0 Up votes0 Down votes

16 views75 pagesfrikandel

Sep 07, 2015

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

frikandel

© All Rights Reserved

16 views

frikandel

© All Rights Reserved

- The Woman Who Smashed Codes: A True Story of Love, Spies, and the Unlikely Heroine who Outwitted America's Enemies
- Steve Jobs
- NIV, Holy Bible, eBook
- NIV, Holy Bible, eBook, Red Letter Edition
- Hidden Figures Young Readers' Edition
- Cryptonomicon
- Make Your Mind Up: My Guide to Finding Your Own Style, Life, and Motavation!
- The Golden Notebook: A Novel
- Alibaba: The House That Jack Ma Built
- The 10X Rule: The Only Difference Between Success and Failure
- Autonomous: A Novel
- Hit Refresh: The Quest to Rediscover Microsoft's Soul and Imagine a Better Future for Everyone
- Hit Refresh: The Quest to Rediscover Microsoft's Soul and Imagine a Better Future for Everyone
- Life After Google: The Fall of Big Data and the Rise of the Blockchain Economy
- Algorithms to Live By: The Computer Science of Human Decisions
- Console Wars: Sega, Nintendo, and the Battle that Defined a Generation
- The Innovators: How a Group of Hackers, Geniuses, and Geeks Created the Digital Revolution

You are on page 1of 75

2

User's Manual

Revised November 2006

ERGUN 6.............................................................................................................................. 1

User's Manual ........................................................................................................................ 1

Chapter 1 - Presentation......................................................................................................... 3

1.1. Introduction .................................................................................................................... 3

1.2. Installation of the program.............................................................................................. 3

Chapter 2 - Environment ....................................................................................................... 5

2.1. Program Structure........................................................................................................... 5

2.2. Using Menus.................................................................................................................. 6

2.3. Data File Management................................................................................................... 6

2.3.1. Manual and automatic data transfer during Item by Item Design .............................. 9

2.3.2. Importing data from Database ................................................................................... 10

2.4. Running the program ................................................................................................... 10

2.4.1. Typical application .................................................................................................... 11

2.4.2. Building a Global Model .......................................................................................... 12

2.5. Results Files................................................................................................................. 12

2.6. Operator's privilege...................................................................................................... 13

2.7. Gas/Solid Database...................................................................................................... 14

2.7.1. Preparing data with pure gases ................................................................................. 14

2.7.2. Preparing data with gases mixtures............................................................................ 15

2.8. Cut & Paste possibility, printing diagrams .................................................................. 15

2.9. Tutorials........................................................................................................................ 16

2.10. About ERGUN 6......................................................................................................... 16

Chapter 3- Hydrodynamics of Fluidized Systems ............................................................... 17

3.1. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 17

3.2 Geldart's classification ................................................................................................... 17

3.3 Terminal Velocity.......................................................................................................... 18

3.4. Fluidization Grids ......................................................................................................... 19

3.4.1 Perforated plate distributors:....................................................................................... 20

3.4.2 Tuyere type distributors:............................................................................................. 21

3.5. Expansion properties in fluidized beds ......................................................................... 22

3.5.1 Calculation of Umf ..................................................................................................... 23

3.5.2. Calculation of .......................................................................................................... 23

3.5.3 Calculation of b ......................................................................................................... 24

3.5.4 Calculation of Db........................................................................................................ 24

3.5.5. Fluidized bed design .................................................................................................. 25

3.6. Werthers Bubbling and Bed Expansion Model ........................................................... 26

3.7. TDH and Entrainment................................................................................................... 27

3.7. Cyclones ....................................................................................................................... 29

3.7.2. Users Defined Cyclones .......................................................................................... 30

3.7.3. Cyclone Time of Flight Model .............................................................................. 31

3.7.4. Cyclone Equilibrium Orbit Model......................................................................... 33

3.7.5. Cyclone Pressure drop calculation............................................................................ 34

3.9. References .................................................................................................................... 36

3.9.1. ref. Bed Expansion..................................................................................................... 36

3.9.2. ref. Grids.................................................................................................................... 37

3.9.3. ref. Cyclone ............................................................................................................... 37

3.9.4. ref. TDH..................................................................................................................... 37

Chapter 4- Fluidized Bed Reactors...................................................................................... 38

4.1. Classification of fluidized bed reactors: ....................................................................... 39

4.2. Werther's model............................................................................................................ 43

4.3. Kunii & Levenspiel's .................................................................................................... 45

4.4. Orcutt's model............................................................................................................... 47

4.5. Reactions with consumable solids: .............................................................................. 49

4.5.1. Solid phase mass balance........................................................................................... 49

4.5.1.1. NSC (No Size Change) ........................................................................................... 49

4.5.1.2. RWCS ( Reactions With Change in Size)............................................................... 50

4.6. Notation ....................................................................................................................... 54

4.7. References .................................................................................................................... 55

Chapter 5 -Heat transfer in Fluidized Beds.......................................................................... 56

5.1. Presentation of the phenomenon................................................................................... 56

5.2.Variation with the fluidization velocity ......................................................................... 57

5.3. Variation with particle diameter ................................................................................... 58

5.4. Influence of the gas properties...................................................................................... 58

5.5. Influence of the solid properties ................................................................................... 58

5.6. Heat transfer mechanisms............................................................................................. 59

5.7. Heat transfer by conduction.......................................................................................... 59

5.8. Heat transfer by convection. ......................................................................................... 62

5.9. Transfer by radiation..................................................................................................... 63

5.10. Transfer of heat at the walls of the fluid bed. ............................................................. 64

5.11. Transfer of heat between bed and immersed tubes ..................................................... 65

5.12. Martin's model ............................................................................................................ 68

5.13. Bock's model............................................................................................................... 70

5.14. Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 71

5.15. Notation ...................................................................................................................... 72

5.16. References .................................................................................................................. 74

Chapter 1 - Presentation

1.1. Introduction

The program ERGUN is the result of a collaboration among researchers in the field of

fluidization on one hand and computer scientists on the other. This resulted in the creation

of a user friendly software, particularly well adapted to the needs of engineers.

The ERGUN computer program is fully on-line documented; dialogue messages are present

at all levels, without slowing down the calculations.

This extensive self-documentation makes it possible to learn in a couple of hours the

different possibilities offered by the program environment and to start performing

calculations without any waste of time.

It is for this reason that the user's manual is highly condensed for the program

environment and ismainly focused on the scientific presentation of the program.

We recommend that you read carefully this set of instructions before starting your

calculations. In order to obtain additional information please contact us.

ERGUN 6 package is distributed by:

Divergent S.A.

R.P. Guy Denielou - 66, av. de Landshut

60200 - Compigne FRANCE

phone (33) 3. 44 23 46 28

Fax: (33) - 3.44.23.45.60

e-mail : ergun@utc.fr

ERGUN 6 needs about 50 MB of disk space to be installed. To install the program, execute

the Setup program from the installation CD. ERGUN 6 is written in Windows

compatible Visual Basic language. Simply follow the set-up instructions and reply to

questions.

In some cases, the set-up may inform you about some files in use. This means that some

files already exist on your computer. Please choose Ignore option to complete

installation.

Ergun6 needs Acrobat Reader to display the tutorials and the users manual. If you

dont have this freeware please download and install this program from

http://www.adobe.com .

Note that ERGUN 6 is usually installed in an ERGUN6.2 directory. However this is

only optional ; you can change the name of this directory to any other you want.

If you have an ancient version of ERGUN program, please be careful when installing the

new version. You would better to install the new version in a new directory to avoid files

confusion. Note that some Data files created by older versions of Ergun Software are not

compatible with the new version. In the case of problem please contact us.

Chapter 2 - Environment

ERGUN 6 is a menu driven program. The user is supposed to know the very simple

operations, commonly used under Windows environment.

The graphical interface of ERGUN 6 is independent from the 'source code' of scientific

routines so that the user can modify a very simple program (optional). However, in this

case, a base knowledge in VISUAL BASIC is required.

The main screen of the program, contains different parts:

- Main menu

- Design Item

- FB Modeling and Analysis

- Database

- Ergun Video Show

- Ergun Slide Show

The Main Menu is a classical Windows type menu that contains general functions as

well as NOTATION, REFERENCES, TUTORIALS, HELP ...and so on.

Design Item concern the calculation of a single element like a GRID, a CYCLONE...

and other current elements in fluidized bed design. These elements are always calculated

separately, in some conditions near to those of the operating system. Please note that it is

always difficult to know what is the exact operating conditions, because of the interactive

characteristic of fluidized bed calculations. In the present version of ERGUN program, the

user needs to do some preliminary calculations to define the proper operating conditions.

On the other hand, he needs always to repeat his calculations after a first trial (to revise

some hypothesis or to change some initialised values. Please look to the Training

example in the main menu, if you are not familiar with these procedures.

FB Modeling and Expert Analysis is the latest feature of Ergun program. Once the

different items of a fluidized bed studied separately, this module helps the user to put all

items together and to make a global model of the fluid bed. Once the Data File prepared,

run the program and open results file. Expert comments are inserted into the result text.

Database is a twined program that lets the user to study and prepare physical data for

some 60 different gases and solids. Please refer to the Database section of this manual

to learn more about the use of the Database .

ERGUN 6 uses familiar Windows type menus. These menus can be activated either by the

keyboard or by the mouse. To activate any option press <Alt> + <underlined letter>. Then

use arrow keys to move to the desired position. For example the scientific <Nomenclature>

table can be consulted from <Show> menu. When the program is running, go to the main

menu and press <S> while pressing <Alt> key. This will activate the <Show> menu. Then

press <Downward direction key> to put the cursor to the <Notation> position. Press

<Enter> to activate this sub-menu.

Data files names should be composed of a maximum of 8 characters a <.dat> extension.

Special characters like *, + ... are not accepted.

A data file is composed of a set of all data necessary for all modules. It means that on data

file can be used for different modules without erasing any data. For example, if a user

<Kevin> saved a data file under the name <KEVIN.DAT> then he can calculate a GRID, a

CYCLONE

... and make a personal project within the same data file <KEVIN.DAT>. Usually any user

has one data file / project.

Structure of data file for the above example:

Kevin.dat :

Solid density ..

Gas density

Gas Viscosity

..

..

Data for Grid Module

Solid density ..

Gas density

Gas Viscosity

..

..

Data for Bubbling Module

Solid density ..

Gas density

Gas Viscosity

..

..

The reason why the user needs to enter the data for each module independently is to make

possible each module to be executed independently. This also help the user to avoid some

common confusions. For example, the gas properties are always not the same in the windbox, in the bubbling suspension or in the cyclone. This is why the data manager conserves

separately the data for each module. To avoid to retype the data, one can use the

Automatic Data Transfer procedure (see the corresponding section 2.3.1 below).

Once the name of a data file is loaded in any module, the program will automatically open

this data file for any new module to avoid retyping the same name. Meanwhile, the user can

operate to open any other data file if desired.

To make a new personal data file, use the <File / Preparing data file> menu. This sub-menu

lets to make a new copy of original ERGUN 6 data file to the user's given name. A new

copy of data file can also be prepared with the <Save As> option of file modification submenu. This option can only be used when the user if modifying an existing data file. In this

case, the program saves the current state of the file to the given name, while the original file

is not modified.

Note to OPERATORS ONLY:

You can modify the source data file ERWIN.$$$ using the text editor available in the

main menu. However, be sure that you keep a copy of original file if any thing goes wrong

with the new one. The interest of modifying this file may be to add some extra lines into the

dp( ), g( )... and any other array parameters (or simply cut some of them.

Choose the TextEditor from the main menu and load ERWIN.$$$ (type the ERWIN.$$$

to load this file). Note that this file contains a number of segments corresponding to each

module of the program. Each segment begins with the name of the corresponding module

and ends with an END statement. Its very important not to change these lines.

What can be changed in the data source Erwin.$$$ file?

Read this paragraph carefully if you want modify any line in this file. First, note that each

column of this file has a maximum number of characters. A data line is composed of for

columns:

Value

unit

name

comment

10 ch

7 ch

7ch

up to 40 characters

______________ Example of file portion: ___________

CYCLONE

0.1132

2600.

0.444

4.45E-5

0.25

m3/s

kg/m3

kg/m3

Ns/m2

m

38E-6

63E-6

88E-6

113E-6

150E-6

200E-6

250E-6

300E-6

400E-6

500E-6

m

m

m

m

m

m

m

m

m

m

density of solid

density of fluid

viscosity

cyclone diameter

<Size distribution section:>

dp(1) mean size cut 1

dp(2) mean size cut 2

dp(3) mean size cut 3

dp(4) mean size cut 4

dp(5) mean size cut 5

dp(6) mean size cut 6

dp(7) mean size cut 7

dp(8) mean size cut 8

dp(9) mean size cut 9

dp(10) mean size cut 10

0.02

0.03

0.10

0.15

0.45

0.15

0.10

0.

0.

0.

g(1)

g(2)

g(3)

g(4)

g(5)

g(6)

g(7)

g(8)

g(9)

g(10)

Qg

Rop

Rof

Dcy

mass

mass

mass

mass

mass

mass

mass

mass

mass

mass

fraction

fraction

fraction

fraction

fraction

fraction

fraction

fraction

fraction

fraction

cut

cut

cut

cut

cut

cut

cut

cut

cut

cut

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

For example, lines can be copied an added to the dp( ) and g ( ) arrays. To add two new cuts

to the size distribution of particles copy and paste two new lines at the end of each dp( ) and

g() sections, as below:

.

.

.

400E-6

500E-6

600E-6

700E-6

m

m

m

m

dp(9)

dp(10)

dp(11)

dp(12)

mean

mean

mean

mean

size

size

size

size

cut

cut

cut

cut

9

10

11

12

g(11)

g(12)

mass fraction cut 12

and

.

.

0.

0.

Note that if the dp( ) array changes, all corresponding arrays should be changed as well, if

not this will generate an error.

The limitation of the array length depends upon the memory capacity.

Units, Names and Comments have no effect on the program execution and can be

changed if necessary. However, we advise not to change any species unless it is necessary.

Note that no tabulation character can be used in this file. Lines contain as much as

necessary, blank characters and are ended by <RETURN>. After any modification of data

source file, all new files from the Main menu / File item, will have the modified form.

2.3.1. Manual and automatic data transfer during Item by Item Design

An automatic Data Transfer Manager is available in the new version 6.1. Click on the

Auto.Data Transfer check box in the Item Design frame of the main menu before

beginning a series of calculations if you desire to transfer data from each step to another.

This option is also available (can be turn on or off) from Data sheet menu.

Note that all possible data is automatically transferred from one module to another. For

the exceptional case of particle size distribution, the latest size distribution in memory is

transferred. However, if the TDH & Entrainment module is executed just before going to

Cyclone design module, the program transfers the size distribution calculated from

carryover result (fine particles) into cyclone design data file section.

If the automatic data transfer option is not activated, the user can always import data at any

time by clicking on the menu Import Data / Bed Conditions or Import Data / Size

Distribution.

The Data Transfer System is based on the allocation of memory to resident data. In some

cases the user may need to clear the data in memory, i.e. when beginning a new case study.

Instead of closing the application and running again, you can just click File/ Clear

memory menu option of the main window.

Gas and solid properties can be imported from the Database and inserted directly into the

data file. To do this the data should prepared and saved in Database environment using one

of the save options : <Winbox conditions> , < Bed conditions> or <Inlet conditions>.

The User is advised to prepare each of the above data before beginning a project. Data

obtained are saved into seperate files and can be directly imported into the data sheet at any

time.

To import data from Database into the data sheet, click on the Import Data / GS properties

from Database while modifying a data file. Corresponding data are automatically inserted

into the data sheet. Please note that the program imports the latest data saved as Bed,

Windbox or Inlet conditions. If necessary, the Database can be called from data sheet menu

by clicking on Call Database submenu.

For more information about How to use the Database, please consult the following

section 2.7: Database.

Before beginning a project, we advise the user to have a rapid look on the way ERGUN6

should be used.

The user needs always to verify step-by-step different items of his (her) project. Let us

imagine that the project is to design a catalytic fluidized bed including heat exchange. In

this case, the reactor may include : <Grid> , <Bubbling> , <Entertainment>, <Cyclones>

and

<Heat Exchanger>...

Any of these items should be studied before beginning to build the concerning project.

This step will help the program to converge. However, note that this step is not necessary

but only recommended, especially for training purposes.

model of a reacting or heating fluidized bed. For the case of the above example, in addition

to the modules listed above, the <Project> will contain heat and mass balances. The

program can manage a project by the module Fluid Bed Modeling and Expert Analyse.

A fluidized bed can be considered as a set up of several smaller elements. Each of these

elements has a particular behaviour that can be studied separately. However, the final

design requires the different components to work harmoniously, something like a

symphonic orchestra. The final step of design should verify that the elements are actually

working harmoniously, and if necessary make the required adjustments. Design of a

fluidized bed requires (usually) the following items to be considered:

Grid design.

Bubbling properties and bed expansion.

Entrainment of fines from the bed.

Cyclones and filters

Internal heat exchanger (if present).

Its very important to understand the way the program is supposed to be used. To get an idea

about this, please read carefully the case study of tutorial1: Reclamation Foundry Sand .

Note that, in almost all cases, the recommended scheme to study or to design a fluid bed is

to follow the gas / solid stream, that means: to begin with the study of the distributor (grid)

and to finish (if no heat exchanger and no reaction) with cyclones.

We always need to initialise the conversion rate, in the cases where the fluid bed is a

reactor. At the end of the calculation procedure, exposed above, we need to verify if the

initial conversion rate is estimated correctly. If not, some items have to be changed until the

conversion rate is satisfied.

Like conversion rate, heat exchangers are studied at the end of the design (or study)

procedure. We always search for the heat exchange surface (number of tubes to put inside

the bed) to remove or to give the necessary heat, in order to maintain the bed temperature.

If the volume of these tubes is important compared to the volume of the fluid bed, one

needs to revise the problem because, initially this volume is not taken into account...etc.

Once different items composing the fluidized system are studied individually, a GLOBAL

MODEL can be developed using the module Fluid Bed Modeling and Expert Analysis.

This step is especially useful because it helps to verify the compatibility of different items.

To build a GLOBAL MODEL activate the Fluid Bed Modeling and Expert Analysis

routine.

This module allows you to build a complete model of a fluidized bed and to check its

operating conditions. Grid pressure drop and configuration, bed expansion data and other

parameters are verified by a simple expert program and the results presented in a text box.

The user should choose a configuration by clicking on the corresponding boxes. The

program generates an ADAPTED DATA FILE, including data for any desired option.

Load the data by clicking on the corresponding button. Modify data if necessary and save

the file. Note that, unlike Item by Item design, where each item has its own data (gas and

solid properties, gas velocity), the data file corresponding to FBMEA module contains

the minimum necessary data to build the global model.

Once the data is checked and modified, click on RUN button. The program proceeds to

Modeling and expert analysis of all items.

To save or print the results click on the "Show results" button, then copy and paste the

desired data to any Windows(c) application.

When you run the program, a part of results is exposed immediately, on the screen, while

all results are stored in a file that can be consulted from <Results / See results file> menu.

<Result File> is generally used to edit reports or to save results in a personal file. Lines of

the <Results File> can be cut and paste to any other WINDOWS application.

The user can also save the result file into a personal name. We advise you to use a <.TXT>

extension recognised by WINDOWS NOTEPAD.

Note that if the data file is saved before Run (the user can always load data without

saving) the portion of the data file used for the calculation is automatically inserted into the

results file.

Also, the Virtual Experts comment are automatically inserted into the results file.

Operator can change some parameters that common users cannot change (this option is only

used for universities to avoid any disorder in the program, especially when its used on a

server). For example, the file path, source code modifications and any other set-up

operations are generally under operator's privilege.

However, personal data file copy and window-type managing can be done by any user and

are not protected.

ERGUN 6 has a new powerful Database. This feature helps the user to prepare physical

data concerning some 60 gas and solid species. To use the Database, click on the

Database button on the main menu. Note that its always possible to accede to this menu

even if you are changing data file (a number of windows can be opened simultaneously.

Once the Database Menu is activated, just click on the desired gas and solid species. Enter

Temperature and Pressure and activate Run from Database menu. All necessary

properties will be displayed on the active window. Save the resulted data file for the desired

options : Wind-box, Bed or Inlet. This will let you to recall the saved data and to insert it

directly into your data file as explained above (see Data File Management section).

Ergun Database can manage gas compositions with up to 10 species. To get the properties

of a gas mixture activate the mode Mixture by checking the button. Then click on any of

gas species on the gas species column (this puts the name of that species into the clip

memory) and then click on the first cell of the gas composition grid. Repeat this operation

for all selected species (up to 10). Now, enter the mole fractions (values between 0 and

1 like 0.5) in the corresponding boxes (mole fraction column). PRESS ENTER after each

value is entered so that the sum of mole fractions appears at the lower part of the column.

Be sure that sum of all mole fractions equals 1 (or very near 1, without exceeding unity)

when finished. Complete for solid choice just by clicking on the desired Solid specie.

Enter the temperature and pressure values and Run the Database. To correct any mistake on

the worksheet, click Refresh in the main File menu. Again, dont forget to save results

for automatic data transfer into the Data File.

As in any other WINDOWS application, the user can cut and paste any TEXT from a data

file or result file into any other application. This option is always useful to write reports

when a part of data file or result file should be included to the report.

In the new version of Ergun Software, the Diagrams can be copied into the clipboard (or

simply printed) by clicking on the corresponding menu option. You can then paste the

content of the clipboard into some application like Microsoft Word .

results and diagrams into

any other Microsoft

Windows application

by simply clicking

Print/ Copy into

clipboard.

2.9. Tutorials

ERGUN 6 is especially useful for engineer training purposes. The program has been used

since many years in a number of universities. Some <Case Studies> are provided for this

purpose.

These examples are explained in the <Tutorial> menu. Note that the operator can add any

other examples. The solution of some of these examples is given within the same text. This

will help some users to learn the "Design Procedure" of a process including fluid beds.

The program ERGUN 6 is the result of a long research in the field of fluidization and

fluidized beds Modeling.

This resulted in the creation of a user friendly software, particularly well adapted to the

needs of engineers. The ERGUN 6 computer program is fully on-line documented and don't

need any heavy manual to read. This extensive self-documentation makes it possible to

learn in a couple of hours the different possibilities offered by the program environment

and to start performing calculations without any waste of time.

ERGUN 6 program is designed and created by:

Pr. K. Shakourzadeh and his team:

Universit de Technologie de Compigne

Chem. Eng. Dept.

BP 20529 - Compigne - 60205 Cedex

e-mail: shakou@utc.fr

Fax: (33).3.44.23.19.80

Pone:(33).3.44.23.46.28

ERGUN 6 package is distributed by:

Divergent S.A.

R.P. Guy Denielou - 66, av. de Landshut

60200 - Compigne FRANCE

Fax: (33) - 3.44.23.45.60 email: ergun@utc.fr

3.1. Introduction

This chapter serves to review a certain number of definitions and concepts in order to

emphasise the problems a process engineer may face during the design of an installation. At

the same time it presents the important role played by fluidization, even if the installation is

primarily designed as a reactor or a heat exchanger.

Even though fluidization phenomena have been the object of numerous scientific

investigations, the design of such installations is still highly dependent upon experiments

and industrial experience.

We highly recommend all users of the ERGUN program to be aware of the limits of

applicability of all correlations available in the chemical engineering literature. Actually,

many of these correlations have been obtained in laboratories, without the necessary

validation through industrial applications.

On the other hand, certain types of solids, in particular those belonging to the C group in

the Geldart diagram (see module H.1.1), are hard to fluidize, and do not follow the methods

usually applied to other types of solids.

Geldart's classification is used to define fluidization characteristics of solid

particles. In fluidization the type (B) solids are more common and the easiest to manipulate.

Producing, however, larger bubbles than type (A) solids.

Type (A) solids are usually finer and lighter. They form small bubbles with

excellent contacting properties in reactors ( ex. dp=~60 m and Rop=1600 for the cracking

catalyst).

Type (D) solids have peculiar behaviour and are seldom used. Care must be

exercised if one uses correlations to calculate their fluidization properties, since type D)

solids have been less studied than others.

As a consequence the validity of some results must be verified by comparing results

obtained from different correlations. Class (C) solids are hard to fluidize. Results produced

by the ERGUN program must be used with caution in industrial applications.

s-g

kg/m3

group B

sand-like

group

coarse

group A

aerable

1.0

group C

cohesive

0.1

10

100

1000

There is a certain number of correlations to calculate the drag coefficient of an isolated

particle. ERGUN program uses Yousffi's correlation to calculate the drag coefficient

according to:

Cd = a + b/Rep + c/Rep2

(1)

The constants a, b et c are defined as function of Rep according to the following table:

Rep <= .1

.1 < Rep <= 1

1 < Rep <= 10

10 < Rep <= 100

100< Rep <= 1E3

1000 < Rep <=5E3

5000 < Rep <=1E4

10000 < Rep

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

0

:

3.69 :

1.222:

.6167:

.3644:

.3571:

.4599:

.5191:

b

b

b

b

b

b

b

b

= 24

:

= 22.73:

= 29.17:

= 46.5 :

= 98.33:

=148.62:

=-490.5:

=-1663 :

c

c

c

c

c

c

c

c

= 0

=.0903

= -3.9

=-116.7

= -2278

=-47500

=-57.87

=5.42E6

Rep=dp.Ut.Rof/

(3)

and the terminal velocity combining the variables from the equations above is given by:

CD

laminar

transient

10-2

1.0

turbulent

102

104

Rep

Figure 2 - Variation of the drag coefficient as a function of particle Reynolds number.

Ut =

4 ( p f ). g . d p

3. Cd . f

(4)

The calculation of the terminal velocity using equations (1) to (4) is interactive, since the

Reynolds number is a function of the velocity Ut and vice versa.

A fluidization grid must perform a uniform gas distribution in the bed. To obtain this the

pressure drop trough the grid must be great enough to reduce fluctuations coming from the

bed weight.

The optimum pressure drop trough the grid is found to be about 0.3 to 0.4 times bed

weight, but some authors propose that any way it must be considered greater than 3400 Pa.

On the other hand, an important pressure drop has some inconvenience like: great utility

cost, difficult grid design, formation of long jets (this is disadvantageous because the grid

region is normally less active than bubbling region).

Many types of grids are used in industry, but most of them can be designed or studied as a

simple "Perforated Plate Distributor" or a "Tuyere Type Distributor". Note that the physical

properties of the fluidization gas, used for grid design proposes, is that of the "Wind Box"

(a common mistake is to use properties corresponding to fluidized bed conditions).

The important factors are:

1)- diameter of the orifices (to be given as data)

2)- pressure drop [P grid] should be about 0.3 times [P fluid bed] and in any case > or =

3400 Pa (see Clift in Gas Fluidization, edited by Geldart).

Writing Bernouilli's equation for both sides of the plate the following relation is obtained:

Pgrille= 1/2 . rof . { (Uor/CD)2 - Ubv 2}

(1)

where Uor is the velocity at the orifice and Ubv is the velocity in the wind box.

For a plate with a thickness "e" CD is given by the relation:

CD = 0.82 (e/)0.13

(2)

Considering the factor f, corresponding to the ratio Ubv/Uor, and knowing that Uor>>Ubv,

equations (1) and (2) give:

f=(Ubv/CD).(f Pgrille)0.5

(3)

Knowing the diameter of the orifices (chosen by the designer), we can calculate the spacing

between the orifices (L) :

L = .[3.14/(4f)]0.5 = .8862/(f 0.5)

(4)

Zenz's criterion:

Zenz observed that bubbles formed from grid jets have a mean diameter about two

times the jet penetration length. On the other hand, we know that the equivalent diameter of

a bubble with its cloud if about 1.5 time Db (equivalent spherical diameter). In this case, the

necessary condition to avoid the coalescence of bubbles is:

2 L > 1.5 Lj

(5)

where L is the distance between orifices and Lj the jet penetration length than can be

estimated from the following equations :

a. Zenz's correlation:

0.0144 Lj/ + 1.3 = log10 ( 1.93 g)

(6)

Lj = 15 dor.{ [(f/(p-f)][Uor2/g.dor]}0.187

(7)

c. Merry's correlation:

Lj = 5.2 dor(f.dor/p.dp).3 [1.3 (Uor2/g.dor).2 -1]

(8)

The important factors are:

1)- The geometry of the tuyere, the diameter of the base orifices () and the diameter of

the orifices at the jet level.

2)- pressure drop [Pgrid must be around 0.3 times (P fluidized bed) and in any case > ou

= to 3400 Pa [ref. 1]

To obtain the distance between two tuyeres, we write Bernouilli's equation between the

wind box and the jet exit from the tuyere, considering the pressure drop at the inlet

contraction. This way the pressure drop due to the grid can be calculated from the following

(Bernouilli's) equation:

P orifice = .5*f(Um2- Ubv2) + fUm2/4

dynamic loss

contraction loss

Um is the upstream speed Ubv is the speed in the wind box.

P jet = .5*f(Uj2- Um2) + fUj2/4

(1)

(2)

where Uj is the speed of the jet ( outside of the tuyere). Finally, the continuity equation

written between the wind box and the jet exit gives:

2. Um = j . Uj

(3)

where is he diameter of the inlet orifices and j is the diameter of the orifices at the jet

level.

On the other hand: P grille = P jet + P orifice

(4)

Knowing the pressure P grille, the solution equations 1 to 4 gives the unknowns Uj, Um,

P jet and Por.

Perforated plate

Tuyere

dor

e

Figure 3 - Examples of perforated plate and vertical tuyere

Generally, there are two different types of calculations to be carried out and the ERGUN

program considers separately these two possibilities.

In the first approach a study of the behaviour of the fluidized beds according the

different types of solids or operating conditions is performed. In this case, it is often

interesting to compare the results that can be obtained from the different correlations

presented in the literature. This method is limited by the range of applicability of the

proposed correlations (study modules).

In the module dedicated to design fluidized beds a set of coherent equations is

chosen to calculate a fluid bed according to classical methods. These equations are chosen,

as much as possible, among those derived from the continuity equation, but also from well

confirmed empirical correlations.

Wen & Yu :

Remf=(33.7+.0408 Ar)0.5 - 33.7

(1)

1823 Remf1.07 +21.27 Remf2 = Ar

(2)

Remf=(25.252+.0651 Ar)0.5- 25.25

(3)

Remf=Ar / ( 1400+5.2 Ar )

(4)

Remf= (31.62 + .0425 Ar)0.5 - 31.6

(5)

3.5.2. Calculation of

Babu et al. :

H/Hmf=1+14.315(U-Umf)0.738 dp p0.376/(Umf0.937 f0.126)

(6)

(1-)=(1-mf) Hmf/H

(7)

=1.57 Rep0..29 Ar(-.19)

(8)

=1-(1-b)(1-mf) with b:

(9)

(10)

Goroshko :

=(18 Rep +.36 Rep)0.21 / Ar0.21

(11)

Wen & Yu :

=((18 Rep+ 2.7 Rep1.657) / Ar)(1 / 4.7)

(12)

3.5.3 Calculation of b

The Ergun program uses the following continuity equations:

1-b = (1-)/(1-mf)= Hmf/h

or

= (U-U )/U

b

mf b

(13)

(14)

H

b= (1/H)

b.dh

(15)

3.5.4 Calculation of Db

This module is developed for perforated plates and tuyeres distributors. However, the

module can be used for grids made of porous plates using an arbitrary large number of

pores (i.e. n=10000).

Dbo = 1.38 (g-.2)(Ao * (U - Umf)) .4

Dbm = 1.49 (dt 2 * (U - Umf)) .4

Db = Dbm + (Dbo - Dbm) * EXP(-.3 * h / dt)

where "Ao" is the area of the grid per orifice (1/n).

(16)

(17)

(18)

(19)

Note that in Mori & Wen's equation Dbm is the maximum size of bubbles formed in a

vertical chain. Do not consider its value for maximum bubble size in industrial fluidized

beds. The calculation method for Dbmaxi in an industrial fluidized bed is controversial.

Geldart[ref. 1] thinks that Davidson's equation : Dbmaxi = 2Ut2/g is the safest way to

calculate it. Thus, he proposes the use of dp'=2.7dp for the calculation of Ut.

Db = (.54 (U - Umf).4)((h + 4 Ao.5).8)(g-.2)

where "Ao" is the area of the grid per orifice (1/n).

(20)

Db = (U - Umf).5 (h + z).75 (g-.25)

where z0 is a constant, function of the grid type.

(21)

This module follows a "pragmatic" approach and uses continuity equations reducing the

system to two phases with flow rates U-Umf for the bubble phase and Umf for the emulsion

phase.

The other equations used to complete the calculation are the following:

-Wen & Yu's for the minimum fluidization velocity;

-Mori & Wen's for the calculation of mean Db;

-Davidson's to calculate the maximum diameter of bubbles;

The calculation procedure is based on the size of the bubbles in the bed given by the

average of those obtained from Darton's and Mori & Wen's equations.

The porosity of the bed is calculated from the following continuity equation:

U-Umf

b =

(21)

UB + (U-Umf)

where Umf and UB are determined by the equations of Wen & Yu and Davidson &

Harrison.

The integration of b along the height of the bed gives its average value:

= 1- (1-b)(1-mf)

(22)

(23)

-a (interfacial area bubble/emulsion): a=6.b/Db

-tb (average "residence time" of gas in the bed):

tb = H/(Ub+U-Umf)

(24)

Werther & al. (Ref. 12 to 15) proposed a set f interesting correlations for the calculation of

bubble size and bed voidage. The method advantageously takes in account the Geldarts

classification of particles. Diverse correlations are proposed for beds with class D, B

and A (no correlation for the class C).

Note that Werthers model has some simplified versions (especially that published in for

chemical reactors) that may be a source of confusion. The basic equation proposed by

Werther in 1978 (and improved afterward) is :

dv = dv [1+0.272(U-Umf)]1/3[1+0.0684(h h)]1.21

(25)

Where dv is the base bubble size and h the height where bubbles appear. Note that the

equation (25) is written in cgs old units. In his further publications, Werther used this

base equation to drive his bubbling model with three parameters dv, and are functions

of particle class :

d v = d ov [1 + 27( U U mf )] (1 + 6.84h )1.2

(26)

U b = (U - U mf) + 0.71 g d v

(27)

U U mf

Ub

, and d ov Solid of Class A

(28)

1/ 3

b =

, and d ov Solid of Class D

Note that the particles of class D generally make big bubbles with irregular form (see one

of the videos provided with Ergun Software). These big bubbles may be broken into smaller

ones when a heat exchanger bundle with horizontal tubes occupies the bed section (see

Heat Exchange options). This surely depends on the size of bubbles and the distance

between tubes (horizontal pitch). Werther proposed another method especially developed

to take in consideration the behaviour of these irregular bubbles and the effect of heat

exchanger bundle. Ergun Software provides features for both common Werther model

(equations given above) and that for the Heat Exchanger Effect.

For more information, please refer to the Werthers publication (ref. 12 to 15).

The entrainment of solids on top of fluidized beds is a phenomenon difficult to model. The

correlations proposed by different researchers do not generally agree and the proposed

models are usually based on assumptions that have not been validated in the operating

conditions of industrial fluidized beds.

Nevertheless, the study of elutriation allows us (even if it is inaccurate) to obtain a

certain number of information about the two important aspects of fluidized beds:

1)-TDH (Transport Disengagement Height) is the height above which the flow and size

distribution of the solids does not vary any more. This is the height for the placement of

cyclones.

2)-The placement of cyclones (TDH) and their sizing according to the size distribution of

the solids above the TDH.

The solid mass flow (and as consequence their size distribution) above the TDH can be

calculated from the equation below:

EiH= Ei + (Ei-Ei). exp(-Z/Z*)

(1)

the mass flux Ei (at the bed surface) is given later by Wen & Chen's equation. The Z*

coefficient must be such that at Z=TDH -> EiH=~Ei*

thus

Z*=~TDH/5

(2)

In practice, equations (1) and (2) are not useful. We only need to calculate the size

distribution of the solid phase above the TDH.

The Ei fluxes are proportional to the solid mass fraction of size "i" present in the bed:

Ei= Ki.xi ; Ki et Ei in kg/s.m2

(3)

The values of Ki are calculated by four methods:

1)- Geldart et al.

(4)

0.5

.( p /f -1)

0.725

Rep

1.15

[(U-Ut)/Ut]0.1

Ki=Rop(1-i)(U-Ut)

i={1+(U-Ut)2)/2.g.Dt}(-1/4.7)

if Dt.f (U-Ut) d pi / = 2.38

(.p/dpi2)(/f)2.5 = 5.17 Dt2.[f (U-Ut)dpi]-1.5

if Dt.f(U-Ut) dpi / > 2.38

(.p/dpi2)(/f)2.5 = 12.3 Dt .[f (U-Ut)dpi]-2.5

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9)

(10)

(11)

Note that if U< Ut the particles will not be ejected from the fluidized bed and that in this

case Kiis equal zero.

Among the different methods for the calculation of TDH we use the following:

1)- Wen & Chen's

TDH(i)= (1/ai).Ln[(E-Ki)/.01 Ki], where ai 1/m

and

E= 3.07E-9 A.Dbs.[f3.5 g.5 (U-Umf)2.5]/2.5

(12)

(13)

A is the diameter of the bed and Dbs is the size of the bubbles at the surface of the bed.

Note: do not use this correlation for fluid beds with a diameter larger than 1 m (if

you do consider Dt=1 m).

2)- Horio & al.

TDH = 4.47 Dbs0.5

(14)

TDH = 0.85 U1.2 (7.33 -1.2 logU)

(15)

4)- Soroko & al.

TDH = 1200 Hmf.Rep1.55 Ar-1.1

conditions : 15< Rep < 300

(16)

(Developed for Hmf < 0.5 m only)

Note that many of these equations give always unreliable results! If the comparison

of results obtained by different equations is not satisfactory, we can always use a

simple (industrial pragmatic) method based on the Ut of particles. In this method,

one considers that all particles having their Ut less than the operating gas velocity,

will leave the bed. In this case, we only consider the size distribution of solids in bed

with Ut<U. Let us consider the example below for a operating velocity of U=0.3

m/s:

dp(i), m

20E-6

50E-6

100E-6

160E-6

Ut,m/s

0.20

0.25

0.5

1.2

gbed(i), %

10

20

50

20

gelut(i), %

33.3

66.6

-----------

In this example, only particles of size 50 microns or less can leave the bed. There is 10% of

fines and 20% of coarser particles. That mean 1/3 (33%) of size 1 and 2/3 (66%) of size 2.

Please note that this method is only a rough estimation of solid size distribution above

TDH. The real size distribution of particles is finer than what we get with this method.

3.7. Cyclones

3.7.1. Standard Cyclones

Cyclones are always an essential part of fluid beds. Among the diverse types of cyclones

used in the industry, standard cyclones are those used currently for common fluid beds. A

standard cyclone is designed from a given well known proportions as shown in the figure

below:

Dc/2

Dc/2

2 Dc

Dc

Dc/4

Dc/2

2 Dc

Side View

Top View

We note for instance the area of the inlet opening window (Dc/8) is a direct function of the

diameter of the cyclone (Dc). The efficiency of a standard cyclone is a direct function of the

inlet gas velocity. Standard cyclones with about 15 m/s inlet velocity give always good

efficiencies. However, one can decide to reduce this velocity to avoid erosion or to increase

it (for smooth particles) to get better efficiencies. The inlet velocity of secondary cyclones

is always higher (about 25 m/s) because of its low loading.

Users defined cyclones may have any desired proportions. If you are not familiar with

Cyclone Design problems, you would better not to choose this option. Actually, if the

cyclone is not well designed for the given task (for instance, highly loaded cyclones or

special type of particles), then the system would produce poor efficiency. To design a User

defined cyclone simply click on the corresponding option box of the Cyclones menu.

Figure 5 Users defined cyclones may have any desired proportions. They are mostly

used for highly loaded flows.

The Time of Flight concept is the old (but yet valuable) theory of cyclone efficiency

calculation. It was mainly worked by Zenz. To calculate the efficiency of a cyclone in terms

of particle size range, Zenz proposed that for a particle to be captured in the lower part of

the cyclone the time of flight from its initial position to the wall should be equal to that

from the top to the bottom.

The velocity component toward the wall is given by Stokes' law with the gravity

acceleration replaced by the centrifugal acceleration :

Up = (2U2/Dc).dp.(p-f)/(18.)

(1)

Considering that the gas circulation velocity in the cyclone is the same as the inlet velocity,

we can define the residence time of the gas (approximately equal to particle residence time)

and write that:

Tp= L/Up

(2)

Tg= .Dc.Ns/Up

(3)

where L represents the width of the inlet window (Dc/4 for Zenz's cyclone) and Ns

represents the number of turns performed by the particles before exiting the cyclone.

Number of turns (Ns)

5

1.7

10

3

15

4.5

20

5.7

In this case the size of particles just touching the wall (at the bottom of the cyclone) can

be calculated from the next equations:

9..L

Ns .U.(p f )

dp50 =

(5)

Zenz considered that only half of the particles of size dp min are actually recovered. Thus

the efficiency of the cyclone for particles of size dp50 would be equal to 50%. For the other

cut sizes efficiencies are calculated from an efficiency diagram. This diagram gives the

efficiency as a function of the ratio dp/dp50. Note that the calculations performed here are

only valid for low charged flows only (generally less than 1%). The efficiencies calculated

must be corrected for cyclones loaded with particles.

Figure 6 In the Time of Flight theory, particles of size dp50 arriving at the left hand

side would have 50% chance of capture (efficiency for these particles would be 0.5)

Cyclone Efficiency

Std. Cyclones

1.00

Efficency, -

0.80

0.60

0.40

0.20

0.00

0

0.5

1.5

2.5

dp/dp50, -

RX

VCS

V 2

mP CS

RX

Wall

region

Central

region

Control

Surface

(CS)

Equilibrium

Orbit

drag

3d P .VrCS

Equilibrium

Orbit

This model has been initially proposed by Barth (ref. 3) and then modified and improved

by Muschelknautz & al. (ref.4). The base idea of the model is that a imaginary cylinder

exists under the vortex finder (Rx) region where particles are in equilibrium between

centrifugal forces and the gas/solid drag forces. The centrifugal forces are expressed in

terms of a angular velocity (applying Stocks law). To define the drag forces, Barth

considers that the gas flow-rate is distributed uniformly over the lateral surface of the above

cylinder. This equality lets calculate the particle cut size dp50 in a quite similar equation

compared to the time of flight model :

(6)

Where the radial and angular velocities VrCS and VCS are obtained from a series of

equations, mainly the momentum balances of the entering and internal currents. Note that

Barths model is a kind of scientific approach to the cyclone understanding behaviour. It

has been tested over some laboratory smooth steel wall cyclones (with no back mixing)

and is probably an optimist model.

The pressure drop is one of the important characteristics of a cyclone (any pressure drop

costs). The basic Bernoullis equation over the gas steam through the cyclone can be

written as follows:

2

2

Plost VLocal

(7)

(8)

The difference between Pin and Pout is the cyclone pressure drop. Among a number of

diverse methods for the estimation of the pressure drop, the equations of Barth (Core

Friction), Stairmand (Dissipative) and Shephered and Lappel (Empirical) are the most

reliable.

The pressure drop is always expressed in a simple equation based on the entrance Euler

number :

P =

1

f U in2 E in

2

(9)

Euin = 16 (a.b)/(Dcy2)

(10)

Where a and b are the width and the height of the entrance window and Dcy the vortex

finder diameter. Barth proposed a much more complicated expression using the internal

velocities calculated from his model. Stairmand & al. proposed an equation similar to that

of Shephered and Lappel. They advantageously included the wall friction and exit effect

dissipations into their correlation.

For detailed information about these models we invite the user to consult the corresponding

references given at the end of this chapter.

a

CD

D

Db

dp

dp(i)

dpm

dt

dt(i)

e

Eo

Ei

f(R)

G(R)

Go

G1

G2

Gb

Ge

Gh

H

H

Hi

Hmf

Ki

nm

n

Rep

TDHi

U

U

Ub

Uj

Umf

Uor

Upis

Ut

VrCS

VCS

particle drag coefficient

diameter of cyclone

average bubble size m

average particle diameter m

particle diameter per size distribution band microns.

mean particle diameter m

bed diameter

sieving aperture m

plate thickness m

solid flux at the bed surface kg/m s.

Elutriation rate per cut of solid kg/m s

size distribution function 1/m

size distribution in % (100.f(R).dr) %

size distribution at the bed inlet %

size distribution of solids from bed %

size distribution of solids above the TDH ( %

size distribution of under-flow (for cyclones) %

size distribution of solids entered (for cyclones)%

size distribution of solids in exit (for cyclones)%

fluid bed operating height m

fluid bed height at onset of bubbling m

fluid bed initial height m

fluid bed height at minimum fluidization m

Elutriation constant for particles in size range i

number of solid phase cuts

number of orifices per sq. m of grid area

particle Reynolds number.

height above which Ei is constant m

operating speed m/s

velocity for incipient bubbling m/s

velocity of rising bubbles m/s

jet velocity in tuyere m/s

minimum fluidization velocity m/s

orifice velocity m/s

plug solid phase velocity m/s

free fall terminal velocity m/s

radial velocity of particles in cyclone m/s

angular velocity of particles in cyclone m/s

Ws0

Ws1

WS2

solid mass under-flow kg/s

solid mass top-flow kg/s

Pag

Pas

Pgw

Psw

Pg

Ps

pressure drop due to friction gas/walls Pa

pressure drop due to friction solid/walls Pa

pressure drop due to the weight of gas Pa

pressure drop due to the weight of solids Pa

P/L

pressure drop per unit height of the bed Pa

P/L)mf pressure drop at min. fluidization velocity Pa

i

mf

p

f

p

porosity at the onset of bubbling

volumetric fraction occupied by the bubbles

initial porosity of the bed

porosity at minimum fluidization

porosity of plug flow

diameter of grid orifices m

diameter of the jets m

viscosity of the fluid Ns/m

fluid density kg/m3

solid density kg/m3

3.9. References

3.9.1. ref. Bed Expansion

1)- Davidson J.F., Harrison D., "Fluidized particles", Cambridge Univ. Press, 1969

2)- Wen C.Y., Yu Y.H., Chem. Eng. Prog. Sym. Ser., vol.62, p100, 1966

3) - Werther J., 2nd Eng. Foundation Conferance on Fluidization, p7-12, 1978

4) - Hilligardt K., Werther J., Chem. Eng. Technol. 10, p272-280, 1987

5) - Werther J., Bellgardt D., Groenewald H. and Hilligardt K., Int. Conf. Fluid Bed

Combustion, Boston, p515-522, 1987

6) - Hilligardt K., Werther J., Ger. Chem. Eng., 9, p215-221, 19861)- Babu S.P., Shah B.,

Talwalker A., AIChE Sym. Ser. vol.74, p176,1978

7)- Goroshko V.D.,Rozenbaum R.B., Todes O.M., in: " Hydrodynamics and heat transfer in

fluidized beds",

M.I.T. Press. Cambridge,MA/ p71, 1966

8)- Thonglimp V., Hiquily N., Laguerie C., Powder Tech.,no38, p233, 1984

10) - Baeyens J., Geldart D., Fluidization & its Applications, conf.,Toulouse, 1973

11) - Grewal N.S., Saxena S.C., Powder Tech. no26, p229, 1980

12)- Saxena S.C., Mathur A., Zhang Z.F., AIChE Journal, vol.33, no3, p500, 1987

1)- Agarwal J.C., Davis W.L., King D.T., Chem.Eng.Prog., vol.58, p.85, Nov. 1962

2)- Geldart D.,/Fluidization Technology/ Ed. John Wiley & Sons, 1986

3)- Quershi A.E., Creasy D.E., Powder Tech., vol.22, p119, 1979

1)- Zenz F.A., 'Cyclone separators' Manual Disposal of Refinery, Wastes, Edt. API 1975

2)- Calculo y Diseno de Ciclones, J. Casa, J.M. Martinez-Benet, Ingeniera Quimica, Feb.

1989

3) Barth W., Berechnung und Auslegung von Zyklonabscheidern auf Grund neuerer

Unterscuhngen, Brennstoff-Wrme-Kraft 8, Heft 1, 1956

4) - Muschelknautz E., Trefz M., Second World Congress on Particle, Technology, Kyoto,

Japan, p.52, Sep. 1990

1)- Wen C.Y., Chen L.H., AIChE Journal vol.28, no1, p117, 1982

2)- Briens C.L., Bergougnou M.A.,Baron T., Powder Tech., no54, p 183, 1988

3)- Baron T., Briens C.L., Bergougnou M.A.,The Canadian Jounal of Chem. Eng., vol.66,

Oct.1988

4)- Cheremisinoff N.P. , Cheremisinoff P.N., Fluidization andIndustrial Applications

Chapter 32, p 1042, 1988

5)- Geldart D., Bayaens J., Pope D.J.,Van de Wijer P., PowderTech., vol.30, p195, 1981

6)- Tanaka L., Shinohara H., Int. Chem. Eng., vol.18, no2,

p276, 1978

7)- Zenz F.A., Weil N.A., AIChE , vol.4, p472, 1958

Fluidized bed reactors present a certain number of hydrodynamic and inter-phase

contact characteristics which make them potentially attractive in gas-solid reactions or

heterogeneous catalytic reactions.

Among the recognised advantages are the possibility of operating the system as

open or closed, the ability to handle large solids mass flows, the advantage of an excellent

mixing of solids and as a consequence radial and axial homogenisation and thus a good

temperature control. On the other hand the physical characteristics of catalyst whose

average size lies between 50 and 100 microns with large specific surfaces, are compatible

with fluidization and contacting conditions. Even though, the gasification of coal back in

1926 was the first industrial application of fluidization, it was only after 1940, with the

appearance of the first cracking catalytic reactors, that the application of this technology

soared. There are numerous techniques to take into account the specific characteristics of a

reaction and the constraints of different processes. Because of the large number of variables

the design, extrapolation or even unit operations, must be based on experience and as such

not without risk. Depending on the superficial gas velocity the flow of a gas through a layer

of solid particles gives origin to different regimes of fluidization (figure 1).

Homogeneous fluidization is rarely observed in gas-solid systems. After the gas reaches the

minimum fluidization velocity, Umf, the jets issuing from the distributor plate give origin

to bubbles. During their growing towards the free surface of the bed the bubbles not only

increase in size and coalesce but also are divided. The combination of these different

motions gives rise to a vigorous agitation, which in part is responsible for the peculiar

properties of fluidized beds.

As the bubbles burst at the surface some of the particles are entrained into the upper part of

the bed. As the velocity of fluidization is increased the size of the bubbles increases, as well

as the entrainment, giving origin to the operating regimes depicted in figure 1.

The different regimes can be distinguished through a number of experimental criteria given

in the literature. For example, the bubbling bed is characterised by a linear variation of

pressure as a function of height, with irregular fluctuations of a few Hz.

which of the main regimes it will operate. Here our attention is limited to those bubbling

beds most commonly found in industrial applications.

The chemical reactions found in fluidized beds are divided into two groups:

- catalytic reactions;

- reactions with consumable solids.

The reactions with consumable solids are naturally more complicated to model

because they present not only a change in the gas composition, but also in the size

distribution of the solid (in some cases) or of its density (in other cases).

The bed surface

Bubble phase

Emulsion phase

Grid region

Figure 2 presents a scheme representative of most fluidized bed reactors. Several zones can

be observed:

1) - The jet region right on top of the distributor plate, with a complicated hydrodynamic

behaviour.

2)- The bed core zone has three phases: bubbles, clouds and emulsions, with a transfer of

reactive mass from bubbles -> clouds -> emulsions and a transfer of product mass in the

opposite sense.

3)- The disengagement zone on top of the bed surface where particles are thrown by the

eruption of the bubbles. Figure 3 presents the different models used for dimensioning

industrial reactors.

Due to the complexity of the hydrodynamic phenomena in the jet zone as well as

in the disengagement zone, models tend to be simple and few. On the other hand there is a

large number of models to calculate conversion rates in the bubbling zone of the bed.

Among the simpler models we can mention those by Orcutt & Davidson and Grace

et al. They consider only two phases constituted in part by bubbles and in part by the

suspension solid/gas. Another model was proposed by Kato & Wen, it assumes a chain of

bubbles to be similar to "n" reactors in series. So far this model has not been verified in

industrial applications.

Kunii & Levenspiel proposed a model relatively simple where they consider the

three phases: bubbles, clouds and emulsion and assume that all the fluid passes through the

"bubble phase". This model has been the object of controversy during certain time, but

investigations by Grace and other researchers demonstrated that, among existing models,

the one by Kunii & Levenspiel gives the best results, probably because it adapts better to

different situations.

Bubble

emulsion

U-Umf

Bubble

cloud

emulsio

n

Bubble

emulsion

U

Umf

model

profile

Werther recently proposed a model based on studies of bed expansion and bubble

size distribution. By analogy with gas-liquid reactors the model uses known mass transfer

phenomena with concentration profiles around the bubbles. This seems to be a promising

model, however, it has the inconvenient of being complicated, particularly when the

reaction is not first order.

The comparison of these different models has been the object of many

investigations and publications. These comparisons allow general conclusions to be drawn

regarding the choice of models to be used according to the type of reaction and operating

conditions favourable to one or another phenomenon.

Generally speaking the conversion of a reactant in a fluidized bed can be limited by two

phenomena: on one hand the mass transfer between the bubble, cloud and emulsion phases,

and on the other hand the chemical conversion rate ( whose speed is proportional to the

amount of available catalyst). If we consider two dimensionless numbers, namely, Nr

(reaction number) and Nk (number of mass transfer units) fluidized bed chemical reactions

can be classified in three categories depending on the relative values of K' and Nk:

- Slow reactions (K'<<Nk): the mass transfer is not the dominant phenomenon and the

hydrodynamic model used does not have much importance, since it is the chemical kinetic

that controls the performance.

- Very fast reactions (K'>>Nk: most of the chemical reaction occurs at the bubble-emulsion

interface (the cloud region). The Werther model is the best suited for this case, since it

takes into account the concentration profile around the bubbles. Nevertheless, the jet region

just above the distributor plate has an important role in this type of reaction, it is thus

desirable to combine the model for the bubbling portion with a model that takes into

account the effect of the jets ( such a model is presente further down in this text).

- Intermediary reactions ( K' and Nk are comparable): the chemical reaction and the transfer

of mass together constitute the limiting steps for the conversion. The Kunii & Levenspiel

model can be applied in this case.

G a s s o lid r e a c tio n

P r e p a r a ti o n o f k i n e t i c s

S h r in k i n g c o r e

e a c tio n w ith n o

c h a n g e in p a r ti c l e

siz e

R ea c tio n s w ith

c h a n g e in

p a r tic le s iz e

R T D based m od el

P o p u la ti o n b a la n c e

typ e m o d e l

Figure 4 presents a decision diagram for choosing the most suitable model as a first

approximation. It is evident that the simpler models (such as Orcutt's) produce large errors.

Nevertheless, they offer two essential advantages:

1)- their simplicity allows rough results to be obtained quickly and also to perform a simple

analysis.

2)- they do not require any specific development for reactions with order different from

one.

It is advised to use either Kunii and Levenspiel's or Werther's models. However,

these models require writing and solving a more complex set of equations (model and

kinetics are more complex).

Together they cover the different possible reaction systems and are complementary from

the simplifying assumptions point of view

The Werther model is based on a summation of results presented in his publications in the

field of fluidized beds. It is primarily concerned with the concentration profile ( of reactive

material ) around the bubbles and the role of the fluidization gas and distributor plate.

Werther assumes a height h*, below which the size of bubbles does not change. In the

absence of better data this important factor can be assumed to be around one metre as

recommended by Werther.

The assumptions considered by Werther are:

1)- U >> Umf so the flow of gas through the emulsion is negligible.

2)- The flow of gas in the bubbles is considered to be a plug flow.

3)- The coefficient of mass transfer and the interfacial area between bubble and emulsion

are considered independent of the height in the bed.

emulsion

Cb

Bubble

film

Ce

Werther's model equations are based on the conservation of mass in the bubble,

cloud and emulsion phases. These equations are relatively complicated, but for a first order

reaction they can be simplified to give:

Mass balance on the gas phase:

-(U-Umf) A (dCAb/dz) +D(dCAn/dy y=0) a.A.dz=0

transfer by +

convection

(1)

transfer = consumption

by diffusion

This equation is based on an element of cloud volume around bubbles:

D.d CAn/dy a.dy - kr CAn a dy

transfer by + reaction in

diffusion

clouds

=0

(2)

=0

-D.(dCAn/dy y=d).a A dz - kr CAe A dz [1-b-ad]=0

(3)

Note that the chemical reaction constant used by Werther is defined per unit volume of

catalyst. To solve this set of equations, Werther uses the next boundary conditions :

constant Ce ;

z=0 -> CAb = CA

y=0 -> CAn = CAb

y=d -> CAn = CAe

(4)

(5)

(6)

The solution of above equations gives the concentration profile through the fluidized bed.

For a simple first order reaction the conversion rate can be obtained by the following

equation :

1 - XA = exp -

(1/ -1).Ha+tanh(Ha)

(1/ -1).Ha.tanh(Ha)+1

. Ha . Nk

(7)

The factor Ha is the Hatta number defined as for gas-liquid reactors by:

Ha=(Kr.D).5/K

(8)

=a.(D/K)/(1-b)

(9)

The dimensionless number Nk represents the importance of the mass transfer in the whole

reactor:

Nk=K.a.H/(U-Umf).

(10)

estimated. This naturally is its strong point when compared with other models, such as

Kunii-Levenspiel's for example, where one must use correlations developed by other

researchers to calculate them.

Kunii & Levenspiel's model is one of the simplest models based on the bubbling properties.

According to this model the rise velocity of an isolated bubble, Ub, is a function of its

dimension Db as given by the simple relations:

Ub' = c . (9.81 db) 0.5

(1)

Ub = Ub' + (U-Umf)

(2)

Ub' is the rise velocity of an isolated bubble and Ub is the velocity of a bubble in a

bubbling bed. The mass transfer constants between the "bubble", "cloud" and "emulsion"

phases ( these media are called "phases" by convention), are determined from an estimate

of the average size of the bubbles in the bed using Werther's method (see the

Hydrodynamics module H.3.1.4 for the calculation of the average db and b).

Figure 6 Kunii and Levenspiel's three phases concept

The Davidson & Harrison relation is used to determine the bubble-cloud constant:

Kbn = 4.5 (Umf/db)+5.85 (D.5) (g 0.25)(db-1.25)

(3)

Kne = 6.78 (mf D Ub/db3)

0.5

(4)

This is exactly the point for which frequently the Kunii & Levenspiel's model is criticised,

namely, the use in a more or less arbitrary fashion of correlations to define two of the most

important variables of the system.

Cloud

Kne

Bubble

Kbn

Emulsion

negligible

Figure 6 Kuniis model with Bubble, Cloud and Emulsion phases

1)- U>>Umf ( the flow of gas through the emulsion phase is negligible).

2)- The solid and gas phases are perfectly mixed in the emulsion phase.

Finally, the mass conservation of the phases "bubble" and "cloud" gives:

1-XA = exp ( -KT . L/U1b)

with KT :

(5)

KT = b .Kr +

1

1 / K bn +

(6)

1

n .Kr +

1

1 / K ne + 1 / e . K r

"bubble", "cloud" and "emulsion" phases:

b =~ 0.003

(7)

n = (1-mf)

3 Umf/mf

Ub - Umf/mf

b + n + e = (1-mf)/b

(8)

(9)

The value of depends of the type of catalyst and seems in general to vary between .1 and

.33.

Before beginning this part, please note that this model is no more used by

Ergun5.0 for catalytic reactions. However, as its concept is used in Gas-Solid Fluid Bed

Reactors, we present the catalytic reaction model here.

This model considers two phases, namely, bubbles and emulsion, with a piston flow in the

bubble phase and a homogeneous mixture within the emulsion phase. The gaseous flux that

moves through the bubbles corresponds to the fluid in excess of the minimum fluidization

requirements. This assumption is used in almost all models and it is justified by the fact that

the local porosity of the suspension fluid-solid does not change when the feeding flux is

increased. On the other hand we assume that the amount of catalyst contained in the bubble

phase is negligible and as a consequence there is no reaction in this phase.

The mass conservation of the bubble phase can thus be written as:

(U-Umf).dCAb = Kg.(CAe - CAb).ab.b.dZ

The total mass conservation for the emulsion phase gives:

(1)

(U-Umf).(CAo-CAe)+

Kg.(CAb-CAe).ab.b.dZ =

(1-)H.Kr.CAen

(2)

The simultaneous solution of equations (1) and (2) gives the concentration profiles of

reactant A, in both the bubble and emulsion phases, so the average concentration at the free

surface of the bed can be calculated from:

CAf = .CAb Z=H + (1-).CAe

(3)

with = (U-Umf)/U

For a first order reaction the concentration CAf is obtained from:

1 - .exp(-Nk) + .K'.exp(-Nk)

(4)

CAf/CA =

1 - .exp(-Nk) + K'

where the parameters Nk and K' represent respectively the numbers of 'mass transfer units'

and 'reaction number':

Nk = Kg.ab.b.H/(U)

K'= Kr.Hmf(1-mf).CA(n-1)/U

(5)

(7)

(6)

Plug flow

phase

Bubble

phase

Nowadays there are other more accurate correlation for the calculation of the mass transfer

constant, however this program uses the original equation proposed by Orcutt and

Davidson.

For Db (mean diameter of the bubbles) Werther's method or the average between

Umf Darton's

U-Umf

and Mori's correlations is used.

Figure 7 - Orcutt and Davidsons two phases model

The interest of this extremely simple model is found in Modeling reactions of order

different from one.

To design a system with consumable solids, it is necessary to establish two series

of mass balances: a mass balance of the gaseous phase and a mass balance for the solid

phase. These two sets of mass balance equations are interdependent and require the use of

iterative methods, since the conversion of solid particles depends on the concentration of

the reactive gas in the emulsion phase and vice versa.

Considering the simplest particles residence time distribution (uniformly

distributed), it is observed that Orcutt's model is the most convenient to use for calculating

the gas consumption. Actually, considering that the emulsion phase is perfectly mixed, all

particles are transformed under the same conditions of reactive gas concentration.

4.5.1.1. NSC (No Size Change)

Let us consider the case where all particles fed into the system have the same size

(or the mean size is considered). If the conversion rate of a single particle is defined by the

relation:

1-Xpi = f(dpi,t)

(1)

and if the particle residence time distribution principle is applied, the conversion rate of dpi

size particles is calculated as:

1- Xi

(2)

where Ei(t) represents the particle residence time distribution function in a stirred system,

and is defined by:

Ei(t) = (1/ti).exp(-t/ti)

(3)

"ti" represents the average residence time of dpi size particles. For fluidized beds with a

certain elutriation, the average particle residence time for particles with initial diameter dpi

can be obtained from:

ti = M/{W1+Ki.A}

(4)

For systems where the feed particles have a broad size distribution, the global

conversion rate can be defined by:

n

X =

(5)

Xi.Gi

i =1

Equations (1) to (5) cannot be applied to the case of consumable solids with

changing size, since the residence times depends on the size distribution.

In this case the calculations are more complicated and require long iterations. The

calculation procedure is based on a population mass balance (see Kunii & Levenspiel's

book). Usually, the resulting equations cannot be solved analytically. The mass balance can

be written as:

Wso.Fo(R).dR - Ws1.F1(R).dR - M. K(R).F1(R).dR M.d/dR [ Keff.F1(R)].dR + 3.M.keff.F1(R).dR/R = 0

(1)b

with:

Wso-Ws1-Ws2= 3.M. +

[ F1(R).Keff/R ].dR

(2)b

Equation (2)b represents the solid global mass balance. The function F1(R), calculated by

solving equation (1)b, must satisfy the following integral :

F1(R).dR = 1.0

(3)b

Ws2(R)=K(R).F1(R).M

(4)b

Note that the elutriation constant in equations (1)b and (4)b refers to the whole bed and is

expressed in s-1.

Finally, the global solid conversion rate can be calculated as the difference between the

inlet and outlet flow rates:

X = (Wso - Ws1 - Ws2) / Wso

(5)b

E(t), s-1

Time, s

F( R), m-1

R, m

Function of Size Distribution

According to Orcutt's (3) model the mass balance for the fluid phase is analogous

to those used in catalytic reaction models. For a first order reaction, according to Orcutt's

model we have :

1 - .exp(Nk)

CAe/CAo =

1 - .exp(-Nk) + K'

(6)

where

7)

Nk = Kg.a.b.H/(U)

Kg = 0.75 Umf + 0.975 g0.25 D0.5/(Db0.25) (8)

K': must be obtained by iteration from the stoechiometric equation for the

consumption of the solid and fluid phases (as we will see later).

The estimation of the concentration CAe (emulsion) is necessary for the calculation of the

solid conversion rate. On the other hand, for the fluid phase we have :

1 - .exp(-Nk) + .K'.exp(-Nk)

CA/CAo=

(9)

1 - .exp(-Nk) + K'

CA

XA = 1 -

CA

(10)

According to the catalytic reaction models, the application of the kinetics laws to

consumable solids, requires the use of a constant K, which takes into account both the

reaction kinetics and the diffusion resistances (see Orcutt model).

On the other hand the mass conservation equations for the fluid and solid phases

must satisfy the stochiometric relation between the two phases:

n.(CA.U.A).XA = (W/MB).X

(11)

During the solution of the system of equations (1) to (11) we notice that the

calculated conversion rate X depends on the concentration of reactive fluid in the

suspension (CAe). CAe depends on the mass transfer phenomenon on one hand and on the

fluid-solid stoechiometric conservation equation (11) on the other.

Thus the resolution of the system of equations (1) to (11) requires the use of an

interactive method to calculate K' (chemical reaction number).

Figure 9 - Size distribution of solid in the underflow and the entrainment from a fluidized

bed.

4.6. Notation

A

Ar

ab

CA

CAb

CAe

CAf

D

Db

Dbmax

dor

dp

dpi

H

Hj

Ha

h*

Kbn

Ki

Kne

KT

kg

K'

Lj

M

Nk

Nr

ti

U

Ub

Umf

Ut

W

W1

X

XA

Xpi

Z

: Archimed's number

: Interfacial area of a bubble based on unit volume

: reactant concentration at the inlet to the reactor

: reactant concentration in the bubble phase

: reactant concentration in the emulsion phase

: reactant final concentration

: reactant diffusion constant in the medium

: bubble diameter

: maximum size of the bubbles

: diameter of the orifices in the distributor plate

: particles average size

: size of class i particles

: bed operating height

: jet height

: Hatta's number ((Kr.D)/kg)

: bubble size stabilisation height

: bubble-cloud mass transfer constant

: elutriation constant

: cloud-emulsion mass transfer constant

: Kunii's model global conversion constant

: bubble-emulsion mass transfer constant

: chemical reaction number

: horizontal distance between jets (orifices in grid)

: total mass of the bed

: number of mass transfer units

: number of chemical reaction units

: Average residence time for particles with size i

: feeding velocity (flow/surface) m/s

: average bubble rising velocity

: minimum fluidization velocity

: terminal velocity of particles

: solid feed mass flow

: solid mass flow

: solid conversion rate

: fluid conversion rate

: conversion rate of particles of size i

: height co-ordinate

: bed porosity

: voidage due to the presence of bubbles

f

mf

b

e

g

p

: porosity at minimum fluidization

: fluid viscosity

: catalyst volume in bubble phase / unit bubble volume

: catalyst volume in emulsion phase / unit bubble volume

: catalyst volume in cloud phase / unit bubble volume

: gas density

: particle density

4.7. References

1- Wen C.Y., Yu Y.H., AIChE J., v.12, p.610, 1966

2- Darton R.C., La Nauze R.D., Davidson J.F., Harrison D., Trans. Inst. Chem. Engrs.,

v.55, p.274, 1977

3- Clift R./ed. by Geldart/ Gas Fluidization Tech./ pub. J. Wiley & Sons, 1986

4- May W.G., Chem. Eng. Prog., v.55, n.12, p.49, 1959

5- Van Deemter J.J., Chem. Eng. Sc., v.13, p.143, 1961

6- Orcutt J.C., Davidson J.F., Pigford R.L., Chem. Eng. Prog. Sym., v.58,n.38, p1, 1962

7- Grace J.R./ ed. by Geldart / Gas Fluidization Tech./ pub. J. Wiley & Sons, 1986

8- Kato K., Wen C.Y., Chem. Eng. SC., v.24, p.1351, 1969

9- Kunii D., Levenspiel O., /Fluidization Engineering/ pub. J.Wiley & Sons, 1969

10- Grace J.R., I & EC Fundamentals, v.14, parts I,II et III, p.75 91, 1975

11- Westerink E.J., Wersterterp K.R., Chem. Eng. Sc., v.45, n.1, p.333, 1990

12 - Werther J., 2nd Eng. Foundation Conferance on Fluidization, p7-12, 1978

13- Werther ., Chem. Eng. Sc., v35, p372, 1980

14 - Hilligardt K., Werther J., Chem. Eng. Technol. 10, p272-280, 1987

15 - Werther J., Bellgardt D., Groenewald H. and Hilligardt K., Int. Conf. Fluid Bed

Combustion, Boston, p515-522, 1987

16 - Hilligardt K., Werther J., Ger. Chem. Eng., 9, p215-221, 1986

17- Werther J., 7 th. International Chem. Reaction Eng. Conf., Boston ,p.1, 1982

18- Yates J. G., Fundamentals of Fluidized-bed Chemical Processes, ed. Butterworths, 1983

19- Grace J.R., NATO repport, june 1985

20- Yates J.G., Rowe P.N., Trans. Instn. Chem. Engrs., v.55, P.137, 1977

21-Grace J.R., deLasa H.I., AIChE, v.24, p.364, 1978

22- Baker H.A., Beer J.M., Gibbs B.M., Inst. Fuel Sym. ser., n1, pA1-1, 1975

The heat transfer coefficient between a fluidized bed and the tubes or the outside wall

varies generally between 300 and 600 W/m2K. These values are by far higher than those

obtained in a fixed bed or by circulating the same amount of gas in an empty column. It is

important to understand that the heat transfer between the solids and the wall is governed

by the motion of solids near the wall. The excellent heat transfer properties of fluidized

beds are associated with the good mixing of the solid phase. This motion of solids is a

result of the motion of bubbles in the bed. That is, during their upward motion the bubbles

entrain the solids into their wakes (figur

bubble

wake

Entrained solid

Furthermore, the bubbles coalesce and break assuring an additional motion of the solids.

All these phenomena generally assure sufficient mixing to consider the fluidized bed as

isothermal. The presence of obstacles in the bed, such as a bundle of heat exchanger tubes,

in certain cases reduces sufficiently the mixing so as to produce vertical and lateral

temperature gradients in the bed (for example compact bundles in pressurised fluidized

beds).

The transfer of heat between solids and a wall cannot be calculated without a good

idea of the hydrodynamics of a fluidized bed, mainly of the bubble distribution in the bed.

The motion of bubbles that induces the motion of solids is usually governed by the design

of the gas distributor and the elements immersed in the bed. When using correlations

available in the literature it is necessary to verify whether they have been obtained under

similar hydrodynamic conditions. Frequently, in small diameter fluidized beds (<1 m) the

bubbles have a tendency to gather in the centre, creating an ascendant motion of the solids

in the centre and a descendant one along the walls. The contact between the solids and a

wall will depend on whether the wall is the external envelope or a tube immersed in the

bed. The values of the transport coefficients, as well as the correlations used for their

determination, will as a consequence also be different. Thus, the heat transfer coefficient

will vary with the position of the exchanger wall in the section, as well as with its elevation.

The most important parameter is the time average porosity of the bed at the exchange

surfaces. Fortunately, for most calculations, an average value for the whole bed is sufficient

and the average hydrodynamic parameters for the whole volume of the bed can be used.

After having reviewed all parameters capable of influencing the heat transfer coefficient,

we present the different heat exchange mechanisms in a fluidized bed. The variation of the

heat transfer coefficient with the particle diameter indicates clearly that we cannot hope to

find a correlation for h valid in all cases. Those models that present a correlation that takes

into account the different mechanisms have a better chance of giving good results than

strictly empirical correlations. After having mentioned the different correlations applicable

to horizontal and vertical tube banks, we present Bock's (1983) and Martin's (1984) models.

Figure 2 presents a typical variation of the heat transfer coefficient with the

fluidization velocity for fine particles. In the first region, from 0 to minimum fluidization

velocity Umf, the particles remain at rest, the heat transfer coefficient, h, is low and slowly

increases with the gas velocity. When Umf is reached the particles start to move around the

transfer surfaces and the heat transfer coefficient increases very rapidly, it passes through a

maximum for a velocity called Uopt. After this point, h decreases for increasing gas

velocity. For large solid particles Uopt corresponds to Umf. In this zone two phenomena

are opposed: the more the gas velocity is increased the more the solids become mobile,

favouring the transfer; but on the other hand, the porosity increases decreasing the transfer.

The heat transfer coefficient hmax for the fluidization velocity Uopt has been the object of

many correlations.

hw

hmax

Umf

Uopt

Ut

For the larger diameter particles, the dominant term for the heat transfer is the gas

convection coefficient ( hgc later to be introduced in the presentation of the heat transfer

mechanisms) and we do not see the same sudden increase in its value when the bed passes

form fixed to fluidized.

For the small particles (<80 m) it seems that h increases with the diameter of the

particles. For particle sizes between 100 m and 1 mm, hmax is proportional to dp to the

power -0.5. For large particles hmax increases again with dp.

The main property is the thermal conductivity of the gas. Most of the heat is

transferred by conduction through a film of gas and thus the higher the gas conductivity the

better the heat transfer will be. The variation of h with temperatures in the moderate

temperature range ( up to 800 C) illustrates well this influence. We would expect an

increase of h when the product g.Cpg increases and that is exactly what we observe for

gases under pressure.

We have already mentioned the influence of particle diameter. The heat transfer

coefficient, h, increases proportionally to ( RHO Cps)**0.2 while the thermal conductivity

of the particles s has no influence if:

The influence of other parameters is much less direct, they essentially affect the

hydrodynamics of the bubbles.

We can already see that the complex variation of the heat transfer coefficient with

the different parameters cannot be easily represented by a single correlation of the power

law type, and that this type of correlations can only be valid for a given range of the

parameters. The modern tendency is to decompose the heat transfer coefficient into three

terms corresponding to three different mechanisms.

As a first approximation we can consider that the heat transfer coefficient is the

sum of three terms representing the different energy transfer mechanisms :

a term representing the transfer of heat by convection from the gas, hgc

and a term for the transfer of heat by radiation, hr

h = hpc + hgc + hr

(1)

This representation is correct only when the terms have values very different from

each other. The conduction term (still called particle convection by some authors) uses the

mechanism of energy transfer caused by the motion of particles near the wall. The heat is

transferred to a particle during its contact with the heated surface by conduction through the

gas near the contact point. The motion of the particles allows the transfer of this heat to the

fluidized medium, where it is almost instantly transferred to the gas and the other particles.

It is the main term for small particles (<1 mm).

The convection term, hgc, represents the direct transfer between the gas that

percolates between the particles and along the surfaces. This contribution increases with the

gas velocity. This is the dominant term for the large particles (>800 m) requiring high

fluidization velocities and/or in the case of pressurised beds.

The radiation term is only important for temperatures higher than 800 C.

Authors agree that for a bubbling fluidized bed the high coefficients of heat

transfer are due to the rapid renewal of particles along the heat transfer surfaces. Each time

a bubble passes near or along the transfer surface those particles along the surface are

replaced by fresh particles at bed temperature. It is the temperature gradient that allows the

heat to be transferred between particles and walls. At the beginning of the contact period

the main resistance is due to the conduction through the gas layer that separates the

particles and the surface. As the particles close to the surface are gradually heated the

particles further away also start to take part in the heat transfer process. Two approaches

have been used to model this transfer process.

1- The models that assume discrete particles in contact with the wall (Botterill

(1962), Decker (1981), and Schlunder (1980)). In Botterill's model a numerical solution is

obtained for the heating of an isolated particle immersed in gas and in contact with the wall

during a certain time. The solution given by this model can only be applied for short contact

times, such that the heat does not penetrate beyond the first layer of particles. Furthermore,

in order to reconcile the theory with the experimental results, Botterill had to introduce a

film resistance between the first layer of particles and the wall.

2-Models that consider aggregates of solids in contact with the wall for a

determined time.

The first of these models is due to Mickley and Fairbanks (1955). In this model an

aggregate of particles, initially at the temperature of the interior of the bed, is placed in

contact with wall by a bubble. An unsteady heat transfer process occurs. According to

Mickley and Fairbanks the aggregate of solids constitutes an homogeneous medium whose

conductivity and specific heat are calculated as in a gas-solids mixture at minimum

fluidization. After each bubble the aggregate is replaced by another and the process is

restarted. The exchange of heat increases as the frequency of passage of bubbles increases.

This model produces an expression for the instantaneous heat transfer coefficient identical

to the one obtained for unsteady conduction in a semi infinite homogenous medium in

contact at t=0 with a wall at constant temperature:

hpci= {e.s.Cps.(1-mf)/(.t)}

(2)

The thermal characteristics of the aggregate are those of the bed at minimum fluidization.

The instantaneous heat transfer coefficient decreases with time. Before thermal

equilibrium is reached the aggregate is replaced by a new one due to the passage of a

bubble. When the bubble surrounds the transfer surface the local instantaneous heat transfer

coefficient decreases dramatically.

The mean heat transfer coefficient can be obtained by the integration of equation (2)

considering a time distribution of wall contact. For aggregates that spend a time t at the wall

we obtain:

hpc= 2

{ e . s .C ps .(1 - mf ) / ( . t)}

(3)

This physically plausible model gives good results for long contact times with the wall (fine

particles).

The deficiencies of this model are two:

on one hand the uniformity of thermal properties of aggregates is not a good

assumption near the wall.

on the other hand this model predicts transfer velocities much too large for the short

particle contact times.

The penetration of a thermal perturbation from a flat surface into a semi infinite

homogeneous medium can be approximated by:

X =~4

.t

(4)

a residence time of 1s, reasonable time for particles at the wall of a fluidized bed, the

thermal penetration is only 400 m. For particle with a diameter superior to 400m, this

simple calculation gives a penetration smaller than the particle diameter. The assumption of

homogeneity is difficult to justify. Kubie and Broughton (1975) introduced thermal

properties that varied with the distance from the wall. Numerous other authors, in order to

account for the increase ? in porosity at the wall, introduced an additional contact resistance

independent of time. This contact resistance is expressed as being equivalent to that of a

gaseous film with a thickness of dp/m. From the literature m varies between 4 and 10 where

m=6 seems to be the optimal value.

According to Schlunder (1980) the source of thermal resistance comes from the

decrease in the thermal conductivity of the gas when the mean free path of the gas

molecules becomes larger than the distance separating the surfaces between which the

transfer by conduction occurs. He obtains a value for the maximum heat transfer velocity

given by:

hmax = (4 g/dp).[1+2l dp) ln(1+dp/2l)-1]

(5)

where l is the mean free path derived from gas kinetic theory, in which an accommodation

coefficient is introduced to account for the incomplete transfer of energy when the

molecules of gas hit the wall. This model assumes that the contact particle/wall is punctual,

it does not consider the particle or wall rugosities. Decker and Glicksman (1981) the

rugosity of a surface of a typical surface is of the order of 10-2 to 10-4 m, while the mean

free path of gas molecules is of the order of 10-4 m. For them it is the inherent rugosity of

the particles and wall which prevents a close contact and creates the thermal resistance.

They experimental study lead them to introduce a contact resistance Rc given by:

1/Rc = 12 g/dp

(6)

hpc = (1-b)/(Rc+1/hpc)

(7)

with:

(1-b) = Ub/(U-Umf+Ub)

(8)

Ub=0.71 (gDb)

(9)

The term (1-b) takes into account the fact that during the passage of the bubbles along the

surface the coefficient is practically zero.

Glicksman and Decker (1980) introduced a thermal time constant for the heating of a

particle:

t = 1/(36.s.Cps.dp2/g)

(10)

If this time is much shorter than the residence time of the particles at the wall, the particle

renewal frequency (fb) plays a very important role. This is the case for very fine particles.

The residence time of particles is given approximately by the inverse of the local frequency

of the bubbles and hpc is written as:

hpc=~ hpc = {e.s.Cps.(1-mf)/(1-b)}

(11)

The mean frequency of bubbles fb for the volumetric fraction occupied by the bubbles can

be obtained with a method described by Grace (1982).

For the larger particles whose temperatures varies during the residence time at the wall

(t>>1/fb) hpc is given by Glicksman:

hpc = 11.2(1-b)g/dp

(12)

Other models such as those by Martin (1984) and Block (1983) use Schlunder's approach to

calculate hpc. These models are described in more detail later on.

The convective heat transfer term becomes important when dealing with large

dimension particles (>800 m) and high pressures. The gas flow condition are either

unsteady or turbulent (group D particles, according to Geldart's 1973 classification).

Most authors use an experimental correlation developed by Baskakov (1972). This

correlation has been obtained measuring the mass transfer by sublimation of naphthalene

covering the transfer wall.

Nu gc = 0.009 Ar1/2 Pr1/3

(13)

This correlation has been obtained for a transfer surface of given size and shape.

Certain authors such as Botterill and Denloye (1978) suggest that the heat transfer

at minimum fluidization is a good approximation of the term hgc?. They propose the

following empirical correlation:

hgc.dp1/2/g = 0.86 Ar0.39 for 103 <Ar< 106

Note that this equation has dimension m-1/2.

(14)

It is difficult to treat the transfer of heat by radiation rigorously since the

calculations become very rapidly very complex. When the transfer by radiation becomes

important, i.e., above 1000 C, the assumption that the components can be added is not valid

anymore. There is a coupling of the convective and radiative transfer processes (Botterill

1975).

For the large particles whose temperature does not vary during the contact with the

wall, the transfer by radiation can be predicted calculating the flux between two isothermal

grey surfaces.

hr = (Tsusp4-Tsurp4)/{(1/Esusp+1/Esurf)(Tsusp-Tsurf)

(15)

The effective emissivity of the bed is higher than that of a single isolated particle

due to the multiple reflections. The results by Botterill 1975 suggest that:

Esusp = 0.5 (1+Ep)

(16)

For smaller particles the problem is more complex since these particles change

temperature during their exposure to the wall. The rate at which are renewed at the wall

becomes important.

The relative importance of the transfer by radiation increases with the size of the

particles and the temperature. A literature review on the contribution of radiation to the

transfer of heat wall/fluidized bed was recently published by Flamant and Bergeron (1988).

Flamant and Arnaud (1984) published a literature review of the contribution of the

coefficient of heat transfer by radiation to the total heat transfer coefficient.

This portion of the heat transfer is difficult to predict since it depends on the

motion of particles near the wall. Frequently the solid particles have a descendent motion at

the fluid be wall, this motion occurs along relatively long distances with a more or less

rapid renewal of solids along the wall. This renewal depends of numerous factors, such as

the design of the distributor plate, the diameter of the bed, the nature of solids.... It is thus

very difficult to establish a general correlation, mainly considering that most investigations

published in the literature were carried out on small diameter units. It is certain that the

length of the heated surface has an influence. It is not the length itself that is important, but

the contact time particle/wall as indicated by the mechanisms described above.

No correlation in the literature gives the variation of h with the speed of fluidization can be

recommended without full confidence. For small particles (dp<1 mm), if possible, it is

preferable to use Zabrodsky's (1966) correlation for the maximum heat transfer coefficient,

hmax:

for dp<1000 mic. :

hmax = 35.8 (f)0.6 p2 dp-0.36

(17)

hmax =0.21 Ar0.32 f/dp

validity range:

(18)

We will provide here Wender and Cooper's (1958) correlation of the non-dimensional

group

(h.dp/f)/[(1-)Cps.s/Cpg.g]

{1+7.5exp[-0.44(L/D) Cps/Cps]}

(19)

Rep = (g.U.dp)/

(20)

Grace (1982) recommends the use of correlations established for vertical tubes, but

also suggests that a value of 80% of the result obtained from the correlation be retained, to

account for the fact that the transfer of heat is not as good at the wall to the bed.

The introduction of tubes into the fluidized bed modifies the general behaviour of

the fluidized bed, mainly due to the obstacle represented by the tubes to the formation of

bubbles. The circulation of solids in the bed will be modified and as consequence the heat

transfer by particle conduction component will be as well. This modification depends on

the precise design of the tube bundle, on the other hand results for a fluidized bed with

tubes are less sensible to extrapolation.

Generally, the heat transfer coefficients obtained for vertical tubes can be similar

to those measured for horizontal tubes, even though locally the mechanisms of transfer are

quite different. If the exchanger is not very small (pitch > 2.Dtube the results obtained with

a tube bundle are not significantly different from those obtained with a single tube.

In these correlations certain authors use the mean temperature to calculate the

physical properties of the gas, while others use the film temperature calculated as the

average between the wall and bed temperatures.

According to recent studies the tube diameter has a small influence on the heat transfer

coefficient.

Bock considers that the essential parameter is the motion of bubbles in the

immediate vicinity of the vertical wall. The heat transfer coefficient for a single tube varies,

for a given fluidization velocity, with the radial position and the height in the fluid bed

(Bock 1981).

All authors observed that the bubbles pass preferentially through the centre of the

bed and that the solids flow back along the wall. At low fluidization velocities the heat

transfer coefficient varies with the lateral position of the tube, while at higher fluidization

velocities this variation is much smaller except at the wall of the bed.

The correlations obtained by different authors before 1978 are analysed in a

thorough review by Saxena (1978).

This very simple correlation is proposed for vertical tubes

giving reasonable values for hw_maxi for a broad range of particle sizes.

(21)

hw maxi = Num f / dp

(22)

(See the Wender & Cooper diagram previously described for wall/suspension heat transfer).

This correlation is very interesting in that it was established using hundreds of experimental

points obtained by different authors.

3)- Shah & al. :

This is a very simple correlation that can be used to test hw values, which must remain

smaller than the proposed hmaxi:

Reopt=.065 Ar.58

Reopt is Rep at the optimal exchange velocity, Reopt < 170

(23)

Reopt>170

h.d/f = 4.63 Reopt.695 (df/dp).805

(24)

hp.d/f = 900(1-)[(U.d.f/)(2/dp3.s.g).326 Pr.3

(25)

(26)

Conditioned to Y/d =2, where Y is the horizontal spacing of tubes dp for ambient

temperature between 360 and 710 C.

5)- Grewal & Saxena :

hmax.dp/f = 0.9 (.0127 Ar/d).21 [(Cps/Cpf)^(45.5*Ar-.7)]

for 300 < Ar < 1E+5

(27)

6)- Vreedenberg :

Vreedenberg proposed several correlations that have been adopted by other authors

(Bansai). We use here only the correlation obtained with a cracking catalyst (fine and light

particles), which complements well the correlations by Catipovic and that by Zabrodsky

(dp>1000 m).

The inconvenient of this relation is that it strongly depends on , which is difficult to

estimate (correlation to be avoided).

for horizontal tubes :

(h.d/f).c^.3 = .66 [U.d.s(1-)/].44

(28)

(hw.d/f).c^.3 = 420 [U.d./(dp3*s*g)].3

7)- Zabrodsky :

h=7.2*f(1-).667/dp+ 26.6 U.2 Cpf f dp

(29)

(30)

subject to dp=2300 m

8)- Catipovic & al. :

h.dp/f = 6(1-)+(.0175.Ar.46 Pr.33)(1-) + (dp/d)(.88*

Repmf .5+.0042 Repmf) Pr.33

where = .55-.66/[(U-Umf)+.125]

9)- Glicksman & Decker :

h.dp/f = (1-b)[9.42+.042(dp.U.f.Cpf/f)]

(31)

(32)

(33)

H/Hmf = 1+[14.315(U-Umf).783 dp1.006 s.376 Umf-.937 * f-.126 ]

The heat transfer mechanisms previously described allow some conclusions to be

drawn regarding the effect of pressure on the heat transfer coefficient. All authors agree that

the convective heat transfer coefficient, hgc varies proportionally to P1/2, according to the

increase in gas density, g, with pressure. Martin's model predicts a variation with pressure

associated with the change in the mean free path of molecules. For a variation in pressure

from 1 to 25 bar hgc will have its value increase 5 fold, while the value of hpc will only be

multiplied by 1.5. The increase in pressure will be beneficial for particles significantly

larger than 1 mm. The compactness of the tube bundle is felt mostly by smaller particles. In

pressurised fluidized beds with a compact tube distribution, whose heat transfer is

significantly larger than those at atmospheric pressure, the temperature cannot be

considered homogeneous throughout the bed. The solid particle mixing is insufficient to

disperse rapidly the generated at the injection point and compensate the heat flux removed

at the top of the bed. Temperature differences of the order of hundred of degrees C have

been observed.

The three mechanisms of energy transfer in fluidized beds are: the conduction by

the particle, the convection by the gas and the radiation. They can be considered

independent and the global heat transfer coefficient, defined as h= q/(Ttube-Tbed), can be

written as the sum of the terms.

h = hpc + hgc + hr

(34)

hgc = 0.009 Ar1/2 Pr 1/3

(35)

hr = 4 T3

(36)

hpc = (1/6) (1-)s.Cps. wp [1-exp(N)]

(37)

where wp is an average velocity of the random displacement of the particles between the

interior of the bed and the surface. The term between brackets represents a degree of

thermal accommodation of the particle during its contact with the heated or cooled wall.

And N is a non-dimensional contact time:

N=(6.hwp.tc)/[(s.Cps. wp).(4dp)]

(38)

The heat transfer coefficient between a plane wall and a single particle, hwp, is composed

of two components:

1/hwp = 1/hwp.max +1/hi

(39)

The first term, usually the dominant resistance term, is due to the conduction through the air

contained between the wall and the particle, and can be calculated by the Schlunder's

formula:

hpw.max = (4f/dp)[1+2l/dp)ln(1+dp/2l)-1]

(40)

The equations in the model contain two quantities that up until now haven't been

calculated directly, namely the contact time, tc, of the particle with the wall and the average

speed of random displacement of particles, wp. To eliminate this two unknowns two

additional assumptions have been introduced in the model:

randomly a particle of a distance equal to its diameter. In other words the product wp.tc/dp

is assumed to be constant:

tc= (

( f )( 1 )

). Z 0 . 8 . s

U U mf

s

dp

Z = (1/6) s.Cps/f

0 .4

(41)

g . d 3p . ( mf )

(42)

5 ( 1 mf ) ( 1 )

The average displacement velocity of particles ,wp, is linked to the "mean free

path" through:

l = 2(2/ -1) [ f.(2RT/Mm).5/(2.P.Cpf -R./Mm)

(43)

where =~ 0.9 (ideal gas), R gas constant, P pressure, T temperature, Mm gas molar mass

and 'f' its conductivity.

For air at 1 bar and 25 C, l is equal to 274 nm, this produces hwp(max) of 24 + 20% for

particles having sizes between 200 m and 2 mm. This result is in accordance with the

experimental results of Gloski, Decker and Glicksman (1984).

In the equation above l is calculated in an manner analogous to the that used in the gas

kinetic theory using the diameter and the concentration of the particles. Thus, the

concentration of particles (in numbers per unit of free volume) allows to relate the unknown

wp to the size of the particles and to the voidage in the bed. The model is finally written as:

hpc=(f/dp)(1-).Z.[1-exp(-Nuwp/C.Z)]

1

1

(f/s)

= +

Nuwp Numax

4 [1+(1.5 C.Z.f/ .s).5]

(44)

(45)

Numax = 4[(1+2l/dp).ln(1+dp/2l)-1)]

(46)

These equations give the term hpc as function of the properties of the particles, of

the gas properties, of the degree of voids in the bed ( which itself depends on the

contains only one adjustable parameter C determined from Wender's experimental results

for spherical glass balls: C= 2.6 . This value is used for all the solids.

On the other hand, to calculate Z it is necessary to use a law that gives the

expansion of the bed as a function of the fluidization velocity. Martin recommends the use

of Werther's relation to calculate bed expansion characteristics, b and . This is the

method used in the program:

b= 1/(1+f g . D b /Ub) ; where f is a correction factor

(47)

Db is the size of the bubbles (see hydrodynamic chapter) and Ub is the rising speed of the

bubbles in the bed.

b =

b .dh / H

(48)

Martin's model seems to follows closely the variations of the heat transfer

coefficient with different operating parameters as long as the mobility of the particles is not

reduced by obstacles located in the bed (Martin 1984).

According to Martin the model can be used for vertical or horizontal tubes as well

as under pressure.

For a given solid changing the value of C we can improve the determination of h

obtained, for example, in a cold bed.

Bock diverges from the "additiveness" of the three mechanisms of transfer. hgc is

calculated from Baskakov's empirical relation and hr is obtained from:

h = hpc + hgc + hr

(49)

and Tm the arithmetic average between the wall and the bed temperatures.

The particle conduction term in this model is written as:

1

1

c

=

+

h pc 1 h max (1 mf ) 2

t

(..c p ) bed

(50)

b is the local mean volume of bubbles in contact with the transfer wall. The contact time

of the particle phase is defined by:

t=(1-b)/fb

(51)

The constant C takes into account the rugosity of the particles and of the surface.

Bock found that C was equal to 3 for all particles he tested.

If there is experimental data available to determine t and ?, we can calculate them

from the following correlations:

t = 62.2(U-Umf)-x Dh0.67 Hy dp0.54

(52)

(53)

with

Dh=(Dt2-d2)/(Dt+n.d)

(54)

where Db is the diameter of the column, d is the diameter of the tubes and n is the number

of tubes.

b = Z (U-Umf)

(55)

Z=0.085 H-0.75 for a single tube (0.14<H<1.1 m)

(56)

with

This model was established for vertical tubes, the hydraulic diameter has no meaning for

horizontal tubes.

5.14. Conclusion

The discussion above, showed that the methods presented here give an idea about the

values of heat transfer coefficient (tendencies), but the hydrodynamics of the bed are too

complex and dependent on the design of the bed to obtain precise results

There are numerous correlations in the literature that can be used in similar conditions.

However, its very important to choose a proper method corresponding the exact operating

conditions under which these correlations are obtained. Many of these papers describe well

the conditions under which they were obtained. Before applying a correlation it is necessary

to make sure that it was obtained under similar conditions (same particle diameter, same

pressure, same temperature level).

We advise the user to compare results from correlations to those obtained from Martins (or

Bocks) models. These last methods have the great advantage not to be far from reality.

5.15. Notation

Cp

CR

Cpg

Cps

Db

Dt

Dh

dp

specific heat

correction for a non-axial position

gas heat capacity

solid heat capacity

bubble diameter

fluid bed diameter

hydraulic diameter

particle meau diameter

d

Esus

Ep

Mm

g

h

hgc

hmax

hpc

tube diameter

suspension emissivity

wall emissivity

gas molar mass

gravitation constant

heat transfer coefficient

gas contribution to the heat transfer coefficient

maximum heat transfer coefficient for optimal velocity

heat transfer coefficient for conduction in a semiinfinite medium

heat transfer coefficient portion due to conduction in

the particles

heat transfer coefficient radiation contribution

heat transfer coefficient between a single particle

and a plane wall

mean free path of the particles

height of the fluidized bed

height of the tube above the grid

pressure

ideal gas constant

hpc

hr

hwp

l

L

H

P

R

T

t

tc

U

Ub

Umf

Uopt

Vp

wp

X

temperature

time

contact time

fluidization velocity

bubble rising velocity

minimum fluidization velocity

optimum fluidization velocity

particle velocity

random displacement velocity (Martin's model)

heat penetration

Gas conductivity

g

g

s

Solid conductivity

Gas viscosity

Gas density

Solid density

Subscripts:

b

bubble

f

fluid

mf

minimum of fluidization

p

particle

s

solid

5.16. References

1)- Andeen B.R., Glicksman L.R., ASME/AIChE Heat Transfert Conf., St. Louis, Aug.

n76-HT-67, 1976

2)- Bansal R.K., Kadaba P.V., Desai P.V., ASME/AIChE National Heat Transfert Conf.,

Orlando, n80-HT-115, July 1980

3)- Basakov A.P., Chap.13 of " Fluidization" By Davidson & al., Academic Press, Lon.

p465, 1985

4)- Bock H.J., Fluidisation IV, Kunii & Toei ed., p323, 1983

5)- Bock H.J., Molerus O., Ger. Chem. Eng., vol.6, p57, 1983

6)- Bock H.J., J. Schweinzer J.S., O. Molerus, Ger. Chem. Eng. vol.6, p301, 1983

7)- Bock H.J., Ger. Chem. Eng., vol.4, p356, 1981

8)- Boothroyd R.G., /Flowing Gas-Solids Suspensions/ Ed. Chapman & Hall Ltd., 1971

9)- Botterill J.S.M., "Fluid-bed Heat Transfert", Academic Press, New York, 1975

10)- Decker N.A., Glicksman L.R., AIChE Sym. Ser., vol.77,n208, p341, 1981

11)- Denloye, Botterill J.S.M.,

12)- Flamant G., Arnaud D., Int. J. of Heat and Mass Transfer, vol.27, n10, p1752, 1984

12)- Glicksman L.R., Decker N.A., VI th Int. Conf. on Fluidised Bed Combustion, Atlanta,

vol.3, p1152, 1980

13)- Grace J.R., Chap.8 / Handbook of multiphase flow/ Hestroni,Ed. Hemisphere, 1982

14)- Grewal N.S., Fluidization and Industrial Applications, Chapter 31, p997, Pub. ,1988

15)- Grewal N.S., chap.18 / Heat & Mass Transfert Handbook / Cheremisinoff, Ed. Gulf.

Houston TX, p609, 1986

16)- Grewal N.S., Saxena S.C., Ind. Eng. Chem. ProC. Des. Dev., vol.22, p376, 1983

17)- Grewal N.S., Saxena S.C., Chem. Eng. J., vol.18, p197, 1979

18)- Grewal N.S., Powder Tech., vol.30, p145, 1981

19)- Hughmark G.A., AIChE, vol.13, p1219, 1967

20)- Kunii D., Levenspiel O., /Fluidization Engineering/ Ed. John Wiley & Sons, 1969

21)- Martin H., Chem.Eng.Proc., vol.18, 1984

22)- Martin H.,XIV th IChMT Symp., Dubrovnik, Sep. 1984

23)- Maskaev V.K., et Baskakov A.P, J. Eng. Phy., vol.24, p.411, 1973

24)- Petrie J.C., Freedy W.A., Chem. Eng., Prog., vol.64, p 45, 1968

25)- Ranz W.E., Marshal W.R., Chem.Eng.Prog., vol.48, p141, 1952

26)- Saxena S.C., Ganzha V.L., Powder Tech., vol.39, p199, 1984

27)- Shah M.M., Heat Trans. Eng., vol.4, p107, 1983

28)- Schlnder E.U., Int. Chem. Eng., vol.20 n4, p 550, 1980

29)- Wender L., Cooper G.T., AIChE J., vol.4,p 15, 1958

30)- Zabrodsky S.S., Antonishin N.V., Parnas A.L., Canadian J. Chem.Eng., vol.54, p52,

1976

31)- Zabrodsky S.S., "Heat Transfert in Fluidised Beds", MIT Press.Cambridge M.A, 1966

32)- Zabrodsky S.S., Epanov Y.G., Galershtein D.M., Saxena S.C., Kolar A.K., Int. J. Heat

& Mass Trans., vol.24, p571, 1981

- Active Report 2.0 Standard EditionUploaded byUsman Ali Dar
- Calculation Manager Design Guide 11.1.2.4Uploaded byPrashantRanjan2010
- MS Excel Shortcut KeysUploaded byJatin Gupta
- ANUJUploaded byIshita Singla
- 9. Amdocs Unix BillingUploaded byShweta Dubey Singh
- OptiTex Protection User GuideUploaded byLipe Ram
- Study GuideUploaded bymrsfrongello
- Model NavigationUploaded byashscribd_id
- 004Uploaded byJohn Smith
- bankingsystemfinal-140125094717-phpapp02Uploaded byAjay Rai
- Microsoft Word Shortcut KeysUploaded byKhairuddinJJ
- GS+ User's GuideUploaded byIgnacio_Franci_7102
- Influence on Particle Shape on Flow Ability and Other StuffUploaded bybdavis33
- Prepking 000-018 Exam QuestionsUploaded byneol32
- Configuring Front Panel ObjectsUploaded by'-MubashirBaig
- 05 RA22245EN10GLS0 Lmt Handling AdvancedUploaded byalqousi_muhieddine
- Microsoft Question MCQUploaded byDhirendra Singh Rajput
- Canoco GuideUploaded byMani Kandan
- Business Functional and Non Functional RequirementsUploaded bySravani Lavanya
- Collect Your SQL Server Auditing and Troubleshooting Information AutomaticallyUploaded byalmagesto52
- Data SharingUploaded byramsha gohar
- BDBMS QBUploaded byAmanda Barker
- description: tags: EDExpress06-07Release3CoverLetterUploaded byanon-44961
- FluidUploaded byPandu Putra
- 95848923-secador-lecho-fluidizado.pdfUploaded byIñiguez Tobon Luis
- fluidized beds.docxUploaded byCHOFOR VITALIS
- MATHEMATICAL MODELLING AND SIMULATION OF FLUIDIZED BED DRYING SYSTEMUploaded byAnonymous vQrJlEN
- Fluidised Bed Unit.docxUploaded byAnika Gaur
- ~hh37A8.htmUploaded byOmar Perez
- Lesson 1 How to Uses Microsoft WordUploaded byfirmanrizki11

- Magelis_SCU_Programming_Guide.pdfUploaded byFabiano Albuquerque
- 2/15/18 search warrant issued by Wake County, NC Superior Court re: Dechoker LLCUploaded byPeter M. Heimlich
- cs1104-1Uploaded byNarvada Khedun
- E Property Project DocumentationUploaded byMusakkhir Sayyed
- ptscotch_user5.1Uploaded byHarish C
- Decuscope_Vol07_1968Uploaded bykgrhoads
- 3impUploaded byArun Ng
- 2210_s19_qp_21Uploaded byHuzaifa Siddiq
- Lecture-2-Introduction-to-C.pdfUploaded byBonaril Muhammad
- 0132678209Uploaded byThimmarayan Krishnappa
- Get Start SES-CDEGSUploaded byGilberto Mejía
- Programming In C Quan BookUploaded byRatish Kakkad
- TDS Survey Pro With TSX v4.6.0 User's Manual - ReconUploaded byRomeo Blanco
- A Eb 101 Introduction to ComputersUploaded byAnonymous sibic3VfN
- ANSWER Key Quiz 5 Auditing CISUploaded byQuendrick Surban
- Pic s9(04) Sign is Leading SeparateUploaded byapi-26024335
- 7 1 Basic Terminology and Frameworks MEFUploaded bysmiley_lauf
- 65067706 Gym Management SystemUploaded byJaved Rahmani Kureshi Jrk
- Book - Introduction to Software Engineering Design - Processes, Principles and Patterns With UML2Uploaded byurrouge
- Huping Hu et al- Various Aspects of Consciousness & Nature of Time ContinuedUploaded byOppekee
- Hulle COA Unit IUploaded byhulleganesh
- COMP1405_Ch1_IntroductionToComputerScienceUploaded byShiningHeartKitty
- CIT 212 Object Oriented Programming With JavaUploaded byKifaru Malale
- Computer Architecture.docUploaded byirfanahmed.dba@gmail.com
- XII_Computer_Science_SQP_2018_19.pdfUploaded byprabhu prasad pradhan
- Java Script CourseUploaded byapi-3695674
- Computer SBI PO(1)Uploaded bySumeet Gupta
- Addressing ModesUploaded bygarydaviesjr
- Dot Net Faq ArunUploaded byapi-3745141
- Belt Conveyor SimulationUploaded bycbqucbqu

## Much more than documents.

Discover everything Scribd has to offer, including books and audiobooks from major publishers.

Cancel anytime.