 6.806 | |
| T32 | 0.994 | 0.021 | 0.220 | 2.026 | 7.448 | |
| T33 | 0.988 | 0.032 | 0.350 | 2.119 | ||
The three simplified Lagrangian flocculation models.
| Model Name | Formulation |
|---|---|
| Winterwerp model |
|
| Son and Hsu (2008) model |
|
| Son and Hsu (2009) model |
|
The comparison of the present entropy-based model with the deterministic models for the experimental data.
| References | Experimental Conditions | Fitting Effect | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Present Model | Winterwerp Model | Son and Hsu (2008) Model | Son and Hsu (2009) Model | ||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Burban et al. [ | 0.98 | 0.054 | 4.170 | 0.83 | 0.282 | 19.860 | 0.86 | 0.255 | 17.587 | 0.90 | 0.190 | 12.942 | |
| 0.99 | 0.023 | 0.640 | 0.97 | 0.037 | 1.083 | 0.97 | 0.026 | 0.424 | 0.98 | 0.036 | 1.053 | ||
| Biggs and Lant [ | 0.98 | 0.027 | 3.403 | 0.89 | 0.053 | 7.218 | 0.90 | 0.059 | 7.917 | 0.90 | 0.067 | 8.889 | |
Figure 3The comparison of the entropy-based expression with the model of Keyvani and Strom for measured data in each of the cycles: (a) ps1, (b) ps2, (c) ps3, (d) ps4, (e) ps5, (f) ps6, and (g) ps7 in the work of Keyvani and Strom [33] (ps was referred to as a “prior shear” case, corresponding to the cycle order of the high and low turbulent shear, in their paper). The blue circle denotes the measured data, the black line represents the entropy-based expression, and the red line shows the model of Keyvani and Strom.
Figure 4The fitted parameter value in the proposed entropy-based model with respect to different flow shear rate values for the collected experimental data in the log-log space (a) and the normal space (b).
Figure 5The fitted parameter value in the proposed entropy-based model with respect to the different bed shear stress values for the experimental data from Stone and Krishnappan [30].
Figure 6The comparison between the observed floc size and the estimated floc size using Equation (22) for the experimental data from (a) Oles [24], (b) Serra et al. [12], (c) Serra and Casamitjana [31], (d) Biggs and Lant [14], (e) Colomer et al. [61], and (f) Stone and Krishnappan [30].