0 views

Uploaded by Muhammad Adnan Laghari

save

- Status of Low Pressure Polyehtylene - LDPE Process Technology Licensing CMR Inc Analysis
- Norton 1978
- Whitaker - Introduction to Fluid Mechanics
- 21-08-14
- A Solution for Every Multiphase Challenge
- A Critical Review of Some Non-equilibrium Situations and Glass Transitions on Aw Values of Foods in the Microbiological Growth
- Barracuda Solution VR
- Powder Technology 2007.pdf
- 136-Smoke Management System Design
- Chemical session 2013 (final).docx
- Simulation of Snow
- 386-389.pdf
- 611
- 9471204-Applied-Hydraulic-Transients-Chaudhry.pdf
- 5. Open Channel Flow
- Bernoulli
- Entropic Force AI.pdf
- aero sem ppt
- page_009
- ME2134.docx
- Mechanics of Fluids Question Bank
- force generated by granular flow.pdf
- 10.1.1.660.3555
- Introduction to Fluid Mechanics
- BRC Course Listing PT
- Wind Effects on High Rise Buildings
- CCET syllabus 2014-2015
- Fluid Flow Review
- 2-Solution of the Diffusivity Equation
- 51428
- CFD Simulations of Gas–Solid Flow in an Industrial-scale Circulatingfluidized Bed Furnace Using Subgrid-scale Drag Models
- feng2018.pdf
- 1-s2.0-S0378382017311670-main
- Vol 3_3_3.pdf
- Kester Ing 2017
- v3n4a2
- paper for boiler
- Boyd 1988
- Test Planning
- A New Structural Parameters Model Based on Drag Coefficient for Simulation of Circulating Fluidized Beds
- PAPQER
- 212333.pdf
- Modeling of Coarse Graining CFD-DeM for CFB [自动保存dddd(New)3232
- energies-07-00477
- Week 4 Lab InTech-Two_phase_flow M awad.pdf
- Comparison of the Standard Euler–Euler and Hybrid Euler–Lagrangeapproaches for Modeling Particle Transport in a Pilot-scale Circulatingfluidized Bed
- 1-s2.0-S1674200114001448-main
- Toda-1973-ON THE PARTICLE VELOCITIES IN SOLID-.pdf
- A Comparison of Two-fluid Model, Dense Discrete Particle Model and CFD-DeM Method for Modeling Impinging Gas–Solid Flows
- viewpdfddpm
- 20-math.pdf
- 1-s2.0-S1385894703002444-main.pdf
- Adiscrete Particle Model for Particle–Fluid Flowwith Considerations Of
- learning-c-151230063008.pdf
- 03-cnsrv.pdf
- 1-s2.0-S0009250916304353-main11
- Gambit Tips and Tricks.pdf
- Vol 3_3_3
- User Programming & Automation.pdf
- Freest on 04

You are on page 1of 3

Pergamon

**Chemical Engineering Science, Vol. 51, No. 4, pp. 667-669, 1996
**

Copyright © 1996 Elsevier Science Ltd

Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved

0009-2509/96 $15.00 + 0.00

0009-2509(95)00321-5

Gas-solid

fluidization: a typical dissipative structure

**(Received 22 June 1995)
**

INTRODUCTION

**Figure 1 shows the variation of different energy terms with
**

gas velocity, all computed according to the EMMS model

(Li et al., 1988; Li and Kwauk, 1994). The figure indicates

that in the PFC regime for fluidization, the dissipated energy

Ndisoccupies a considerable portion of the total energy Nr,

while as the flow regime transits to dilute transport, it drops

dramatically.

In the EMMS model, the energy consumption for suspending and transporting unit mass of particles N~ is shown

to be minimal in the PFC regime and maximal in the FD

regime, and it can therefore be used as the criterion for

stability conditions. Further work (Li et al., 1993) indicated

that Nt can be used as a substitute for N~, to define stability

conditions of these two regimes, that is, Nt = rain in the PFC

regime and Nr = max in the FD regime. Noting the constancy of N r at any specified value of Ug from eq. (3), it thus

follows from eq. (5) that Nais = max in the PFC regime with

a two-phase structure and that Nals = rain in the FD regime

with a uniform structure.

**In accordance with the controlling role of the particles
**

and/or the fluid, Li et al. (1992) characterized the three major

regimes in particle-fluid two-phase flow as: particle dominating (PD) for the fixed bed, particle-fluid compromising (PFC)

for fluidization and fluid dominating (FD) for dilute transport. Subsequent efforts have been focused on transition and

structural difference between regimes (Li and Kwauk, 1994).

In modeling particle-fluid two-phase flow by the energyminimization multi-scale (EMMS) method, Li et al. (1988)

attributed the stability of the heterogeneous two-phase structure of the PFC regime to the inherent tendency of the

system toward minimal energy expended in suspending and

transporting the particles Nst. For the FD regime, on the

other hand, the EMMS method revealed that N,t tends

toward a maximum. Such contrary criteria point to the

extremum behavior (Li et al., 1993) unique to particle-fluid

two-phase flow.

According to the theorem of minimum entropy production (Prigogine, 1967), steady states of linear nonequilibrium

systems prevail only when the entropy production rate is

minimized. There is however no single and general variational theorem for nonlinear steady-state dissipative systems

(Gage et al., 1966; Nicolis, 1994). This paper purports to

examine the extremum behavior of fluidized systems in the

light of nonequilibrium thermodynamics in order to explore

valid approaches to elucidate the bifurcation phenomenon

and dissipative structure for such complicated systems.

TWO BIFURCATIONS

The PD regime for the fixed bed essentially corresponds to

single-phase fluid flow through a maze of channels composed of packed particles. Particles determine the configuration of these channels, and the fluid merely seeks these

channels and distributes itself through paths with minimal

resistance, resulting in minimal energy dissipation. The pressure gradient AP/AL in this regime is known to vary with

superficial fluid velocity Ug, and in the case of fine particles,

it is proportional to Ug and is affected by an exponential

function e-4'7 of the voidage of the packed solid particles (Li

and Kwauk, 1994):

**EXTREMUM ENERGY DISSIPATION
**

In a particle-fluid system with superficial fluid velocity

Ug and solids flow rate Gs, the energy supplied to the system

is spent not only in suspending and transporting the particles

but also as dissipated energy in particle collision, circulation,

acceleration, etc. (Li et al., 1988). With respect to unit mass of

particles in unit cross-sectional area normal to the direction

of flow, the total energy consumed is

Nr

U9

APUg

AL(1 - e)pv

(1)

(1 - ~)(p, - pz)g.

(2)

where

AP

~-£ =

Therefore

N~ = U ~ g\ ( P~v - / P I ]

(3)

**The energy consumption transformed into particle potential
**

energy is

N, = G~#/(1 - e)Pv.

(4)

Therefore, the total dissipated energy is

Ndi s = N T - - N t.

(5)

d v2 e4 7•

AP

18(1--e)# I AL

**implying linear relationship between the driving force
**

AP/AL and the superficial fluid velocity Ug, as shown in Fig.

2 by experiments carried out with FCC particles fluidized

with air, with local voidages monitored with an optical fiber

probe.

As the superficial fluid velocity increases to that for minimum fluidization Uml, particles start to move and expand

with increasing voidage e, leading to nonlinearity between

Ug and AP/AL. The system is said to have entered the PFC

regime. With increasing superficial fluid velocity, nonlinearity of the system increases and reaches a critical extent at

the minimum bubbling velocity Umbat which the fluid organizes itself into bubbles and particles aggregate into the emulsion phase, resulting in a dramatic change in flow structure

which is now dissipative with ordered behaviors as Nicolis

and Prigogine (1977) described. Such a change is known as

the first bifurcation corresponding to nonequilibrium phase

transformation in thermodynamics. For particle-fluid systems with large particles, corresponding to high Rev, the

dissipative structure appears immediately beyond Urns, that

667

Umf = U=b.01 0. The first bifurcation at U.....5 1. the A P / A L ~ U 9 curve bifurcates into two branches both satisfying the mass and momentum conservation equations. With the onset of this second bifurcation. Although thermodynamics does not specify any single and general variational theorem for such a steady-state dissipative structure.:~_.. implying a more or less homogeneous structure. 0 0. 0 max ~./ . in which the particles organize themselves into a dense phase with voidage e~ and PFC PD Fixed Bed FD Fluidtzation Transport 40 U=f '$ E U 30 O~k" ~ 0 20 .. both of which are mobile...5 8. and the dense phase disappears. 10 ••• / Q. . and it is therefore designated fluid dominating (FD). the conventional time.b. Its nonlinear nature is characterized by a highly heterogeneous two-phase structure with significant energy dissipation which is necessary to maintain its steady state. another is unstable with particulate structure as shown by the dashed line. 2...b "'. 1988). known as "choking". at which the nonlinear two-phase PFC regime suddenly gives way to the single-phase dilute transport (generally known as "choking"). [ L ./.. although the dilute phase becomes somewhat denser. resulting in a second bifurcation.~ 0. As superficial fluid velocity further increases. future research should be focused on the non-linear behaviors of the system...1.0 2. however. calculated from the EMMS model (Li et al. For gas-solid systems. the probability of the existence of these two voidage values narrow down to a very limited range (a single value in theory). Fixed B Bed Fixld Upt P.5 10 Nd. / 10 N°nlineaz ~j~~i~A U. The second bifurcation at Upt. am Fluidization iiato . corresponding to the heterogeneous and the homogeneous structure. Such a change corresponds to a switch of stability conditions from Nd~s = max to N d i s = min.01 0.0 $. X J . 1.. . dp = 54 #m. 2. the fluid determines the flow structure.5 2. showing an ordered dissipative structure and extremum behavior of the system.. This dissipative structure is brought about jointly by the particles and the fluid. only the two-phase heterogeneous structure..668 Shorter Communication is.r£.. local voidage takes a constant value. Gs = 50 kg/m2s). Experimental results (shown as dots) in a fluidized bed of 90 mm ID with FCC particles. as shown in Fig. a second critical velocity Up~ is reached. the selforganization of particles is suppressed.=min Ndi = _/_. Because of the predominance of the dissipative structure in gas solid ftuidization. In dilute transport. greater perturbation prevails in such a two-phase structure.0~ 0.. Figure 3 shows the bifurcation phenomena in terms of local voidages in the fluidized FCC bed.5 V note chargeof scalefar L~ Gas Velocity Ug (m/s) Fig. At U o > U. the E M M S analysis indicates that for this highly dissipative structure.. If the first bifurcation occurs at minimum fluidization (case for large Rep).. showing linear characteristics in the fixed-bed regime but nonlinear behaviors in the fluidization regime.and spaceaveraged approaches do not suffice for adequate elucidation of the mechanisms and for quantifying the process.b results in two branches of fluidization: one is stable with an aggregative structure due to self-organization of particles and the fluid. local voidage changes suddenly to alternate between a value close to unity and a value approaching eraf. as shown by experimental data in Fig.. respectively... With increasing fluid velocity. Energy consumptions in different regimes of a particle-fluid system. is physically stable. / I the fluid into a dilute phase with voidage ef. leads to a second sudden change in flow structure..e~ " B "~B . Nd~s = max.0 .. J i ~ i J 1 2 3 4 5 Gas Velocity Ug (m/s) Fig. With the onset of the second bifurcation at choking. resulting in more extensive scatter of voidage values between unity and e. showing maximum dissipation in fluidization regime but minimum dissipation in transport regime (FCC/air: pp = 930 kg/m 3. 2.0 1. attesting to intensification of chaotic and/or random behaviors. In the particledominating fixed-bed regime. 0 4. Second Bifurcation -.00 0.

-. Chen. Beijing 100080. . with sudden reversion to homogeneous structure. . • I. Nicolis. S..'. 2.. Introduction to Thermodynamics of Irreversible Processes.. . New York.. In Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics Variational Techniques and Stability (edited by R. Multiple resolution appears to be a promising approach toward understanding such a complicated system: total energy resolved into reversible and irreversible energies. J/kg s total dissipated energy with respect to unit mass of particles. Experimental results (shown as dots) in the same bed as Fig.". • biextremum voidages with increasing chaotic and randora changes in fluidization regime.-~.1 1 AP/AL 10 Umf Upt ~_~as:-.. R.. Li. 1 5 August 1993. G. Schiffer. M.66 i Ur. The non-existence of a general thermodynamic variational principle. "': I. J/kg s total energy consumption with respect to unit mass of particles. p. " "'. showing bifurcations of local voidage: • a single constant voidage in fixed-bed regime. as particle self-organization becomes suppressed..f .'. and global structure resolved into subsystems of different scales. m/s 2 solids flow rate. Mooson Kwauk for his encouragement and help. Pittsburgh. New York. p. (3) Fluidization is a typical dissipative structure with nonlinear and nonequilibrium behaviors.89 Nst . The first bifurcation marks the occurrence of bubbling with sudden appearance of dissipative structure."i' . L.0. Li.f ..~:": " "" NT "-?. . and Zhang..'- I . G. Large). 1993. and Kwauk.V'. H. Beijing. kg/m 2 s 2 minimum fluidization velocity. Z./." : . " " . M. 1992. Vol. Donnelly.78 .. Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank Prof. 056 . ~¢'. 89.... M. I • . . the second..:" Nt I Ndis . particle-fluid movement resolved into extremum and chaotic and/or random movements.k#!". Y. ." ' ". Nicolis. Kwauk.:.'.~. Interscience Publishers.-~'. 83. Tung. and Prigogine... m/s superficial velocity. J. J.. JINGHAI LI* GUIHUA QIAN LIXIONG WEN Multi-Phase Reaction Laboratory Institute of Chemical Metallurgy Academia Sinica.:. 1994 (personal communication).. Chicago. i ' ". ~ .' I'..R. China * Corresponding author. . Fdllll g G. F.. . J. . Particlefluid contacting in circulating fluidized beds.. :. Multi-scale modeling and method of energy minimization in particle-fluid twophase flow.~.- • NOTATION rTranspor dp . ~ . 1988. 1967. X. II (edited by P. m/s minimum velocity for dilute transport. ". Role of energy minimization in gas/solid fluidization. CONCLUSIONS (1) Major regime transition in particle-fluid two-phase flow (notably for gas-solid systems) corresponds to bifurcation in thermodynamics. Weikang Yuan and Prof...~." "- ". J. P. D. Metallurgical Industry Press.. 669 Ug Umb p: pp ef ~c s sa e* particle diameter.. M. kg/m s REFERENCES Gage.:. (2) The stability of the nonlinear dissipative PFC regime is governed by Ndis = max. J. .. Nicklin). Li. C... Oxford. m/s minimum bubbling velocity. 0. Potter and D. © • I 0. 0. Xu. :. Valuable discussion with Prof. and Kwauk. m gravity acceleration. the whole process resolved into ordered and disordered branches.:v. Prigogine.~. The University of Chicago Press.":'-'1 73 o 0. ". ' : ~ ~ ~ " :" i:".. kg/m 3 voidage in dilute phase voidage in dense phase average voidage average voidage in the PFC regime at critical point average voidage in the FD regime at critical point fluid viscosity. and Reynolds..Velocity LJo (m/s) Fig. Kline. In Circulating Fluidized Bed Technology. 1994. In Fluidization V l l (edited by O. Prigogine). :. J.:" . .'. presented at the 4th International Conference on Circulating Fluidized Beds. Basu and J. • :~:-- . . J/kg s pressure gradient. Pergamon.: . 3.. kg/m 2 s energy consumed for suspending and transporting unit mass of particles. Self-Organization in Nonequilibrium Systems. Upt " ... Particle-Fluid Two-Phase Flow--the Energy-minimization Multi-scale Method.O0 F ILIIdl Z 8 t tON Bed.~ ". A. Yan. for Dissipative Structures to Order Through Fluctuations. • convergence to another single-valued voidage in transport regime. I.' .. G.. Engineering Foundation. - :. kg/m 3 particle density. Whether such a variational criterion is applicable to some other nonlinear nonequilibrium systems is to be explored further. J/kg s transporting energy consumption with respect to unit mass of particles. J. and Reh. Herman and I. New York.':'~.Shorter Communication P~xed 1 . J. Li.'. E.-. Jiuli Luo and financial support from National Natural Science Foundation of China and Academia Sinica are also gratefully acknowledged. .::-'.:. I. : .44 001 ":. W. . PFC/FD transition. Wiley. . 1977. from fluidization to dilute transport.'~~'. m/s fluid density. ". 1966.

- Status of Low Pressure Polyehtylene - LDPE Process Technology Licensing CMR Inc AnalysisUploaded byAdeel Ahmed
- Norton 1978Uploaded byCharisah Andriyani
- Whitaker - Introduction to Fluid MechanicsUploaded byalejandro magno
- 21-08-14Uploaded byAravindNaidu
- A Solution for Every Multiphase ChallengeUploaded bySunil Saini
- A Critical Review of Some Non-equilibrium Situations and Glass Transitions on Aw Values of Foods in the Microbiological GrowthUploaded byCesar Huamani
- Barracuda Solution VRUploaded byPayal Minocha
- Powder Technology 2007.pdfUploaded byKiki Kumala Putri
- 136-Smoke Management System DesignUploaded byAmr Kamel
- Chemical session 2013 (final).docxUploaded byWilliam Cruz
- Simulation of SnowUploaded byDeepak Chachra
- 386-389.pdfUploaded bySinhroo
- 611Uploaded by444DANIEL
- 9471204-Applied-Hydraulic-Transients-Chaudhry.pdfUploaded byWilliam Castellares Paucar
- 5. Open Channel FlowUploaded byFahmi Adha Nurdin
- BernoulliUploaded bysazex
- Entropic Force AI.pdfUploaded byShweta Sridhar
- aero sem pptUploaded byNaveen Singh
- page_009Uploaded byMarko
- ME2134.docxUploaded byben
- Mechanics of Fluids Question BankUploaded byanbuvrp
- force generated by granular flow.pdfUploaded bysmendoza
- 10.1.1.660.3555Uploaded bychemsac2
- Introduction to Fluid MechanicsUploaded byBima El-Mubarok
- BRC Course Listing PTUploaded byjeffreymacasero
- Wind Effects on High Rise BuildingsUploaded byMoraru Gabriel
- CCET syllabus 2014-2015Uploaded byAnmoldeep Bhullar
- Fluid Flow ReviewUploaded bysayan
- 2-Solution of the Diffusivity EquationUploaded byAsshole
- 51428Uploaded byCepa Ugol

- CFD Simulations of Gas–Solid Flow in an Industrial-scale Circulatingfluidized Bed Furnace Using Subgrid-scale Drag ModelsUploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- feng2018.pdfUploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- 1-s2.0-S0378382017311670-mainUploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- Vol 3_3_3.pdfUploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- Kester Ing 2017Uploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- v3n4a2Uploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- paper for boilerUploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- Boyd 1988Uploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- Test PlanningUploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- A New Structural Parameters Model Based on Drag Coefficient for Simulation of Circulating Fluidized BedsUploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- PAPQERUploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- 212333.pdfUploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- Modeling of Coarse Graining CFD-DeM for CFB [自动保存dddd(New)3232Uploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- energies-07-00477Uploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- Week 4 Lab InTech-Two_phase_flow M awad.pdfUploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- Comparison of the Standard Euler–Euler and Hybrid Euler–Lagrangeapproaches for Modeling Particle Transport in a Pilot-scale Circulatingfluidized BedUploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- 1-s2.0-S1674200114001448-mainUploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- Toda-1973-ON THE PARTICLE VELOCITIES IN SOLID-.pdfUploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- A Comparison of Two-fluid Model, Dense Discrete Particle Model and CFD-DeM Method for Modeling Impinging Gas–Solid FlowsUploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- viewpdfddpmUploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- 20-math.pdfUploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- 1-s2.0-S1385894703002444-main.pdfUploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- Adiscrete Particle Model for Particle–Fluid Flowwith Considerations OfUploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- learning-c-151230063008.pdfUploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- 03-cnsrv.pdfUploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- 1-s2.0-S0009250916304353-main11Uploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- Gambit Tips and Tricks.pdfUploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- Vol 3_3_3Uploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- User Programming & Automation.pdfUploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari
- Freest on 04Uploaded byMuhammad Adnan Laghari