Improper sizing of these openings can promote bridging and improper flow from both front and rear of

the hopper transition. 

Material with enough cohesive strength due to stickiness or sharp jagged edges can cause slow
movement through a transition and possible bridging at the discharge. This may require a large opening
or unique hopper design to allow for flow.

The amount of moisture in the bulk material,

The stickiness (cohesiveness) of the bulk material

. I n a mass flow scenario, if the parti cles are less than 1/4-inch in s i z e , t h e n c o h e s i v e
a r c h i n g w i l l o c c u r d u r i n g d i s c h a r g e . The finer the parti cle size and greater the range
of parti cle sizes, the greater the cohesive strength, and lower the flow rate R e d u c ti o n i n
s i z e i n c r e a s e s t h e c o n t a c t a r e a b e t w e e n t h e particles, thereby increasing the cohesive
forces.

It has been noted previously that the flowability of powders will decrease with the decreasing particle
size
Flow patterns in hoppers
Dr Robert Berry, Senior Consultant Engineer for The Wolfson Centre for Bulk Solids Handling
Technology

When a silo is discharging material, there are two distinct flow patterns that can occur; core-flow
(funnel-flow) and mass-flow as illustrated in fig 1a, b & c. 

The core-flow pattern is the default pattern that most vessel operate in (unless mass-flow has
been specifically designed for) where by material flows down a preferential flow channel above
the outlet and the material around the walls remains static.  

If the product is free-flowing and the silo has a tall parallel section the flow channel can expand
to the walls in the upper silo as shown in fig 1a.  

 
If the material has a degree of cohesion, the flow channel expansion angle will be very steep, so
the flow channel will extend to the top surface of the inventory in the silo.  

This core-flow pattern gives a first in last out form of stock rotation, can lead to;

 flushing of aeratable materials, i.e. freshly loaded aerated material passes straight into the
flow channel,
 caking (unwanted agglomeration) of time sensitive materials, i.e. static regions around
walls can harden over time and take up permanent residence in the silo,
 segregation of materials with a wide size distribution, i.e. if centrally loaded, an angle
repose forms in the silo, coarse particles roll to the base of the pile (wall) and the fines
 are less mobile and collect in the centre of silo.  When discharged in core flow fines come
out first followed by an increasing proportion of coarse particles. 

The alternative and desirable flow pattern for difficult to handle materials is mass-flow (shown in
fig 1c) where the hopper has much steeper walls so that material slip occurs at the walls and all
the material is in motion when discharge occurs.  

This gives a first in first out discharge pattern and all material has a consistent residence time,
minimising chances of agglomeration and flooding.  While segregating material separate within
the silo during loading the uniform draw down causes them to remix on discharge.  Mass-flow
also gives a gravity discharge rate that is more consistent over time and independent of inventory
level.  

The key disadvantages of mass-flow are the potential for wear of the walls if product stored is
very abrasive (either core-flow or a wear allowance must be made), the higher pressures on the
wall during discharge (because all contents is live) particularly at the transition from the parallel
to converging sections of the silo, and a greater head room requirement to store a given volume
of material due to the steeper hopper. 



Fig 1 Silo flow patterns a) core-flow (free flowing material) b) core-flow (cohesive material) and
c) mass-flow

Wall Friction Measurement

The determination of whether a material will mass-flow or core-flow requires a measurement of

the friction between the hopper wall and the stored powder.  This can be done by shearing a cell
of consolidated powder over a sample of wall measuring the shear force whilst controlling the
normal force.  

The shear force is plotted as a function of normal force, the wall yield locus, the angle of which
represents the wall friction angle, i.e. the angle at which the wall must be inclined to cause slip of
the powder down the wall.  

The relationship between mass-flow hopper half angle and the wall friction angle is presented in
fig 2a&b and shows that as the wall friction angle reduces the limiting hopper angle for mass-
flow becomes shallower.  I.e. the higher the friction between the powder and the hopper wall, the
steeper the hopper required for mass-flow.  

Two extremes of hopper shape are presented a conical hopper and plane or wedge shape hopper.
The latter gives mass-flow at larger half angles because material converges in only one direction
rather than two for a cone.
Fig 2. Mass flow limits for conical and plane (wedge) shaped hoppers

Flow obstruction
When a silo fails to discharge under gravity there are a three primary types of flow obstruction
namely mechanical arching, cohesive arching and rat-holing, see fig 3a, b & c respectively.  

 Mechanical arching is the relatively trivial case where the particles are too big, relative to the
size of the outlet, and several particles can mechanically jam over the outlet.  

To avoid this the diameter of a circular outlet (or diagonal of a slot outlet) must be approx. 10
times greater than the maximum particle size. 
Fig 3a. Silo flow obstructions a) mechanical arching
 Fi
g 3b. Silo flow obstructions b) cohesive arching
Fig 3c. Silo flow obstructions c) cohesive rat-holing

Cohesive arching and rat-holing are where the material gains strength when consolidated due to
cohesion as a function of either a fine particle size typically below 100microns (where van-der-
Waals forces dominate over gravity forces) or presence of surface liquid where the surface
tension binds the particles together.   

With cohesive material if the size of the outlet is too small then an obstruction will form, and
gravity flow will only occur when outlet diameter/ width is sufficiently wide that the weight of
the bulk solid in the arch exceeds the unconfined strength of the material.  Cohesive arching is
the flow limiting condition in a mass-flow silo, rat-holing is the flow limiting condition in a core-
flow silo. 

The rat-hole occurs because for the diameter of the core, the hoop stress is insufficient to
overcome the strength of the material, so as before the outlet diameter must be increased thus
increasing the hoop stress until failure occurs.  

For a mass-flow silo, the critical outlet dimension is largely independent of the size of the silo,
however for a core-flow silo the critical rat-hole dimension can increase significantly as the
vessel gets larger (of diameter and height) and the consolidation stress in the pipe increases.   

Flow function
To size the outlet of a silo to overcome cohesive arching or rat-holing, the cohesive strength of
the material is measured and represented as the flow function (fig 4a) which is a blue print for
the flowability of given material.  The flow function measurement is best illustrated by the
concept a sand castle test (see fig 4b). 

In the first stage of the “sand castle” test, the bulk solid is compacted uniaxially in a mould
(bucket) to a given normal stress.  In the second stage of the test, the mould (bucket) is removed
to reveal the bulk solid “sand castle”.  

An increasing vertical stress is then applied to the unconfined bulk solid (sand castle) and the
peak strength at failure recorded.  The horizontal axis of the flow function represents the
consolidation stress, “the stress applied to compact the sand castle in the bucket”, versus the
unconfined failure strength “the strength of the free-standing sand castle” on the vertical axis.
Although the means of measurement in practice is by shear testing rather than uniaxial action,
the meaning is the same.

Fig 4a. The flow function

Fig 4b. The Sand castle test

Time consolidation
For both types of silo time consolidation can be a significant factor.  This is where the material
strength increases as a function of the time-period of static storage, where particles move closer
together increasing the strength.

Thus, if the material is left static in the hopper over a week-end a large outlet size required to get
the material to flow on Monday morning.  This can be designed for by characterising the strength
over the required time-period.  

Alternatively, if this time-period is used infrequently discharge aids could be employed from the
outlet to the diameter of the time outlet to be used only when reinitiating flow from a long static
storage period. 

Feeder Interfacing
Having got the geometry of the silo correct for reliable gravity flow, it is possible to convert a
mass-flow silo back to a core-flow one, through inappropriate feeder interfacing. 

There are numerous feeder types used to control the discharge rate of products from silo
including; screws, belts, chains, vibratory slides, ploughs, rotary valves and for each there is a
correct and incorrect way to interface. 

A screw and a belt are used below to describe the principal of good interfacing practice.  A
standard incorrect interface for a screw is a constant pitch and diameter which gives a fixed
transport volume. 

Thus, screw moves material forward from the first pitch, so the only place material in the silo
can enter the screw is from the back of the slot.  Thus, a mass-flow silo discharges in a core-flow
manner because of poorly design feeder interface geometry.  

What is required to support mass-flow is a screw with fixed outer diameter, but an increasing
pitch and reducing shaft diameter in the direction of feed.  Thus, the volume moved by the screw
increases in the direction of feed and material flows along the full length of the slot in mass-flow.

Similar principals apply for a belt, a horizontal interface will draw from the font of the slot only
see fig 5a.  What is required is an outlet that increases in height at approx. 5° so that slot width
has taper to give an increasing width in the direction feed, creating a progressively widening and
heightening pile on the belt in the direction of flow to support mass-flow see fig 5b.

Fig 5a. Incorrect belt interfacing

Fig 5b. Correct belt interfacing

Retrofit techniques silo inserts

A common approach that can be used to correct discharge problems with a core-flow silo are
static inserts.  Surprisingly, an internal obstruction within the silo (usually an inverted cone) if of
the correct size and in the right position can dramatically improve the discharge characteristics of
a core-flow silo to something approaching mass-flow. 

This technique works by changing the shape of the flow channel from a cone to wedge wrapped
into an annulus.  As shown previously the wedge achieves mass-flow at significantly lower
angles and is less sensitive to changes in inventory. 

 

Fig 6a. Core flow & Fig 6b. Flow correcting insert

Summary
To adequately design a silo for reliable flow you need to know your material.  If the material is
free-flowing and always remains so and segregation is not a problem than core-flow may be
acceptable for your process. 

However, if your material is cohesive, time dependent (prone to caking), fluidises readily, or
highly segregable, then a mass-flow pattern is probably required.  
To achieve mass-flow you need to measure the flow properties of your material, the; wall
friction, flow function, internal friction, bulk density and time flow function so that the critical
outlet size and converging angle can be specified to give reliable flow.  

Finally remember that the feeder interface geometry must be correctly designed to support mass-
flow.