Kim and Kamrin (2020) showed that rescaling the stress ratio μμ by a power of the dimensionless granular temperature ΘΘ collapses discrete-element-simulation data across many dense granular flow geometries onto a single master curve, μΘp=f(I)μΘ^p = f(I), with p≈1/6p ≈ 1/6 in 3D and p≈1/8p ≈ 1/8 in 2D — but the framework is not closed: the temperature field must be imported from particle simulations because no validated fluctuation-energy balance exists for the dense, near-jammed, contact-dominated regime. Key later progress — a 2026 preprint deriving μ(I,Θ)μ(I,Θ) from a contact-inclusive granular-temperature equation and recovering a generalized nonlocal-fluidity equation perturbatively, a 2025 vibration-controlled closure, and 2026 continuum implementations — has advanced every sub-part, yet no geometry-independent, near-jammed-accurate, predictive closure with boundary conditions has been validated, and the universality of pp remains unsettled (current evidence favors material-dependence, with large uncertainties). The problem remains open in its original generality: derive and validate a fluctuation energy balance for ΘΘ, with boundary conditions, that closes the rheology; quantify its relation to nonlocal fluidity models; and determine the status of pp.

Background

Dense granular flows — gravity-driven landslides, chute flows, and industrial handling of grains and powders — are commonly described by the phenomenological μ(I)μ(I) rheology, in which the stress ratio (macroscopic friction coefficient) μ=τ/Pμ = τ/P, the shear stress ττ normalized by the confining pressure PP, is a single-valued function of the inertial number I=dγ˙/√(P/ρs)I = dγ̇/√(P/ρ_s), the ratio of the microscopic rearrangement time to the macroscopic deformation time for particles of diameter dd and material density ρsρ_s under shear rate γ˙γ̇ (da Cruz et al. 2005; Jop et al. 2006). This 'local' description fails for heterogeneous flows: regions where μμ is below the yield threshold still creep, and shear-band widths depend on system size. To capture such nonlocal effects, the Nonlocal Granular Fluidity (NGF) model (Kamrin and Koval 2012) introduces a scalar 'fluidity' field g=γ˙/μg = γ̇/μ that obeys a phenomenological reaction–diffusion equation, ξ2∇2g=g−glocξ^2 ∇^2 g = g − g_{loc}, with a cooperativity length ξξ and a local fluidity glocg_{loc} set by the homogeneous rheology.

Grain-scale velocity fluctuations, quantified by the granular temperature T=δv2/DT = δv^2/D (DD is the spatial dimension and δvδv the velocity fluctuation magnitude), act as an agitation variable. Classical kinetic theory of granular gases supplies a transport ('fluctuation energy') balance for TT, but its assumptions — momentum and energy transported by instantaneous binary collisions — break down in dense, enduring-contact, near-jammed flow. From discrete element method (DEM; particle-resolved dynamics simulations) data across many flow geometries, Kim and Kamrin (2020) found that rescaling the stress ratio by a power of the dimensionless temperature Θ=ρsT/PΘ = ρ_s T/P collapses data that μ(I)μ(I) cannot: μΘp=f(I)μ Θ^p = f(I), with p≈1/6p ≈ 1/6 for 3D sphere systems and p≈1/8p ≈ 1/8 for 2D disk systems; particle surface friction shifts the master curve f(I)f(I) but not the exponent. In their own predictive chute-flow test, however, the authors imported the ΘΘ field from the particle simulations rather than computing it, precisely because no validated fluctuation-energy balance exists that remains accurate in the dense regime; their conclusion states that including such a balance law 'would provide Θ and complete the rheological model'. The paper also notes that the presumed diffusive spreading of ΘΘ suggests, without establishing, a connection to the NGF fluidity diffusion equation, and it leaves the status of pp open in general terms — describing a 'potentially universal scaling exponent pp, which, once identified, allows model fitting solely from simple shear data' — while itself varying only spatial dimension and surface friction; the concrete sweep over particle shapes, polydispersity, restitution coefficients, and boundary conditions reflects later treatments of the universality question rather than the original paper.

Problem Statement

Complete the μ(I,Θ)μ(I,Θ) constitutive framework for dense granular flows into a closed, predictive continuum model. Here μ=τ/Pμ = τ/P is the stress ratio (shear stress ττ over confining pressure PP), II the inertial number (the ratio of microscopic to macroscopic deformation time scales), TT the granular temperature (T=δv2/DT = δv^2/D, the mean squared velocity fluctuation per dimension, with DD the spatial dimension), and Θ=ρsT/PΘ = ρ_s T/P its dimensionless form, with ρsρ_s the particle material density. Specifically: (i) formulate and validate a fluctuation energy balance — a governing transport equation for TT, equivalently for ΘΘ — together with closure relations for its flux and dissipation and appropriate boundary conditions (including external agitation sources such as vibrating walls), that remains accurate in the dense, contact-dominated, near-jammed regime where classical kinetic theory fails, so that ΘΘ is predicted by the model rather than imported from experiment or particle simulation; (ii) determine whether, and quantify to what extent, the diffusion/reaction dynamics of ΘΘ within this balance are connected to the nonlocal granular fluidity (NGF) reaction–diffusion equation of Kamrin and Koval; and (iii) determine whether the scaling exponent pp in μΘp=f(I)μΘ^p = f(I) is universal or material-dependent, across space dimensions, particle shapes, polydispersity, surface friction, restitution coefficients, and boundary conditions. The three sub-goals (i)-(iii) are jointly posed; the properties listed after 'across' in (iii) define the scope over which the universality of pp is to be determined. These deliverables jointly serve one objective: turning the empirical power-law collapse into a self-contained continuum model whose flow-field predictions can be tested against configurations not used for calibration, for use in geophysical and industrial granular-flow prediction.

References

  1. Seongmin Kim and Ken Kamrin, 'Power-law scaling in granular rheology across flow geometries', Physical Review Letters 125, 088002 (2020). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.088002, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.088002 (preprint arXiv:2005.00732, https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.00732).
  2. Benjamin M. Alessio, Matthew R. Edwards, and Ching-Yao Lai, 'Dense granular rheology from fluctuations' (2026), preprint arXiv:2601.01907, https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.01907.
  3. Diego Berzi, 'On granular flows: From kinetic theory to inertial rheology and nonlocal constitutive models', Physical Review Fluids 9, 034304 (2024). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevFluids.9.034304, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevFluids.9.034304.
  4. Mitchell G. Irmer, Emily E. Brodsky, and Abram H. Clark, 'Granular Temperature Controls Local Rheology of Vibrated Granular Flows', Physical Review Letters 134, 048202 (2025). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.134.048202, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.134.048202.
  5. Zexu Yuan, He Zhao, and Dengming Wang, 'Toward a unified continuum framework for dense granular flows: μ(I) rheology extended with granular temperature', Journal of Fluid Mechanics 1030, A24 (2026). DOI: 10.1017/jfm.2026.11267, https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2026.11267.
  6. Seongmin Kim and Ken Kamrin, 'A second-order non-local model for granular flows', Frontiers in Physics 11, 1092233 (2023). DOI: 10.3389/fphy.2023.1092233, https://doi.org/10.3389/fphy.2023.1092233.
  7. Pierre Jop, Yoël Forterre, and Olivier Pouliquen, 'A constitutive law for dense granular flows', Nature 441, 727–730 (2006). DOI: 10.1038/nature04801, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04801.
  8. Frédéric da Cruz, Sacha Emam, Michaël Prochnow, Jean-Noël Roux, and François Chevoir, 'Rheophysics of dense granular materials: Discrete simulation of plane shear flows', Physical Review E 72, 021309 (2005). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.72.021309, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.72.021309.
  9. Ken Kamrin and Georg Koval, 'Nonlocal Constitutive Relation for Steady Granular Flow', Physical Review Letters 108, 178301 (2012). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.178301, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.178301.
  10. Martin Trulsson, 'Non-Local Particle Flows Become Local When Considering Dissipative Stress' (2026), preprint arXiv:2605.06531, https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06531.