## 4 Results and Discussion  
Numerical experiment carried out with program developed by the authors in Python. The following values of parameters: \(c_{0}^{(1)}=0.05\), \(c_{0}^{(2)}=0.03\), \(m_{0}=0.3\), \(v_{0}=10^{-4}\) m/s, \(\rho_{0}=0.1\), \(\rho_{a0}=0.01\), \(\rho_{a0}^{(1)}=0.007\), \(\rho_{a0}^{(2)}=0.003\), \(\rho_{p0}=0.09\), \(\rho_{p0}^{(1)}=0.06\), \(\rho_{p0}^{(2)}=0.03\), \(\beta_{a0}^{(1)}=0.005\) s\({}^{-1}\), \(\beta_{a0}^{(2)}=0.003\) s\({}^{-1}\), \(\beta_{p0}^{(1)}=0.005\) s\({}^{-1}\), \(\beta_{p0}^{(2)}=0.003\) s\({}^{-1}\)[34] are used. Values of some other parameters are given under Figures 1-4. Let us analyze the numerical results. In Figure 1 profiles of changes \(c^{(i)}\), \(\rho_{a}^{(i)}\) and \(\rho_{p}^{(i)}\), \((i=1,2)\) are shown without dynamic factors and diffusion effects. Over time, the values of, \(c^{(i)}\), \(\rho_{a}^{(i)}\) and \(\rho_{p}^{(i)}\) at fixed points in the reservoir increase (Figure 1). For the capacity of the passive zones, \(\rho_{p0}^{(1)}=0.06\), \(\rho_{p0}^{(2)}=0.03\) were used. It can be seen from Figure 1c that near the inlet of the medium, over time, the concentration of the first component of the suspension becomes greater than the capacity of the passive zone for the first component, i.e., \(\rho_{p}^{(1)}>\rho_{p0}^{(1)}\). Due to this fact, the capacity of the passive zone for the second component is saturated not only with concentration \(\rho_{p}^{(2)}\), but also with \(\rho_{p}^{(1)}\). Approximately at \(t\approx 900\) s, the deposition concentration of the second component increases to some \(x\) and then decreases. Over time, the interval of increasing of \(\rho_{p}^{(2)}\) expands. With increasing values of the parameters \(\rho_{p1}^{(1)}\) and \(\rho_{p1}^{(2)}\) (Figure 2) near the point \(x=0\), the capacity of the passive zones is completely saturated with the deposition more quickly, at \(t\approx 450\) s. Here, unlike the above capacity of the second component is fully saturated with itself an exception is only a few points near \(x=0\). Furthermore, quick filling the capacity of passive zone leads to increase of \(c^{(i)}\), \(\rho_{a}^{(i)}\). In Figure 3 some results are presented to estimate the effect of diffusion term. A comparison of the graphs with corresponding graphs above shows that diffusion leads to smearing of profiles. Concentration of suspended particles will flow further in this case. This also leads to formation of more deposition at the points away from inlet point in both active and passive zones. Only in passive zone deposition reaches the maximum value and stationary situation is established in this zone at points near to \(x=0\). But in profiles of \(c^{(i)}\) and \(\rho_{a}^{(i)}\), the stationary situation has not established yet in studied time. From Figure 4 it is seen that dynamic factors affect mainly the formation of deposition in active zone. As in the case of a single-component suspension [37], the potential capacity of the active zone is not completely saturated with deposition. As the parameters characterizing intensity of gradient of pressure for the first component of suspension \(\gamma^{(1)}\), \(\omega^{(1)}\) are greater than the parameters of second one \(\gamma^{(2)}\), \(\omega^{(2)}\) capacity of active zone for first component is less filled with deposition than that for the second one. This also leads to a little increase in \(c^{(i)}\), \(\rho_{p}^{(i)}\). Figure 5 presents the dynamics of \(\rho_{p}^{(i)}\) at the fixed points \(x=0\) m and \(x=0.04\) m for different values of parameters \(\rho_{p1}^{(1)}\) and \(\rho_{p1}^{(2)}\). At the point \(x=0\) (Figure 5a) the capacity of passive zone for the second component is not fully saturated with itself, but at the point \(x=0\) (Figure 5b) the concentration of deposition of second component reaches the maximum value of its capacity. Increasing the parameters \(\rho_{p1}^{(i)}\) leads to increasing of intensity of deposition in passive zone.