Loubser RC and Jensen P

Proc S Afr Sug Technol Ass (2015) 88: 211 - 222

REFEREED PAPER

MODELLING JUICE FLOW IN A SHREDDED CANE BED

LOUBSER RC AND JENSEN P
Sugar Milling Research Institute NPC, c/o University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, 4041, South Africa
rloubser@smri.org pjensen@smri.org

Abstract
A diffuser is essentially a porous bed of shredded sugarcane through which juice flows.
Theory based on the equations attributed to Darcy for saturated flow and Richards for
unsaturated flow predicts that the velocity of the flow through the bed depends on the
distribution of the permeability in the bed. At steady state, a pressure profile is established
within the bed so that the friction pressure loss exactly matches the gravitational pressure
head. If the permeability in the bed is uniform then the theory predicts that the static pressure
in the bed will be constant throughout the bed and will be equal to atmospheric pressure. A
rectangular glass model diffuser in which the lateral dispersion of the juice could be observed
with a static cane bed was used to map the pressure distribution and flow through a bed. The
results from pressure and flow distribution measurements were compared to theoretically
derived results. The steady state pressure distribution that was measured verified the
theoretical prediction that the static pressure would essentially be equal to atmospheric
pressure. These results can form the basis for more complex models to predict the flow
distribution within a full scale diffuser.
Keywords: diffuser, flow, extraction, pressure, permeability, flooding

Introduction
As juice percolates through a diffuser bed it experiences changing conditions which may
cause it to slow down, disperse sideways or speed up. These complex responses affect the
operation of a diffuser. Even regions of high permeability can cause flooding. Fast flowing
juice will be pumped to a spray above the diffuser at a point where the bed may not be able to
accept the increased amount of juice. This will result in local flooding of the bed. It is
generally difficult to conceptualise the effect that these changes may have on the overall
response of a diffuser. Experimental data and a realistic model will help to demonstrate these
effects to operators.
Extraction rate and efficiency depends on contact between the juice flowing through the
diffuser bed and the cane fibre. Consequently, the ideal situation is to have the maximum
amount of juice flowing through the bed at any one time. If the percolation rate increases or
decreases at some point, however, the diffuser will flood and uncontrolled mixing of high
brix and low brix juice may occur. Control of the juice hold-up in the diffuser would facilitate
maximising the juice-fibre contact but would require some form of measurement that infers
the amount of juice hold-up. A model validated with experimental data would help to identify
measurements that could be used for hold-up control.

211

Loubser RC and Jensen P

Proc S Afr Sug Technol Ass (2015) 88: 211 - 222

Theory, based on certain simplifications, predicts that the static pressure in the cane bed
depends on the distribution of permeability within the cane bed (Adolinline, et al., 2012).
Under conditions of constant permeability, a constant pressure gradient is expected from inlet
to outlet. This makes it difficult to use pressure as an indicator of hold-up.
When water is introduced onto the top of a cane bed, some of it enters the bed directly while
the rest migrates along the surface of the cane until it reaches a point where the cane has
capacity for it to flow through the cane. The water flows through the cane under the influence
of gravity. It will also migrate sideways from areas of high juice saturation level to low juice
saturation level. The water originating from the source essentially forms a plume as it
percolates through the cane bed away from the source. The degree of saturation of the cane in
the plume decreases from the centre of the plume towards the edges. At some point, the water
can no longer be detected and this is considered the boundary of the plume.
Objectives
A tool was required to assist researchers and operators in understanding how the hydrodynamic effects in a diffuser influence its operation. Numerical models can be used to go
some way towards providing the tool required.
A numerical model was validated using experimental data to predict how the juice would be
distributed through the bed and where it would exit from the bed for any flow rate of juice
applied to the surface of the bed. The flow rate of juice exiting an experimental diffuser, and
the distribution of juice that could be seen inside the diffuser, was compared with the results
from the numerical model.
Experimental investigation
Measurements required
An experimental diffuser was used to visualise the formation of a plume in a bed of cane
from start-up until steady state was reached. Several measurements were taken to characterise
the flow of the juice through the cane bed:

A measure of the flow distribution out of the bottom of the bed.

The variation of static pressure within the plume.
An estimate of the steady state shape of the plume.

Experimental diffuserer
The experimental diffuser shown in Figure 1 was used for the investigations. The tank had a
glass front which was 1.5 m long and 1 m high. The width of the tank was 0.3 m. A
0.1 x 0.1 m grid was drawn on the glass to match the grid that would be used to form the
elements in the numerical model. The bottom of the diffuser was made from a piece of
diffuser screen with 10 mm diameter holes at 14 mm centre distances with a hexagonal
arrangement. A trough was used to catch the juice that drained out of the bottom of the
diffuser. The water was pumped through a 50 mm pipe to the top of the tank with a
swimming pool pump. The pipe was fitted with a ball valve to throttle the flow so that the
rate could be set to a desired value.

212

Loubser RC and Jensen P

Proc S Afr Sug Technol Ass (2015) 88: 211 - 222

Figure 1. Experimental tank diffuser.

Flow rate profile

The flow rate out of the diffuser was measured by placing a 0.1 m wide channel under the
screen and aligning it with the grid drawn on the glass side as shown in Figure 1. The mass of
juice collected in a bucket after a certain time was used to calculate the flow rate out of that
element or grid location. This was repeated at each grid location along the length of the
diffuser.
Pressure profile
Holes were drilled in the backing of the experimental diffuser at the centres of selected
elements. A piece of clear tubing with coloured liquid was used to indicate the static pressure
within the bed relative to atmospheric pressure. Figure 2 shows the pressure tappings and
tubes at the back of the diffuser. For places where the pressure was sub-atmospheric, a loop
was made in the pipe to form a water manometer (U-tube) below the tapping.

Figure 2. Taps for measuring pressure in cane bed.

Plume
The position of the plume was estimated by visual inspection. The amount of juice in each
element was estimated by visual inspection and recorded as a fraction of the total capacity of
the element. The Matlab contouring algorithm was used to reproduce the shape of the
plume.

213

Loubser RC and Jensen P

Proc S Afr Sug Technol Ass (2015) 88: 211 - 222

Numerical modelling of porous medium flow

Model components
Numerical modelling of the dynamic behaviour of the juice in the cane bed of a diffuser
requires the application of theory which predicts flow in fibrous porous media. The juice flow
in the diffuser was modelled using discrete forms of the differential equations derived from
potential theory combined with continuity considerations.
A user interface to show an animation of the progress of the juice through the cane bed was
developed. To allow for the animation, the number of calculations had to be minimised so
that the animation could be displayed in accelerated time.
Potential theory
Potential theory is used to predict the flow in a porous medium such as shredded sugarcane.
The velocity of the flow is proportional to the negative gradient of the potential. The potential
is essentially a pressure with units of force per unit area. In the case of flow through shredded
sugarcane, assuming that the velocities are small so that pressure drops are only attributable
to viscous and not turbulent effects, there are two components that make up the potential:

The static pressure, which can be measured by placing a pressure probe into a location in
the cane bed orientated perpendicular to the flow direction and measuring relative to a
reference such as atmospheric pressure.
The head pressure, which results from the column of water above the point and so
depends on the elevation of the point in the bed relative to a reference height.

Since pressure was measured with a water manometer, and the fluid flowing through the bed
was essentially water, it was convenient to measure potential in terms of water gauge or
metres water. Potential then becomes:
= +

Equation 1

where
is potential [m]
is gravitational position measured upwards from the screen [m]
is static head [m].
For small Reynolds numbers based on fibre diameter (Re<<1), where viscous effects
dominate over turbulent pressure drops, Equation 2 can be used to calculate the velocity in a
given direction, s:

=
Equation 2

where
is fluid velocity in direction [m/s]
is a displacement in the direction of interest [m]
is a proportionality constant (hydraulic conductivity in direction s) [m/s].
The constant of proportionality, Ks, relates the gradient of the potential in a given direction, s,
to the fluid velocity, , in that direction. In a saturated bed, with uniform permeability,
direction does not have to be considered, so a single constant, K, can be used. K can be
interpreted as the maximum percolation rate (terminal velocity) of the juice in the cane bed.

214

Loubser RC and Jensen P

Proc S Afr Sug Technol Ass (2015) 88: 211 - 222

Equation 2 can be expressed in vector form to take account of flow in all directions in a set of
cartesian coordinates. This gives rise to Equation 3, which is a form of Darcys equation:
=
where
is velocity vector [m/s]
means differentiation in each of the primary directions the gradient
function.

Equation 3

For the situation where the flow is in fully saturated shredded cane, the principle of continuity
may be applied. Continuity says that the nett flow into a point must be zero. This gives rise to
Equation 4:
Equation 4
= 0
For fully submerged flow, if the shredded cane is uniform and the hydraulic conductivity is
constant, the problem reduces to solving the well-known Laplaces equation with boundary
conditions to match the situation around the cane of interest:
2 = 0

Equation 5

If the flow is at steady state, it can be shown that, since the boundaries are at atmospheric
pressure, the static pressure throughout the domain will be atmospheric.
Unsaturated flow gives rise to a time-based accumulation term instead of the zero which
arises from a continuity consideration. This gives rise to the Richards equation which
Cockett (2014) and numerous other authors have studied, proposing and comparing
performance of iterative techniques such as Newton and Picard iteration for its solution.
Material balance
To produce a fast running model with predictable solution times, it was decided to avoid
iterative approaches. There may be a slight penalty in accuracy for using this approach and
the experimental component of this work would highlight whether these compromises were
acceptable.
In the current work, it was decided to step back to Equation 3 and use these relations, in
discrete form, to determine the flow into an element. Where the element is saturated, the nett
flow must be zero. For an unsaturated element, the nett flow is equal to the accumulation of
juice in the element. Linear equations in terms of the unknown potentials can be developed
within the computer code, for those elements that are totally submerged, using a material
balance approach, also referred to as continuity, by considering the flow across each
boundary of the element. The accumulation of juice in the other elements can be determined
by applying Darcys equation (Equation 3), by using known potentials (based on zero static
pressure) in the neighbouring elements and by taking degree of saturation into account.
Flow calculations
The horizontal flow, qx, between adjacent elements, shown in Figure 3, is determined by the
potential difference between them and the hydraulic conductivity. The distance considered
for the potential gradient is dx and the area of flow is proportional to dy for two dimensional
flow. The flow rate is given by the velocity, flow area and degree of saturation, and gives rise
to Equation 6:

215

Loubser RC and Jensen P

Proc S Afr Sug Technol Ass (2015) 88: 211 - 222

Figure 3. Horizontal flow.

1 2

Equation 6

where
is the degree of saturation
Kx is the average hydraulic conductivity between the adjacent elements.
A similar calculation may be done for vertical flow (Figure 4), qy, giving rise to Equation 7:

Figure 4. Vertical flow.

1 2

Equation 7

where
is the degree of saturation
Ky is the average hydraulic conductivity between the adjacent elements.
Submerged and unsubmerged flow
The degree of saturation is the ratio of the amount of juice in an element to the maximum
amount it can hold.
An element can have three states, depending on the degree of saturation of the element and its
neighbours.
1. Unsaturated, where the degree of saturation is less than one.
2. Saturated, where the degree of saturation is equal to one.
3. Submerged, where the element is saturated and all the elements bordering the element
concerned are also saturated.
In the case of submerged flow, it is known that there can be no change of volume so the
material balance gives a set of equations of the form shown in Equation 8. In this equation,
the only unknowns are the potentials in each of the elements.

216

Loubser RC and Jensen P

Proc S Afr Sug Technol Ass (2015) 88: 211 - 222

=0

Equation 8

In unsubmerged flow, the juice can accumulate in the element, so Equation 9 applies. There
are two unknowns in this single equation, namely the potential and the rate of juice
accumulation. To solve this problem, namely the lack of equations, an assumption was made
that since part of the element would be at atmospheric pressure, the difference between the
average pressure in the element and atmospheric pressure could be neglected. This meant that
the potential could be estimated and only the rate of accumulation had to be calculated:

Equation 9

where
is the rate of accumulation of juice in the element.
Elements adjacent to the submerged elements could be saturated but have unsaturated
neighbours. Equation 6 and Equation 7 were used to determine the flow between the
saturated elements and their submerged neighbours. The static pressures in saturated but
unsubmerged elements were assumed to be atmospheric, just as with the unsaturated
elements.
Resulting equations
Using Equation 8 (submerged elements) and Equation 9 (unsubmerged elements) to describe
the potential in submerged elements and manipulating them so that unknown potentials are
on the left of the equation and known potentials on the boundaries on the right, gives rise to
the set of linear simultaneous equations shown in Equation 10:
[] =

Equation 10

where
is a vector of the unknown potentials within the submerged elements
is a vector of known values resulting from the boundary flows
[] is a matrix of coefficients relating unknown potentials to element
boundary flows.
For unsubmerged elements, the potential was calculated according to the degree of saturation
and position. The rate of accumulation could then be calculated directly for those elements
using Equation 9.
Results and Discussion
Outlet flow profile
Comparisons between the outlet flow of the experimental tank diffuser and the model
calculation are shown in Figure 5 to Figure 8. All the runs were made using the same batch of
cane. The tank diffuser was filled with cane and then flooded with water to cause the bed to
settle as evenly as possible. The bed was then allowed to drain. Thereafter the measurements
were taken at varying flow rates.
The model was run using the same flow rate as the total flow measured leaving the screen of
the tank diffuser. The same hydraulic conductivity was used in the horizontal and vertical

217

Loubser RC and Jensen P

Proc S Afr Sug Technol Ass (2015) 88: 211 - 222

directions in the model. The hydraulic conductivity was varied in the model and the total
squared difference between the experimental and modelled flow rates, as a function of
modelled hydraulic conductivity, was calculated. The hydraulic conductivity of the bed was
the value which gave the minimum squared difference between the measured and calculated
flow profiles.
The estimates for the hydraulic conductivity from the analysis are shown in Table 1. The
initial conductivity was approximately 0.008 m/s (0.48 m3/min/m2) and this decreased over
time to a lower value of approximately 0.003 m/s (0.018 m3/min/m2). Reduction in
permeability was demonstrated by Barker, et al. (2011) who used a 200 mm diameter column
with a substantial depth of juice above the cane bed. Their graphs indicated percolation rates
of about 0.65 m3/min/m2 after ten minutes reducing to about 0.45 m3/min/m2 after an hour.
Love and Rein (1980) also reported a drop in percolation rate with time in their 0.61 m
diameter column. They measured percolation rates between 0.24 and 0.33 m3/min/m2 after
20 minutes which is similar to the hydraulic conductivity values calculated from the squared
error minimisation approach used in this work.
Table 1. Hydraulic conductivity determined squared error minimisation.
Flow rate

Description

Hydraulic conductivity

L/min

m/s

m3/min/m2

Run 1: High conductivity

Immediately after settling of bed

26.5

0.008

0.48

Run 2: Low conductivity

After further settling of bed

16.3

0.004

0.24

Run 3: High flow

Immediately after run 2

40.0

0.003

0.18

Run 4: Double inlet

Immediately after run 3

21.6

0.003

0.18

Figure 5 shows a comparison of the model prediction of the flow out of the bed and the
experimental measurement. The bed was first flooded to give an initial compaction and then
drained. Thereafter the flow was set for the first run.
-4

x 10

4.5
4
3.5

Flow m/s

3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0

7
8
9
Element

10

11

12

13

14

15

Figure 5. Outlet flows: Run 1 qtotal=26.5 L/min, K=0.008 m/s.

218

Loubser RC and Jensen P

Proc S Afr Sug Technol Ass (2015) 88: 211 - 222

Despite the initial flooding of the bed, it continued to settle between the tests. Water was
circulated through the bed for a substantial period before run 2 was completed. A similar size
plume was achieved with a substantially reduced flow rate. The comparison of experimental
and predicted flow profiles, at the reduced hydraulic conductivity, is shown in Figure 6.
-4

x 10

4.5
4
3.5

Flow m/s

3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0

7
8
9
Element

10

11

12

13

14

15

Figure 6. Outlet flows: Run 2 qtotal=16.3 L/min, K=0.004 m/s.

The flow rate was increased to give the profile shown in Figure 7. It was noted that there was
some lateral transfer of juice on the underside of the screen. This could have contributed to
some error in the experimental result.
-4

x 10

4.5
4
3.5

Flow m/s

3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0

7
8
9
Element

10

11

12

13

14

15

Figure 7. Outlet flows: Run 3 qtotal=40.0 L/min, K=0.003 m/s.

The model was tested using two point sources of juice on the top of the bed. The result from
this configuration is shown in Figure 8.

219

Loubser RC and Jensen P

Proc S Afr Sug Technol Ass (2015) 88: 211 - 222

-4

x 10

4.5
4
3.5

Flow m/s

3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0

7
8
9
Element

10

11

12

13

14

15

Figure 8. Outlet flows: Run 4 qtotal=21.6 L/min, K=0.003 m/s double inlet.

Model results, plume shape and pressure profile

The shape of the plume observed in the test diffuser was compared with the model and is
shown in Figure 9 to Figure 12. The blue area in the left hand plot shows the plume that could
be observed in the diffuser. It was difficult to identify the boundary of the plume so the result
should be considered an approximation.
The static pressure was measured using the pressure taps at the rear of the diffuser. These
results, in millimetres water gauge, are shown in the appropriate elements on the plot.
Negative numbers represent sub-atmospheric pressures.
The results from the model are shown in the right hand plot. The contours represent degree of
saturation calculated by the model (darker shades of blue represent higher degrees of
saturation).
The results in Figure 9 were for the first run, the flow rate results of which are shown in
Figure 5.
The static pressure measurements are small. Since a 5 mm pipe was used for measuring the
pressure, this contributes to the uncertainty in the head measurement. Consequently, the
magnitude of these measurements cannot be considered substantially different to 0 mm. This
is consistent with the observation that the mathematics predicts that the static pressure will be
constant throughout the plume for uniform hydraulic conductivity.
Experiment

Model

Numbers represent pressure (mm water)

Figure 9. Plume shape: Run 1 qtotal =26.5 L/min, K=0.008 m/s.

220

Loubser RC and Jensen P

Proc S Afr Sug Technol Ass (2015) 88: 211 - 222

The result shown in Figure 10 represents a similar sized plume as Figure 9, but for a more
compressed bed. The flow rate through the bed is substantially reduced while maintaining a
similar saturation characteristic. Most of the static pressure readings are small except for one,
which is -15 mm. This could be indicative of a region of low permeability cane immediately
above the pressure tapping.
Experiment

Model

Numbers represent pressure (mm water)

Figure 10. Plume shape: Run 2 qtotal=16.3 L/min, K=0.004 m/s.

The plot in Figure 11 represents a plume at a higher flow rate. The plume has become wider
to accommodate the additional flow. It appears that the model predicts that the plume will be
slightly wider than the experiment indicates. The exact boundary of the plume was difficult to
detect and could contribute to this discrepancy.
Experiment

Model

Numbers represent pressure (mm water)

Figure 11. Plume shape: Run 3 qtotal=40.0 L/min, K=0.003 m/s.

The model was extended further by splitting the incoming juice flow into two point sources.
The result of this configuration is shown in Figure 12.
Experiment

Model

Numbers represent pressure (mm water)

Figure 12. Plume shape: Run 4 qtotal=21.6 L/min, K=0.003 m/s double inlet.

221

Loubser RC and Jensen P

Proc S Afr Sug Technol Ass (2015) 88: 211 - 222

Comparison of the pressures measured showed no clear patterns. The variation in the
pressure, or head, was attributed to small local variations in hydraulic conductivity. The
magnitude of the static pressure was small compared to the height of the bed above the
tappings and no correlation between depth and measurement was evident as analysis of the
mathematics predicted.
Conclusions and Recommendations
A flow model, based on a laminar flow (fibre-based Reynolds number less than 10), through
a cane bed was compared to an experimental investigation. It was found that the distribution
of flow out of the cane bed closely matched the form of the prediction by the mathematical
model. A parameter in the model, the hydraulic conductivity, could be found so that the
model and experiment gave results with a similar appearance. Some of the error may be as a
result of lateral transfer of water below the screen.
The hydraulic conductivity that was found by comparing the exit flow rate from the
experiment to that predicted by the model was used in the model to predict the shape of the
juice plume that formed in the cane bed. The shapes of the predicted and observed plumes
were comparable. Difficulties in defining the edge of the plume in the experimental study
may have contributed to differences between the two.
The distribution of juice saturation levels within the cane bed at steady state depends on the
quantity and distribution of the juice entering the cane bed and a single parameter, the
hydraulic conductivity, to describe the properties of the cane bed. The hydraulic conductivity
is mathematically equivalent to the maximum percolation rate of the cane bed.
The static pressures in the plume, measured through tappings on the back of the diffuser,
were consistent with the mathematical study which showed that, if the hydraulic conductivity
is constant, the static pressure will be equal to atmospheric pressure. The pressures measured
were less than 15 mm water gauge from atmospheric. This was considered small and
attributed to minor variations in the characteristics of the cane bed.
This work can be extended by improving the detection of the plume in the experimental
study. Additional data may be necessary to confirm the robustness of the approach. The next
step in the development would be to use the principles learned in the building of more
sophisticated models, particularly of the time dependent hydrodynamic behaviour of juice in
a diffuser. This would facilitate moving towards the objective of producing an interactive
dynamic model of the behaviour of juice in a diffuser for research and training purposes.
REFERENCES
Adolinline, A, Breward, C, Ferdinand, R, Florio, B, Fowkes, N, Hocking, G, Hutchinson, A,
Khalique, M, Loubser, R, Mason, D, Ockendon, H, Please, C and Rademeyer, M
(2012),
Flow
Through
Sugar
Cane
http://www.aims.ac.za/en/researchcentre/workshops-conferences/past/misg-2012, Accessed: 2015-02-24
Barker, B, Loubser, R and Purchase, B (2011), Use of a percolation column to assess cane
processability. Sugar Milling Research Institute Technical Note No. 5/11: 8 pp
Cockett, R (2014), Simulation of unsaturated flow using Richards equation
http://www.row1.ca/s/pdfs/courses/RichardsEquation.pdf, Accessed: 2014-08-29
Love, DJ and Rein, PW (1980), Percolation behaviour of cane diffuser. Proc Int Soc Sug
Cane Technol 17: 1900-1924

222