You are on page 1of 37

Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

Review

A state-of-the-art review of gas}solid turbulent #uidization


H. T. Bi, N. Ellis, I. A. Abba, J. R. Grace*
Fluidization Research Centre, Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, University of British Columbia, 2216 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC,
Canada, V6T 1Z4
Received 31 August 1999; accepted 27 March 2000

Abstract
Turbulent #uidization has only been widely recognized as a distinct #ow regime for the past two decades, even though it is
commonly utilized in industrial #uidized-bed reactors due to vigorous gas}solids contacting, favourable bed-to-surface heat transfer,
high solids hold-ups (typically 25}35% by volume), and limited axial mixing of gas. Despite its practical importance, turbulent
#uidization has received much less attention than the adjacent #ow regimes of bubbling, slugging and fast #uidization, due to the
challenges of experimental and theoretical work related to this #ow regime. However, recent years have seen an upsurge in interest in
turbulent #uidization. Various methods } pressure #uctuations, visual observations, capacitance signals, optical "bre probes and bed
expansion } have been used to determine the transition velocity, usually denoted ; , at which turbulent #uidization begins. Di!erent
A
methods tend to give di!erent results. There appear to be as many as three di!erent types of turbulent #uidization, depending on such
factors as mean particle size, particle size distribution, column diameter and internal ba%es, if any. When turbulent #uidization is
preceded by bubbling, ; denotes a change from closed laminar bubble wakes to open turbulent wakes. The upper boundary of
A
turbulent #uidization occurs when a distinct upper bed surface disappears due to substantial entrainment. Much of the literature
regarding the turbulent #uidization #ow regime adopts the terminology of the bubbling regime, ascribing such properties as bubble
diameter and bubble rising velocity, despite the transitory and distorted nature of the voids. Turbulent beds exhibit non-uniform
radial voidage distributions, with lower time-mean voidages near the wall than in the interior of the column. Axial mixing of both gas
and solids is usually characterized by axial dispersion coe$cients and Peclet numbers which depend on the column dimensions, as
well as the gas and particle properties. Empirical equations are presented for prediction of these quantities for both gas and solids.
Surface-to-bed convective heat transfer coe$cients tend to reach a maximum in the turbulent #uidization regime. When turbulent
beds are represented by two-phase models, interphase mass exchange is rapid. Reactor models vary widely, some treating the
turbulent bed as a single phase homogeneous suspension subject to axial dispersion, while others assume two-phase behaviour.
A probabilistic approach that merges these approaches as the gas velocity increases shows promise. While considerable progress has
been made, substantial challenges remain in understanding and characterizing the turbulent #uidization #ow regime.  2000
Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Fluidization; Turbulence; Multiphase #ow; Hydrodynamics; Mixing; Multiphase reactors

Contents
1. Historical development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4790

2. Existence of and transition to turbulent #uidization


2.1. Modes of turbulent #uidization . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2. Existence of turbulent #uidization #ow regime
2.3. Measurement techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.4. Factors in#uencing transition velocity, ; . . . .
A
2.5. Comparison for ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A
2.6. Transition mechanisms and modelling . . . . . . .

4791
4791
4791
4792
4793
4794
4794

...
...
...
...
...
...
...

* Corresponding author. Tel.: #1-604-822-3121; fax: #1-604-8226003.


E-mail address: jgrace@chml.ubc.ca (J. R. Grace).
0009-2509/00/$ - see front matter  2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 0 0 9 - 2 5 0 9 ( 0 0 ) 0 0 1 0 7 - X

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...
...
...
...
...
...
...

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...
...
...
...
...
...
...

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...
...
...
...
...
...
...

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...
...
...
...
...
...
...

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...
...
...
...
...
...
...

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...
...
...
...
...
...
...

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

4790

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

3. Transition from turbulent to fast #uidization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


3.1. Transport velocity (; ) based on phase diagram method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3.2. Critical velocity, ; , based on solids entrainment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
QC
3.3. Transition velocity, ; , based on pressure #uctuations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I
3.4. Comparison of ; , ; and ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
 QC
I
3.5. Identi"cation of data pertaining to turbulent #uidization regime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4796
4796
4797
4798
4799
4799

4. Local #ow structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


4.1. Local voidage and void-phase fraction
4.2. Local void size and rise velocity . . . . .
4.3. Radial and axial voidage distribution .
4.4. Turbulence characteristics . . . . . . . . . .

.
.
.
.
.

4799
4799
4800
4801
4802

5. Gas and solids mixing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


5.1. Gas mixing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.2. Solids mixing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4803
4803
4807

6. Heat
6.1.
6.2.
6.3.

transfer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Convection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Heat transfer in the freeboard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Radiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4808
4808
4810
4810

7. Mass transfer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.1. Interphase transfer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.2. Gas/particle mass transfer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4811
4811
4811

8. Solids entrainment in turbulent #uidized beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


8.1. Entrainment #ux . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8.2. Transport disengagement height (TDH) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4813
4813
4814

9. Modelling and reactor performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4814

10. Conclusions and outlook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4819

Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4819

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4821

1. Historical development
The turbulent #uidization #ow regime is commonly
considered to lie between bubbling #uidization and the
fast #uidization regime. It has been characterized by low
amplitude of pressure #uctuations, resulting from the
disappearance of large bubbles/voids. The "rst photograph of a turbulent #uidized bed, distinctly di!erent
from bubbling #uidization, was published by Matheson,
Herbst and Holt (1949). A turbulent #uidization regime
was introduced in the #ow regime diagram of Zenz
(1949). The "rst quantitative study seems to have been
performed by Lanneau (1960) who measured local voidage, voidage #uctuations and pierced void lengths in
a 76 mm ID #uidized bed with "ne catalyst particles at
high gas velocities, although the transition from bubbling/slugging to the turbulent regime was not quanti"ed.
Kehoe and Davidson (1970) extended their work on
slugging to higher velocity operation and identi"ed the

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

transition from bubbling to turbulent #uidization based


on visualization of a 2-D bed and bubble rise velocity
and capacitance traces in a 3-D column. Later the turbulent #uidization regime was reported by Massimilla
(1973), Thiel and Potter (1977) and Crescitelli, Donsi,
Russo and Clift (1978). In these early studies, transition to
turbulent #uidization was generally determined based on
visual observations and local voidage or pressure traces.
The "rst transition criterion was proposed by
Yerushalmi, Cankurt, Geldart and Liss (1978) to quantify
the transition from bubbling/slugging to turbulent #uidization. The gas velocity, ;A , at which the standard
deviation of pressure #uctuations reached a maximum
was said to mark the beginning of the transition to
turbulent #uidization, while ;I , where the standard deviation of the pressure #uctuations levels o!, was said to
denote the end of the transition. In recent years, ;A has
been widely adopted to de"ne the transition to turbulent
#uidization.

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

ticles (Canada, McLaughlin & Staub, 1978; Chyang


& Huang, 1988; Dunham, Mann & Grewal, 1993).

Table 1
Some commercial turbulent #uidized bed reactors
Process

Particle
classi"cation

Typical gas
velocity (m/s)

FCC regenerators
Mobil MTG reactors
Acrylonitrile
Maleic anhydride
Phthalic anhydride
Ethylene dichloride
Roasting of zinc sul"de

Group
Group
Group
Group
Group
Group
Group

0.5}1.5
&0.5
&0.5
&0.5
&0.5
&0.5
&1.5

A
A
A
A
A
A
B

4791

There were only a few works on turbulent #uidization


before 1975 when most researchers focused on bubbling
#uidization. From 1975 to 1985, there were about 10
papers published on turbulent #uidization, indicating
some growth in research interest. Since 1985, research on
turbulent #uidization has gained momentum with an
average of about four papers per year. Although most
studies have been focused on the transition from bubbling/slugging to turbulent #uidization, papers have begun
to deal with gas and solids backmixing, gas-to-solids and
interphase mass transfer and reactor performance.
Industrial application of turbulent #uidized beds includes chemical and metallurgical processes, as listed in
Table 1. Yerushalmi and Avidan (1985) reviewed the
early work on turbulent #uidization. Since then, signi"cant progress has been made in improving understanding
of turbulent #uidization and its applications. The objective of this review is to summarize available information
on turbulent #uidization and to focus on aspects which
need to be advanced in the future.

2. Existence of and transition to turbulent 6uidization


2.1. Modes of turbulent yuidization
Previous experimental work using a variety of techniques and indices indicates that there are at least three
di!erent types of transitions to turbulent #uidization:
Type I: A relatively sharp transition to a hydrodynamic
regime which is physically distinct from other regimes
(Kehoe & Davidson, 1970; Yerushalmi et al., 1978; Crescitelli et al., 1978; Yang & Chitester, 1988; Tsukada,
Nakanishi & Horio, 1993).
Type II: A gradual transition involving intermittent
slug-like structures interspersed with periods of fast-#uidization-like behaviour, the latter becoming predominant with increasing super"cial gas velocity (Crescitelli et
al., 1978; Rowe & MacGillivray, 1980; Brereton & Grace,
1992; M'chirgui, Tadrist & Radev, 1999).
Type III: A relatively gradual transition to distinctive
behaviour for shallow beds (HKD /DR (2) of large par-

Type I transitions generally occur in non-slugging systems of "ne (Geldart group A) particles, while Type II
corresponds to slugging (i.e. group B and presumably D)
systems. Type III transitions result from the penetration
of gas jets in shallow #uidized beds of large particles
where fully developed slug #ow is never achieved due to
the limited bed depth. Type I and Type II transitions are
distinguished based on the ratio of maximum stable
bubble diameter to the column diameter, i.e.
d  /DR (0.7 for Type I transition, while Types II and
III can be distinguished by the HKD /DR ratio. Type II
corresponds to slugging systems where HKD /DR is larger
than about 2, while d  /DR is larger than about 0.7.
2.2. Existence of turbulent yuidization yow regime
The bubbling, slugging and fast #uidization #ow regimes have been widely studied and accepted by #uidization researchers. However, the turbulent #uidization
#ow regime has been controversial and not always accepted as a separate #ow regime (e.g. see discussion following
Lanneau, 1960; Rowe & MacGillivray, 1980; Geldart
& Rhodes, 1986; Rhodes & Geldart, 1986b; Rhodes,
1996, 1997).
The existence of a turbulent #uidization #ow regime
parallels the churn-turbulent #ow regime for gas}liquid
two-phase #ows, and it is worth noting that this too has
been subject to controversy (Hewitt & Jayanti, 1993). In
both cases, at lower super"cial gas velocities, one "nds
either bubbly #ow or, for tubes of relatively small diameters, slug #ow, with bubbles or slugs dispersed in
a continuous phase comprised of liquid (for gas}liquid
#ows) or particles and interstitial gas (for gas}solid
#uidized beds). At high super"cial gas velocities, one
"nds annular mist #ow (for gas}liquid systems) or fast
#uidization (gas}solid systems). The churn-turbulent and
turbulent #uidization #ow regimes then represent
transitional regions between lower velocity #ow regimes
(bubbling or slugging), where there is a dense continuous
phase, and a higher velocity #ow regime (annular mist or
fast #uidization), where gas forms the continuous phase
and there is a relatively dense annular region at the outer
wall. The turbulent #uidization #ow regime may then be
de"ned as the range in which there is no clear continuous
phase, but instead, either via intermittency or by interspersing voids and dense regions, a competition between
dense and dilute phases in which neither gains the
ascendancy.
A complementary manner of explaining the existence
is to consider the population of bubbles as the gas #ow
rate increases in the bubbling #ow regime. As more gas
#ow must be accommodated, the volume occupied by
bubbles increases and a greater and greater fraction of

4792

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

their time is spent in pursuit of other bubbles. Ultimately,


when the bubbles occupy approximately half the volume
of the bed, it is no longer possible for them to maintain
individual identity, and bubbling breaks down into
a chaotic state.
Grace, Issangya, Bai and Bi (1999a) proposed several
criteria to be satis"ed for any #ow regime:
E There must be distinctive features: The darting transitory voids viewed in Type I turbulent #uidization
distinguish turbulent #uidization from the other #uidization #ow regimes.
E There must be distinctive trends. Such features as the
radical improvement in gas}solid contacting (Massimilla, 1973), reversal of the direction of the pressure
#uctuation vs. gas velocity plots (Yerushalmi & Cankurt, 1979), change in the tendency for gas mixing to
vary with gas velocity (see Section 5.1), unique statistical and chaotic properties (Bai, Issangya & Grace,
1999) and a decrease in the amplitude of the root mean
square force on immersed horizontal tubes (Grace
& Hosny, 1985) are clear examples of distinctive
trends.
E A #ow regime should also be capable of being both fully
developed and statistically steady. This criterion also
appears to be met by the turbulent #uidization #ow
regime as de"ned above.
The controversy over the existence (or non-existence)
of the turbulent #uidization #ow regime appears to have
largely originated from the two transition velocities,
;A and ;I , introduced by Yerushalmi and Cankurt
(1979) and shown schematically in Fig. 1. The confusion
has arisen because these authors proposed that
;I marked the onset of turbulent #uidization, whereas
subsequent authors have found either that ;I does not
exist or that it marks the end of the turbulent #ow regime,
i.e. the transition from turbulent #uidization to fast #uidization. Details are discussed below. Turbulent #uidization is now widely accepted as extending from ;A to the

Fig. 1. De"nitions of transition velocities, ; and ; , based on stanA


I
dard deviation of pressure #uctuations.

onset of fast #uidization, and this is the range considered


in this review article.
2.3. Measurement techniques
Several measurement methods have been utilized to
determine the transition from bubbling or slugging to
turbulent #uidization including visual observation, local
capacitance, pressure #uctuations and local and overall
bed expansion. Based on signals from pressure transducers, capacitance probes, optical "bre probes, X-ray
facilities, as well as manometers, several transition criteria have been proposed.
(a) Visual observations: Kehoe and Davidson (1970)
de"ned turbulent #uidization as a state of `continuous
coalescence } virtually a channeling state with tongues of
#uid darting in zigzag fashion through the beda. Beyond
the point where this regime was initiated, it was impossible to detect slugs on traces from capacitance probes.
This de"nition has been adopted in some subsequent
studies (e.g. Crescitelli et al., 1978; Thiel & Potter, 1977;
Massimilla, 1973; Yang & Chitester, 1988). The
transition in Geldart group A particle systems seems to
be sharp, but in slugging systems with group B and
D particles it is gradual. As a result, the transition to
turbulent #uidization could only be identi"ed based on
visual observations in non-slugging systems (Thiel
& Potter, 1977).
(b) Heterogeneity index: Local voidage #uctuations
measured by capacitance and optical "bre probes have
also been used to deduce the transition to turbulent
#uidization. Kehoe and Davidson (1970) and Crescitelli
et al. (1978) de"ned the transition as the point where it is
impossible to detect slugs in capacitance traces. The
standard deviation of the local voidage #uctuations increases with increasing super"cial gas velocity and
decreases slightly after reaching a maximum value
(e.g. Abed, 1984; Chehbouni, Chaouki, Guy & Klvana,
1994). It is thus di$cult to determine a transition point
based on the standard deviation of local voidage #uctuations. Alternative approaches have been developed to
determine the transition based on local voidage signals.
Lanneau (1960) de"ned `a heterogeneity indexa as e!ectively half the average absolute deviation of the local bed
density from its mean value based on capacitance signals.
This quantity increased with increasing ; before reaching a maximum, after which it decreased. Lancia, Nigro,
Volpicelli and Santoro (1988) de"ned a similar index to
determine the transition. Transition velocities determined in this manner appear to be lower than from the
pressure #uctuation method.
(c) Bed expansion: Avidan and Yerushalmi (1982) identi"ed an abrupt change in the bed expansion with increasing super"cial gas velocity, and ascribed this to the
transition from bubbling to turbulent #uidization.
Lee and Kim (1990a), Yamazaki, Asai, Nakajima and

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

Jimbo (1991) and Nakajima Harada, Asai, Yamazaki


and Jimbo (1991) reported similar data. However,
in #uidized beds where entrained particles are e$ciently
returned to the bed at high gas velocities, such abrupt
changes tend to disappear (Geldart & Rhodes, 1986;
Grace & Sun, 1991; Bi & Grace, 1995). Hence, this
method tends to be dependent on the solids collection
and return system.
(d) Pressure yuctuations: Most research groups,
beginning with Yerushalmi and Cankurt (1979), have
utilized the velocity, ;A , de"ned above, to demarcate
the transition to turbulent #uidization. Determination of
;A and ;I are shown schematically in Fig. 1. Extensive studies have also been carried out to quantify
these two transition points. However, ;I often cannot be
identi"ed (e.g. Satija & Fan, 1985; Rhodes & Geldart,
1986b) and depends on the system used to return particles captured after being carried out of the bed (Bi
& Grace, 1995) and measurement location (Chehbouni et
al., 1994). Hence ;A has become widely accepted as the
standard means of delineating the transition to turbulent
#uidization.
Both absolute (single-point) and di!erential (twopoint) pressure #uctuations have been measured to assess
the transition to turbulent #uidization. The recorded
pressure signals have been interpreted in terms of average
peak-to-peak amplitude, maximum peak-to-peak amplitude, peak-to-average amplitude, standard deviation,
normalized standard deviation, skewness, etc. Some researchers (Avidan & Yerushalmi, 1982; Lee & Kim, 1988)
have claimed that the same transition point can be obtained from alternative techniques. Others (Cai, 1989;
Lee & Kim, 1988; Brereton & Grace, 1992) showed that
;A , evaluated from di!erent interpretations can di!er. Bi
and Grace (1995) showed that ;A values based on absolute and di!erential pressure #uctuations di!er. The dimensional standard deviation also gives a di!erent
;A value from the dimensionless standard deviation normalized by the average absolute or di!erential pressure
measurement. The maximum peak-to-average value
method appears to give more or less the same ;A value as
the dimensional standard deviation method. ;A from
di!erential pressure #uctuations varies with the measurement interval, while ;A from absolute pressure #uctuations is relatively insensitive to axial location. These
phenomena can be explained (Bi & Grace, 1995) based
on the origin and transmission of pressure #uctuations in
gas}solids #uidized beds.
Fig. 2 compares transition velocities determined from
absolute and di!erential pressure #uctuations. It is seen
that ;A from di!erential pressure #uctuations is systematically higher than from absolute pressure #uctuations.
The transition velocities from visual observations and
from the bed expansion method are consistent with
;A from absolute pressure #uctuations, because all three
re#ect global #uctuations of the #uidized bed. Since the

4793

Fig. 2. Comparison of transition velocity, ; , from absolute and di!erA


ential pressure #uctuations (Bi & Grace, 1995).

in#uence of di!erent measurement methods and data


analysis methods is signi"cant, it is essential to standardize (Brereton & Grace, 1992) or to fully report all
experimental details so that experimental data from different sources can be compared.
2.4. Factors inyuencing transition velocity, ;A
In measurements of pressure #uctuations, tubes of
various lengths are connected to a pressure transducer.
To prevent particles from blocking the probe, the probe
needs to be either purged by gas or "tted with a "lter.
When the probe is continuously purged, the issuing gas
may disturb the #ow "eld around the probe tip. On the
other hand, a high resistance "lter can damp pressure
signals. While the intensity of pressure #uctuations decreases with increasing probe resistance, the peak point
does not shift appreciably, indicating that ;A is not
signi"cantly a!ected by the probe resistance, so long as
the probe has the same resistance in all experiments.
Grace and Sun (1990) and Bi and Grace (1995) found
that the transition velocity ;A determined from di!erential pressure signals over the same interval was almost
independent of the static bed height, which varied from
0.4 to 1.0 m. Similar results were reported by Cai (1989)
and Satija and Fan (1985) based on absolute pressure
#uctuations with HKD /DR '2. On the other hand, for
a shallow #uidized bed of HKD /DR (2 with Group B and
D particles, Canada et al. (1978) and Dunham et al.
(1993) found that ;A increased with static bed height.
This could be related to the undeveloped bubble #ow in
shallow beds before transition to turbulent #uidization
can occur.
Since column diameter may a!ect bubble size and
bubble rise velocity, the transition velocity ;A is in#uenced by the column diameter. As shown in Fig. 3 from
Cai (1989), ;A decreases with increasing column diameter
for small columns, becoming insensitive to column diameter for DR '0.2 m. Similar trends were observed by
Zhao and Yang (1991) in columns with internals.
;A increases with increasing mean particle size and

4794

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

Fig. 3. E!ect of column diameter on transition velocity, ; (adapted


A
from Cai, 1989).

the amplitude of pressure #uctuations was reduced at


higher temperatures. The lower amplitude of pressure
#uctuations at elevated temperature has been related to
smoother #uidization and smaller bubbles (Kai &
Furusaki, 1985; Knowlton, 1992; Rapagna, Foscolo
& Gibilaro, 1994), while the higher transition velocity
;A may result from the lower gas phase density and
higher gas viscosity.
Various types of internals have been widely used in
commercial #uidized-bed reactors for heat transfer, improved contacting, etc. Internals usually restrict bubble
growth and promote bubble breakup. Transition to turbulent #uidization thus tends to occur at lower gas velocities in the presence of internals. Zhao and Yang (1991)
and Jin, Yu, Wang and Cai (1986) measured ;A in beds
containing various types of internals and found that they
generally reduced the transition velocity ;A .
2.5. Comparison for ;A

Fig. 4. E!ect of gas density on transition velocity ; .


A

density. Sun and Grace (1990) and Ihara, Kayou and


Natori (1996) showed that ;A also depends on the particle size distribution, with wider distributions giving
lower pressure #uctuations and lower ;A than particles
of narrow size distributions.
Lanneau (1960) found that the transition velocity
based on the `heterogeneity indexa decreased with increasing system pressure. Later experiments (Yang
& Chitester, 1988; Cai, Chen, Jin & Wang, 1989; Tsukada
et al., 1993; Marzocchella & Salatino, 1996) con"rmed
this trend (see Fig. 4). Such an e!ect may be related to
improved #uidization quality due to the reduction in
bubble size in pressurized #uidized beds.
Only a few studies have reported the e!ect of temperature (e.g. Peeler, Lim & Close, 1999). Cai et al. (1989)
and Foka et al. (1996) discovered that ;A increases as the
temperature is increased at constant pressure, although

A number of equations have been developed to predict


the transition velocity ;A , as listed in Table 2. Bi and
Grace (1995) evaluated these correlations based on the
available data. The AP (absolute pressure) equation of Bi
and Grace (1995) and that of Cai et al. (1989) appear to
give the best predictions for absolute pressure #uctuation
measurements. These two equations also give good prediction of the data from bed expansion measurements,
con"rming that the transition velocity based on bed
expansion measurements are close to those from absolute
pressure #uctuation measurements. The DP (di!erential
pressure) equation of Bi and Grace (1995) best predicts
the di!erential pressure data. For di!erential pressure
#uctuation data, the root mean square deviation is generally larger than 0.30 m/s, indicating considerable scatter.
This is in part because ;A varies with axial location,
a factor neglected in all correlations. All equations show
poor agreement with data from visual observation
methods. In addition, recent data from Peeler et al. (1999)
show that the in#uence of temperature is not well predicted by the various correlations.
2.6. Transition mechanisms and modelling
To explain the transition from bubbling to turbulent
#uidization, Yang (1984) proposed that clusters of particles obey laws similar to those governing the behaviour
of individual particles #uidized in a homogeneous manner. Based on the maximum velocity of continuity waves,
he obtained:
;A ";G

m!1 K
m

(1)

where ;G is the terminal velocity of particle clusters, and


m, the Richardson and Zaki (1954) index, is determined
based on bed expansion tests.

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825


Table 2
Correlations for transition velocity, ;

4795

Source

Equations

No.

Yerushalmi and Cankurt (1979)

; "3.0(o d ) !0.77
A
N N

(a)

Yang (1984)

; "; eK
A
G C
; "; Re\ 
G
R R
e "(m!1)/m
C
m"2.31 Re\ 
R

(b)

Jin et al. (1986)

Zhao & Yang (1991)

;
D
A " f R
d
(gd
N
N
fD "0.00367
R
fD "0.00232
R
fD "0.00032
R

o !o
N
E
o
E
(for bed
(for bed
(for bed

 

n#1 L
; "; eL
A
G KD n!1

 

(c)

without internals)
with vertical tubes)
with pagoda type ba%es)
(d)

o
\ 
N
(for D '0.3 m)
; "14.55; Re\ 
R
G
R R
1000o
E
n"6.807Re\ 
R
; "; " R
#0.833(0.3!D ) (for D (0.3 m)
A
A "  
R
R
Lee and Kim (1988)

Cai et al. (1989)

Sun and Chen (1989)

(e)

Re "0.700Ar 
A

(f)

  
 

 

  


;
k
  0.211 0.00242  
A " E
#
k
D 
D 
(gd
E
R
R
N
o !o  o /(o !o )!e
E
N N
E
KD
; "1.74d N
A
N
o
1!e
E
KD
where
0.6D
R
Z "2.25
d
A
d
#0.6D 

R
o !o
o /(o !o )!e
N
E
N N
E
KD
d
"1.32d

N
o
1!e
E
KD

o
E
o
E

o !o
N
E
o
E

 g 
#;
KD
Z 
A

 
D
R
d
N

 

(g)

(h)

Leu, Huang and Gua (1990)

Re "0.568Ar 
A

(i)

Horio (1991)

Re "0.936Ar 
A

( j)

Nakajima et al. (1991)

Re "0.663Ar 
A

(k)

Dunham et al. (1993)

Re "1.201Ar (H/D )  MN BN > 


A
R
for Group A and B articles, and
Re "1.027Ar (H/D )  MN BN > 
A
R
for Group D particles

(l)

Bi and Grace (1995) (DPF data)

Re "1.243Ar 
A

(n)

Bi and Grace (1995) (APF data)

Re "0.565Ar 
A

(o)

Chehbouni, Chaouki, Guy and Klvana (1995)

; /(gD "0.463Ar 


A
R

(p)

Geldart and Rhodes (1986) accounted for ;A in terms


of transport of particulate material beyond the pressure
taps recording the #uctuations. With increasing gas #ow,
the bed expands, while freeboard hold-up increases caus-

(m)

ing a decrease in bed height. ;A was said to be reached


when the two opposing processes balance, i.e. where the
bed height reaches a maximum. Such a mechanism,
however, fails to explain the maximum in the pressure

4796

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

#uctuations with two pressure taps always immersed in


the dense bed. Furthermore, Avidan and Yerushalmi
(1982), Zhao and Yang (1991) and Svensson, Johnsson
and Leckner (1993) showed that ;A based on bed expansion and standard deviation of both absolute and di!erential pressure #uctuations does not correspond to the
point at which the bed height reaches a maximum because the bed height continues to increase beyond ;A .
Sun and Chen (1989) modelled the transition based on
the maximum stable bubble size. ;A is assumed to be
reached when bubbles reach their maximum stable size at
a certain height, causing bubble breakdown to become
predominant. With the bubble size predicted by the
equation of Rowe (1976), they obtained:
;A ";KD #d  g /z 
(2)
A
with d  estimated (Harrison, Davidson & de Kock,
1961) by
o !o
N
E !e
KD
o !oE
oE
(3)
d  "1.32dN N
oE
1!eKD
and z correlated by
A
0.6DR
 
zA "2.25
d .
(4)
d  #0.6DR



Based on the coherence function of pressure signals


from two pressure transducers one above the other, Cai,
Jin, Yu and Wang (1990) postulated that the bed undergoes a transition from bubbling to turbulent #uidization
when bubble break-up predominates over coalescence.
Hence ; is said to be reached when:
A
*N
"0
(5)
*; 33A
where N is the number of bubbles per unit bed volume.
Cai et al. (1990) derived equations for ;A with the bubble
rise velocity estimated by the Davidson and Harrison
(1963) equation, and the bed voidage correlated
(Cai et al., 1989) by

0.00894
e" 0.796#
D
R

 

Re  
Ar

maximum stable size when their wakes transform from


a closed laminar to an open turbulent structure. When
a following bubble enters a turbulent wake of a leading
bubble, the trailing bubble tends to split. The onset of
massive bubble break-up then transforms the #ow from
bubbling to turbulent #uidization as bubble splitting
becomes dominant. The analysis led to:
2.59Ar l
B
;A ";KD #
>!0.3Ar 

(7)

where >"0.8 for Group A particles, while lB can be


estimated by
l "0.00374Ar 
(8)
B
based on experimental data for spherical particles evaluated from a rotating cylinder viscometer (SchuK gerl, Merz
& Fetting, 1961) and from bubble shapes (Grace, 1970).
All of these criteria relate the transition process to
a change of void behaviour in non-slugging systems.
Bubble behaviour at high gas velocities, however, is not
well understood due to severe distortion caused by
bubble}bubble interactions. A key point in seeking the
transition mechanism is to understand void behaviour at
high gas velocities.

3. Transition from turbulent to fast 6uidization


The transition from turbulent #uidization to fast #uidization is characterized by signi"cant entrainment of
particles, setting an upper limit on the gas velocity for
batch operation, and a lower limit for the disappearance
of the upper dense}dilute interface. There are two types
of transition criteria, one based on solids entrainment
behaviour and the other on solids concentration pro"les.
Table 3 classi"es existing criteria into these two
categories.
3.1. Transport velocity (; ) based on phase diagram
method

(6)

Li, Kwauk and Reh (1992) predicted ;A based on


energy dissipation minimization. ;A was predicted to be
reached when the bubble phase volume fraction reached
0.5, as proposed by Grace (1986b). However, Hyre and
Glicksman (1997) discount the idea of energy or pressure
drop minimization. Yamazaki et al. (1991) considered the
formation of vertically aligned bubbles connected by
channels at the transition from bubbling to turbulent
#uidization. The channel fraction was found to be almost
zero in the bubbling condition, increasing rapidly
beyond ;A .
Based on an analogy to gas}liquid two-phase #ow, Bi,
Grace and Lim (1995a) postulated that bubbles reach

According to Yerushalmi and Cankurt (1979), a critical solid circulation rate may exist where a sharp change
in the pressure gradient occurs when the solids circulation rate is varied at a given gas velocity in the riser of
a circulating #uidized bed (see Fig. 5). As the gas velocity
increases beyond a certain point, the sharp change in
pressure gradient disappears, with the gas velocity at this
critical point de"ned as the transport velocity ; . This
method has been widely used to determine the transport
velocity. However, some researchers (Rhodes & Geldart,
1986a; Schnitzlein & Weinstein, 1988; Bi, Grace & Zhu,
1995b) reported that it was di$cult to identify such
a transition point in their systems, while a close examination of the pressure gradient pro"les reported by

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

4797

Table 3
Methods for determining transition from turbulent to fast #uidization
Author

Method

Type

Lewis Gilliland and Bauer (1949)


Yerushalmi Turner and Squires (1976)
Schnitzlein and Weinstein (1988)
Yerushalmi and Cankurt (1979)
Bi, Jang and Fan (1991)
Horio et al. (1992)
Adanez, de Diego and Gayan (1993)
Chen, Li, Wang, Wang and Kwauk (1980)
Li and Kwauk (1980)
Leu et al. (1990)
Yang, Rong, Chen and Chen (1990)
Han, Lee and Kim (1985)
Perales et al. (1991)
Chehbouni et al. (1995)
Schnitzlein and Weinstein (1988)
Le Palud and Zenz (1989)
Bi et al. (1995b)

Bed expansion versus ;

Solid concentration

!dP/dz};}G phase diagram


Q

Solid concentration

Voidage } ;}G phase diagram


Q

Solid concentration

Pressure #uctuations

Solid concentration

Emptying-time versus ;

Entrainment

Maximum G versus ;
Q
Elutriability versus d
N
Saturated G versus ;
Q

Entrainment
Entrainment
Entrainment

Fig. 5. De"nition of transport velocity, ; , by Yerushalmi and



Cankurt (1979).

Yerushalmi and Cankurt (1979) reveals that ; varies


with axial location.
An analysis by Bi (1994) showed that the transport
velocity, ; , based on the phase diagram of Yerushalmi
and Cankurt (1979) may indicate a transition of axial
voidage pro"les in the riser, analogous to the `critical
pointa in a phase diagram (Matsen, 1982; Klinzing, 1981).
Below this velocity, a distinct interface exists between the
top dilute region and the bottom dense region when
a su$cient solids circulation rate can be ensured. Beyond
this velocity, the interface becomes relatively di!use. The
variation of voidage with height tends to be relatively
smooth. However, such a transition relies on the
measurement method and on interpretation of the data.
Li and Kwauk (1980) de"ned a transport velocity in
circulating #uidized-bed systems, based on a plot of bed

voidage versus solids circulation rate at various super"cial gas velocities. They de"ned the transport velocity as
the point below which the bed remained in a dense
condition and above which the unit could be operated in
a dilute phase transport state. This transport velocity is
clearly lower than that de"ned by Yerushalmi and
Cankurt (1979).
To increase the accuracy of determining the transport
velocity, Horio, Ishii and Nishimuro (1992) calculated
the maximum [*(!dP/dz)/*GQ ]3 at di!erent gas velocities and then plotted this derivative against the super"cial gas velocity. The resulting curve allows ; to be
determined by extrapolation. Several correlations have
been developed to predict the transport velocity, ; , as
listed in Table 4. In view of the scatter in the experimental
data due to changes in measurement location, column
diameter, height, etc., it is di$cult to judge which correlation gives the best prediction.
3.2. Critical velocity, ;QC , based on solids entrainment
Solids entrainment in #uidized beds at low and intermediate gas velocities has been well documented (e.g. see

Table 4
Correlations for ;

Author

Equation

Lee and Kim (1990b)


Re "2.916Ar 

Perales et al. (1991)
Re "1.415Ar 

Bi and Fan (1992)
Re "2.28Ar 

Adanez et al. (1993)
Re "2.078Ar 

Tsukada, Nakamishi and Horio (1994) Re "1.806Ar 

Chehbouni et al. (1995)
Re "0.169Ar (D /d ) 

R N

4798

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

Fig. 6. De"nition of transition velocity, ; (Bi et al., 1995b).


QC

Geldart, 1986). Entrainment at higher ; has also been


reported in recent years (e.g. Yerushalmi et al., 1978; Gao,
Zhao, Qiu & Ma, 1991). In gas}solids transport systems,
solids #ux and gas velocity are related by

;
GQ "oN (1!e) !;  .
e

(9)

Since the apparent bed density at high gas velocities is


not sensitive to the gas velocity and solids circulation
rate (Bi et al., 1995b), a linear relationship between
GQ and ; in the high gas velocity range with e constant in
Fig. 6 suggests that ;  approaches a constant value,
which can be determined from the intercept and slope of
the linear portion of the curve. ;QC can be considered to
correspond to the onset of signi"cant entrainment for an
assembly of particles. Schnitzlein and Weinstein (1988)
proposed that the maximum solids circulation attainable
at a given gas velocity be plotted versus the super"cial
gas velocity. The transport velocity determined by extrapolation of the linear section of the curve to GQ "0 is the
same as ;QC de"ned by Bi et al. (1995b). ;QC also appears
to be similar to the critical velocity de"ned in gas}liquid
vertical transport systems demarcating the transition
from counter-current to co-current upward transport
(Wallis, 1969).
The critical velocity ;QC can also be determined in
batch-operated #uidized beds by measuring solids entrainment or the time required to empty the bed. In a tall
#uidized bed with particle inventory, = , the time required to blow all the bed particles out of the column
(so-called emptying time) is related to the entrainment
rate by:
C "= /GQ A

(10)

Fig. 7. Reciprocal of bed emptying time as a function of ; based on


data of Perales et al. (1991) for FCC particles, d "80 lm,
N
o "1715 kg/m.
N

where GQ is the entrainment #ux, corresponding to the


solids circulation #ux in a circulating #uidized bed
measured at the exit of the column, and A is the riser
cross-sectional area. ;QC can then be determined, as demonstrated in Fig. 7 for the data of Perales et al. (1991), by
plotting 1/C versus super"cial gas velocity.
Bi et al. (1995b) collected and analysed available
;QC data based on the entrainment and emptying-time
methods. It was found that ;QC is independent of column
dimensions (i.e. riser height, riser diameter), geometry
(e.g. solids feed device) and solids inventory when large
diameter, tall risers are used. ;QC , like ;KD , can thus be
considered a property of the bed material and gas
properties alone. Available data were correlated by
ReQC "1.53Ar . For large particles where ReQC from this
equation is less than ReR , Bi et al. suggested that ;QC be
taken as equal to the single particle terminal velocity, ;R .
3.3. Transition velocity, ;I , based on pressure yuctuations
The transition velocity ;I has been found to be
a strong function of the con"guration and the solids
return system (Rhodes & Geldart, 1986b; Schnitzlein
& Weinstein, 1988; Bi & Grace, 1995). In units where
entrained particles are e$ciently captured and returned
to the bottom of the dense bed, the standard deviation
does not level o! until transport is reached, i.e. where
particles are carried over signi"cantly. Based on existing
experimental data, Bi and Fan (1992) showed that ;I is
more or less the same as the transport velocity, ; .
Chehbouni et al. (1994), on the other hand, found that

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

4799

tify the transition to turbulent #uidization and may instead correspond to the transition to fast #uidization.
Several correlations have been developed for the prediction of ;I as listed in Table 5.
3.4. Comparison of ; , ;QC and ;I
Table 6 compares experimental ; , ;QC and ;I data
from di!erent sources. ; is generally higher than ;QC ,
indicating that the change in the upper interface of the
bed occurs at higher gas velocities than that corresponding to signi"cant entrainment of particles. Also, ;I is
close to ;QC , con"rming that the levelling-o! of pressure
#uctuations is related to signi"cant entrainment.
3.5. Identixcation of data pertaining to turbulent yuidization regime

Fig. 8. Voidage and standard deviation of pressure #uctuations


as a function of super"cial gas velocity (adapted from Schnitzlein
& Weinstein, 1988).

;I could be determined from di!erential pressure #uctuations, but not from absolute pressure #uctuations.
The levelling-o! of the standard deviation of pressure
#uctuations in Fig. 8 (Schnitzlein & Weinstein, 1988) is
mainly caused by the levelling-o! of bed voidage (Bi,
1994). Hence ;I is not a well-de"ned criterion to quanTable 5
Correlations for ;
I
Author

Equation

Yerushalmi and Cankurt (1979)


Horio (1991)

; "7.0(o d ) !0.77
I
N N
Re "1.41Ar  for Ar(10
I
Re "1.46Ar  for Ar'10
I
Re "0.601Ar  for Ar(125
I
Re "2.28Ar  for Ar'125
I
Re "1.31Ar 
I

Bi and Fan (1992)


Tsukada et al. (1993)

In the subsequent sections of this review, we consider


hydrodynamics, heat and mass transfer, dispersion and
chemical reaction in cases where some or all of the data
almost certainly correspond to the turbulent #uidization
#ow regime, as determined by having ;A ););QC ,
where ;A is based on Eq. (o) in Table 2, and ;QC on
ReQC "1.53Ar  as discussed in Section 3.2.
4. Local 6ow structure
4.1. Local voidage and void-phase fraction
As the gas velocity is increased from the bubbling
regime into the turbulent regime, di!erent behaviour is
observed, in particular a di!use bed surface, turbulent
motion of solids clusters, and voids of irregular shapes
(Venderbosch, 1998). Many of those who have studied
turbulent #uidized beds, beginning with Lanneau (1960)
have assumed two distinct phases as in bubbling
beds } a dilute (or void) phase largely empty of particles
and a dense phase containing most of the particles and
interstitial gas. If this approach is adopted, a volume

Table 6
Comparison of ; , ; and ; based on literature data
 QC
I
Author

Particles

; (m/s)
I

; (m/s)
QC

; (m/s)


Yerushalmi and Cankurt (1979)

FCC
HFZ-20
FCC
9G Al
Al 25
CBZ-1
FCC
sand
Polyethylene
Sand

0.61
1.37
NA
1.45
1.98
1.38
0.60
3.50
NA
NA

0.90
1.50
1.25
1.50
1.75
1.11
0.55
NA
1.60
2.50

1.37
2.10
1.80
NA
NA
NA
1.10
4.50
2.25
'5

Chen et al. (1980)


Rhodes and Geldart (1986b)

Horio et al. (1992)


Bi et al. (1991)
Bi et al. (1995b)

4800

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

balance on the solids gives


1!e"dT (1!eT )#(1!dT )(1!eB )
(11)
where e is the overall voidage, dT is the void phase volume
fraction, eT is the void phase voidage and eB is the densephase voidage.
As the gas velocity is increased in the turbulent regime,
the volume fraction of voids increases, while the densephase voidage increases above eKD . The dense-phase
voidage is important in inventory control, process modelling and determination of pressure balances in #uidized
beds (King, 1989). The measured average void fraction
has been used to estimate the dense-phase voidage
(Yamazaki et al., 1991), suggesting expansion of the dense
phase when there is a transition from the bubbling to the
turbulent #ow regime. Similarly, Werther and Wein
(1994), using Geldart's Group B particles, observed a signi"cant increase of dense-phase voidage, obtained from
the probability density distribution of the capacitance
probe signals, with increasing gas velocity. There was no
clear in#uence of radial position on the dense-phase
voidage. In both of these studies, point density measurements were analysed to deduce the phase fractions from
probability density functions. However, in such measurements the threshold value in the probability distribution
function strongly in#uences the derived phase fraction, so
that this method is questionable.
Lee and Kim (1989b) indirectly measured the dilutephase fraction, and the interstitial gas rise velocity from
tracer gas measurements in the dense and the dilute phases
using Geldart group B particles. No direct measurements
of dense-phase voidage were reported for ;'0.5 m/s,
possibly due to the di$culty of conducting collapse tests
for high velocity #uidized beds. Wang, Wang, Jin and Yu
(1997) conducted collapse tests in a column which physically separated the bed and freeboard, thereby eliminating
accumulation of entrained particles on top of the bed
surface as it collapsed. The dense phase voidage did not
vary with gas velocity between 0.1 and 0.5 m/s, in agreement with Yamazaki et al. (1991).
Local void fractions have also been deduced from
probes which can di!erentiate between the phases. Optical "bre probes have revealed an increase in the nonuniformity of radial pro"les of local voidage for turbulent
#uidized beds with increasing height (Nakajima et al.,
1991; Farag, Ege, Grislinga s & deLasa, 1997; Zhang,
Qian, Guo & Zhang, 1997) and increasing gas velocity
(Zhang et al., 1997; Nakajima et al., 1991). Representative
trends appear in Fig. 9.
The work of Nakajima et al. (1991) suggests the possibility of di!erent circulation #ow patterns for di!erent
static bed heights, i.e. 4DR versus 6.5DR . The shallower bed
revealed a gross circulation pattern, in line with other
"ndings (Avidan & Yerushalmi, 1982; Abed, 1984;
Zhang, Guo, Li & Zhang, 1996). With voids rising
through the centre of the column and dense phase de-

Fig. 9. Radial distributions of void fraction for spent FCC catalysts:


0.2 m diameter bed, 0.85 m static bed height, ;: 0.13}0.93 m/s, axial
position above distributor: z"0.1 and 0.7 m (adapted from Nakajima
et al., 1991).

scending near the wall, a di!erent circulation pattern was


observed for the deeper bed. The radial non-uniformity
decreased for the higher static bed height due to smaller
voids near the wall at higher axial positions. Farag et al.
(1997) found two circulation cells in a column of diameter
0.3 m, and a more homogeneous #ow structure for
a 0.5 m diameter column in the turbulent regime. The
greater homogeneity for the larger column could result
from a lesser wall e!ect and from turbulent eddies disrupting gulf streaming (Ege, 1995).
Due to the #uctuating and di!use bed surface in turbulent #uidized beds, it is not possible to determine bed
expansion solely by visual observation. Pressure pro"les
are commonly used to characterize the bed expansion
and overall voidage. However, this method has been
criticized (Werther & Wein, 1994) as yielding values
which are too high due to the acceleration of particles in
the region close to the distributor.
A modi"ed Richardson}Zaki equation has been applied to both Group A particles (Avidan & Yerushalmi,
1982) and Group B particles (Lee & Kim, 1990b) for
correlating the average voidage with the super"cial gas
velocity within the turbulent #uidization regime. Avidan
(1980) introduced an e!ective terminal cluster velocity,
;H
R , such that
;/;H
(12)
R "eL.
A recent summary of ;H
R and the index `na was provided
by Venderbosch (1998).
4.2. Local void size and rise velocity
In the previous section, voids were treated as distinct
entities as in bubbling beds. Local void size and rise

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

velocity have been investigated in the turbulent #uidized


regime as analogous to the bubbling regime (Lanneau,
1960; Yamazaki et al., 1991; Lu, Xu, Shi and Shen (1997);
Farag et al., 1997; Taxil, Guigon, Archimbault &
Gauthier, 1998). However, voids in turbulent #uidized
beds tend to be small and transient, with indistinct or
irregular boundaries (Rowe & MacGillivray, 1980; Lee
& Kim, 1989a). Lanneau (1960) concluded that voids
were small, rapid and losing their identity for
;'0.6 m/s. The void sizes depend on the mechanisms of
coalescence and splitting as voids rise. Wall proximity
clearly a!ects these factors. Local void sizes inferred from
probes provide little information on their behaviour.
Werther and Wein (1994) claim that for Geldart group
B particles, both void dimensions and their rising velocities can be predicted with reasonable accuracy from
results obtained in bubbling beds. For Group A particles,
however, the void rise velocity showed considerable deviation from the Davidson and Harrison correlation (1963)
for ;';A (Yamazaki et al., 1991).
Lu et al. (1997) extended a bubble diameter correlation
of bubbling beds to a turbulent #uidized bed, using
Group A particles. Experimental studies indicated that
the coalescence and splitting mechanisms di!ered in the
central core (r/R)0.4), an intermediate region
(0.4(r/R(0.8) and near the wall (r/R*0.8). There was
favourable agreement with the model of Horio and
Nonaka (1987) which considers both bubble splitting and
coalescence, as well as a modi"ed two-phase model in
determining bubble frequencies. Voids grew in the distributor region, and decreased in size in the centre of the
column. In contrast, Zhang et al. (1997) found a uniform
distribution of void size and rise velocity along both the
axial and the radial directions in a 0.19 m column. The
bubble size was correlated by
d "(1.34#0.8;);10\ (m).

(13)

The local #ow structure seems to be greatly in#uenced by


the equipment, so that caution must be exercised in
applying such correlations to other columns.
The most common method of obtaining the void rise
velocity is to cross-correlate the signals from two sensors
which are aligned vertically and a known distance apart
(Bendat & Piersol, 1971). The optimum distance between
the probes depends on the frequency and the waveform
under investigation.
Yamazaki et al. (1991) and Lee and Kim (1989a) have
shown for "ne and coarse particles, respectively, that
the mean void rise velocity increases with ; up to around
the transition velocity, ;A , and then tapers o! or remains
constant (see Fig. 10). Lee and Kim (1989a) also noted
variations of void rise velocity from the centre to the wall.
Farag et al. (1997) reported negative rise velocities in the
centre of a column of diameter 0.3 m, indicating a circulation pattern where gas travels downwards near the axis
and upwards near the wall. Taxil et al. (1998) found little

4801

Fig. 10. Mean bubble size and bubble rise velocity for spent FCC
catalysts: 0.2 m diameter bed, 0.85 m static bed height (adapted from
Yamazaki et al., 1991).

correlation between the void chord length and rise velocity. Reported void properties in turbulent #uidized beds
are summarized in Table 7.

4.3. Radial and axial voidage distribution


The inhomogeneity of the solids hold-up in a turbulent
#uidized bed was investigated by Abed (1984) using
capacitance probes. Downward #ow was found along the
wall coupled with accelerated upward #ow at higher
voidage in the interior of the column. Hydrodynamic
parameters such as void phase fraction and dense-phase
voidage (emulsion void fraction) were derived from the
probability density function of local signals. Even beyond
the transition to the turbulent #ow regime, the gas continued to #ow preferentially up the centre of the bed.
Using Geldart group B particles and a capacitance
probe, Werther and Wein (1994) reported a shift to higher voidage in the central region as the gas velocity increased from 0.38 to 2.05 m/s.
Lu et al. (1996) correlated the local voidage with respect
to radial position based on optical "bre probe measurements without including any in#uence of axial position:

 





r
r 
r 
r 
#a
#a
#a
(14)
e"a #a
R
R
R
R
where for ;"0.954 m/s, a "0.868, a "!0.891,
a "0.383, a "1.308, and a "!1.218. An alternative expression due to Wang and Wei (1997) is



1!e
r 
"0.908#0.276
.
1!e
R

(15)

Comparison of data from larger (Lu et al., 1996; Wang


& Wei, 1997) and smaller (Abed, 1984; Li, Reh, Tung

4802

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

Table 7
Summary of hydrodynamic parameters determined in turbulent #uidized beds
Investigators

Parameters studied

Method

D
R
(m)

d
N
(lm)

;
(m/s)

;
A
(m/s)

Static bed
height (m)

z
N
(m)

Lanneau (1960)
Lee and Kim (1989a)

Void size
Void rise velocity

Capacitance probe
Pressure transducer

0.76
0.1

40}80
362

0.03}1.5
0.3}1.3

N/A
1.1

4.6
1.0

Optical "bre probe

0.2

64

0.13}1.33

0.50

0.85

64

0.16}0.80

0.50

1.30

87

0.27}1.59

0.65

0.85

Optical "bre probe

0.2

64

0.45}1.1

0.55

0.85

2.3
0.35
0.55
0.1
0.7
0.1
1.3
0.1
0.7
0.5

Optical "bre probe

0.3

65

0.45

0.6, 0.9

0.21, 0.60

Void rise Velocity


Void size

Optical "bre probe

0.5

65

0.34
0.40
0.52
0.4
0.55
0.7

0.45

1.6

0.1, 0.4,
0.8,
1.2

Zhang et al. (1997)

Void phase fraction


Void rise velocity
Void size

Optical "bre probe

0.20

77.6

0.39
0.59
0.78
0.98

N/A

0.88
1.15

Lu et al. (1997)

Void size

Optical "bre probe

0.71

69.2

0.44}0.86

0.43

0.6

0.15
0.35
0.55
0.75
0.85
0.23, 0.36,
0.85

75.0

0.44}0.99

0.48

0.6

0.23, 0.36,
0.85

95

0.2}1.7

0.52

1.3

0.386

Nakajima et al. (1991) Void phase fraction

Yamazaki et al. (1991) Void rise velocity


Void size
Farag et al. (1997)
Void phase fraction

Taxil et al. (1998)

Void rise Velocity

Optical "bre probe

0.2

; calculated based on Eq. (o) in Table 2.


A

& Kwauk, 1990; Issangya, 1998; Chaouki, Gonzalez,


Guy & Klvana, 1999a) columns suggest that the former
show #atter pro"les in the interior of the column due to
a reduced wall e!ect. Table 8 summarizes the published
work on radial voidage distributions in turbulent
#uidized beds.
Axial voidage distributions in turbulent beds are
characterized by a smooth increase of gas volume concentration with height in the freeboard, with the voidage
remaining &0.65 to 0.75 in the bed. As the gas velocity
increases, the average solids concentration in the bed
calculated from pressure drop measurement decreases
(Fig. 11). Both Horio et al. (1992) and Venderbosch (1998)
reported that the decrease in hold-up moved higher with
increasing static bed height. A summary of data on the
axial distribution of voidage in turbulent #uidized beds is
presented in Table 9.
4.4. Turbulence characteristics
Despite the inclusion of the word `turbulenta in the
title of the #ow regime under consideration, there have
been only limited attempts to determine the turbulence

characteristics of #uidized beds operated in the turbulent


#uidization #ow regime. The standard deviation of voidage #uctuations, widely used to determine the onset of the
regime as described in Section 2, can itself be considered
to be a measure of the intensity of turbulence. The macroscale of turbulence is clearly related to the size of the
transient voids which appear and disappear, while
the dominant frequency is determined by the frequency
of these voids. Probability distributions, power spectral
distributions, intermittency characteristics and cycle
frequencies have also been reported for Type 1 and
Type II (see Section 2.1) turbulent #uidized beds, respectively (Bai et al., 1999; M'chirgui et al., 1999; Lin, Wei
& Jin, 2000).
SterneH us, Johnsson, Leckner and Palchonok (1999)
speculate that much of the gas-phase turbulence encountered in circulating #uidized beds originates in voids rising
and bursting in the dense lower region of the riser. These
authors ascribe bubbling and slugging to this bottom
region, but the lower dense region is often found to be
subject to turbulent bed hydrodynamics. Palchonok,
Johnsson and Leckner (1997) operated CFB boilers
with and without dense bottom regions and estimated

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

4803

Table 8
Summary of literature data on radial voidage distribution in turbulent #uidized beds
Investigators

Morooka, Kawazuishi
and Kato (1980)
Abed (1984)
Li et al. (1990)
Werther and Wein (1994)
Lu et al. (1996)
Wang and Wei (1997)
Issangya (1998)
Xu, Sun, Nomura, Li
and Kato (1999)

Method

D
R

d
N

;
A

(m)

(lm)

(m/s)
(0.5

0.4

1.0

0.875
1.48
*
0.14}2.75
7 levels
0.6
0.36}1.09
0.38
3.0

Capacitance probe

0.12

Capacitance probe
Optical "bre probe
Capacitance probe

0.152
0.09
0.6

54.8
54
120

0.03}0.55
*
0.38, 2.05

N/A
0.34
0.77

*
*
0.65

Optical
Optical
Optical
Optical

0.71
0.47
0.076
0.09

75
54
70
54

0.41}0.95
0.38}0.95
0.43}0.70
0.11}3.15

0.48
0.41
0.48
0.34

0.60
0.58
0.46
*

"bre
"bre
"bre
"bre

probe
probe
probe
probe

65}68

z
N

(m/s)

Static bed
height
(m)

(m)

; calculated based on Eq. (o) in Table 2.


A
Table 9
Summary of literature data on axial voidage distribution in turbulent #uidized beds
Investigators

Method

D
R
(m)

d
N
(lm)

Horio et al. (1992)

Optical "bre probe

0.05

60

Werther and Wein (1994)


Wang and Wei (1997)
Venderbosch (1998)

Capacitance probe
Optical "bre probe
Pressure transducer

0.6
0.47
0.05

120
54
90

z
N
(m)

;
(m/s)

;
A
(m/s)

Static bed
height (m)

0.3}5.5

0.5

0.38}2.05
0.38}0.95
0.6, 0.8, 1.0

0.77
0.41
0.58

H '0.7 m
0.98
KD
G "25.6 kg/ms
Q
0.65
0.14}2.75
0.58
0.36}1.09
0.06}0.16
As indicated in
Fig. 11

; calculated based on Eq. (o) in Table 2.


A

#uidization #ow regime has been found to exhibit unique


chaotic properties (Bai et al., 1999).

5. Gas and solids mixing


5.1. Gas mixing

Fig. 11. Axial solids concentration pro"le: 0.05 m diameter bed, 0.12 m
static bed height (adapted from Venderbosch, 1998).

dominant frequencies and other gas-phase turbulent


characteristics in both cases. The (commonly turbulent)
dense bottom region appears to play a major role in
determining the overall riser turbulence characteristics.
Fluidized beds in general, de"nitely including those
operated in the turbulent #ow regime, have been found to
be chaotic (e.g. see van der Stappen, 1996). The turbulent

The gas #ow pattern becomes di$cult to analyse in the


turbulent #ow regime as it develops into intermittent
continuous and discontinuous phases. Information on
the mixing behaviour of gas is vital for predicting reactor
performance.
The axial dispersion model is commonly applied to
characterize the dispersion of #uid in #uidized beds. Axial
mixing of gas in a turbulent #uidized bed can be characterized by three coe$cients: the axial dispersion coe$cient,
a backmixing coe$cient; and the radial gas mixing coe$cient. These coe$cients are related (SchuK gerl, 1967) by
DX E
D
b;DR
" @ E #
;DR ;DR
DP E

(16)

where b characterizes the nature of the velocity pro"le in


the tube (van Deemter, 1980). For turbulent #uidized

4804

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

beds, 5;10\(b(5;10\ based on radial concentration pro"les (Cankurt & Yerushalmi, 1978). The small
magnitude of b has been used to justify eliminating the
radial dispersion term, especially for Group A particles
(Yerushalmi & Avidan, 1985; Li & Wu, 1991).
A number of studies have investigated axial gas dispersion in turbulent #uidized beds as summarized in Table
10. A pulse of injected tracer was detected at two di!erent
locations in the bed, one above the other, by Foka et al.
(1996) and Li and Wu (1991). The residence time distribution between these locations was then obtained by numerical deconvolution. The measurements obtained
through this method yield a `transient response functiona (Nauman & Bu!ham, 1983), since one or both of
the boundaries was open. It is necessary to obtain additional information on the #ow structure to deduce the
`truea RTD.
Li and Wu (1991) introduced hydrogen as a tracer to
study the gas RTD in a #uidized bed of FCC particles.
The axial solids concentration measurement from the
sectional pressure drops ensured that the two probes
were subject to the same #ow regime. The gas dispersion
coe$cient was computed to "t RTD curves from a onedimensional pseudo-homogeneous di!usion model and
was correlated by
DX E "0.1835e\ 

(17)

suggesting that the dispersion coe$cient decreases


strongly with increasing bed voidage. Tracer injection
0.3 m above the distributor cannot ensure uniform introduction of tracer across the bed. With no explicit inclusion of operating conditions, the above correlation is
likely limited to small columns.
Foka et al. (1996) injected radioactive argon to
obtain RTD data, which were then "tted to both dispersive and two-phase models. The dispersion coe$cient
again decreased with increasing voidage and velocity
once in the turbulent regime (Fig. 12). A correlation was
given as

 

;HR
d \ 
PeE "
"4.4;10\Ar  N
.
DX E
DR

(18)

The same experimental data were also "tted to the twophase model of van Deemter (1980).
Ege (1995) injected pulses of helium into the main
air#ow upstream of the wind chamber. Two thermal
conductivity detectors were aligned vertically, one above
the other in the bed. Pulse injection into the 0.3 m diameter column with 1.4 m static bed height led to a double
peak for a detector 0.4 m above the distributor. This was
attributed to a decrease in the ratio of distributor pressure drop to bed pressure drop, causing #uctuation in the
tracer #ow. Further analysis of the measurements resulted in a core-annulus model (see Section 9). Published
gas mixing data from larger columns is lacking.

Fig. 12. Gas axial dispersion coe$cient versus super"cial gas velocity
for FCC particles: 0.1 m diameter bed (adapted from Foka et al., 1996).

The one-dimensional axial dispersion model was applied successfully to Mobil's MTG process in scaling up
from 0.04 m diameter reactor, through 0.1 m, to a ba%ed
0.6 m diameter demonstration plant (Edwards & Avidan,
1986). Sulfur hexa#uoride, an absorbing tracer, was injected upstream of the distributor ensuring plug #ow tracer
injection. The detector was located 1.8 m above the bed.
Measurements were obtained for di!erent average bed
and freeboard voidages (Krambeck, Avidan, Lee & Lo,
1987). The axial dispersion coe$cient increased with
increasing column diameter.
Guo (1987) employed hydrogen gas and a thermoconductivity cell to analyse gas mixing in a two-dimensional bed. The axial dispersion coe$cient increased linearly with static bed height. A similar trend was found by
Cankurt and Yerushalmi (1978). Wei, Lin and Yang
(1993), on the other hand, studied the gas mixing in
a 5.8 m diameter commercial FCC regenerator and
found that the gas axial dispersion coe$cient was proportional to the square root of the column diameter.
Gas dispersion in a turbulent #uidized bed is caused by
turbulent mixing and molecular di!usion in addition to
non-uniform velocity pro"les. Van Deemter (1980) distinguished smaller-scale mixing, related to turbulent eddies,
from mixing induced by di!erences in vertical velocities.
In order to understand the dispersion behaviour, it may
be necessary to investigate the void/bubble breakdown
mechanisms. Guo (1987) concluded that void breakdown
is caused by turbulent eddies. Such macro-scale eddies
clearly provide an important mixing mechanism in turbulent #uidized beds.
Given the lack of a widely applicable approach for
predicting gas mixing in turbulent beds, we propose
a new and improved correlation covering existing data,
the "rst seven papers tabulated in Table 10, over a wide
range of bed voidage and column diameters for axial gas

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

4805

Table 10
Sources of literature data on axial gas dispersion in turbulent #uidized beds
Investigators
(gas}tracer)

Model

Tracer injection

d (lm)
N

D
R
(m)

;
(m/s)

;
A
(m/s)

D
X E
(m/s)

Cankurt and Yerushalmi


(1978)
(Air}CH )


One dimensional
dispersion

Steady state

55

0.152

0.21
0.81
1.17
1.50

0.36

0.38
0.50
0.57
0.32

Edwards and Avidan


(1986)
(Air}SF )


1-D axial dispersion

Pulse

Group A with 0.1


(15%
0.6
40 lm "nes

0.6
0.6

N/A

0.587
0.838

Lee and Kim (1989b)


(Air}CO )


Di!usion process with


axial and radial
dispersion coe$cients

Steady state

362

0.1

0.8
0.88
1.00
1.08
1.20

0.85

0.220
0.235
0.230
0.245
0.215

Li and Weinstein (1989)


(Air}He)

One dimensional
dispersion

Steady state

59

0.152

0.1
0.5
1.3

0.43

0.1
0.55
0.60

Li and Wu (1991)
(Air}H )


1D pseudo-homogeneous
di!usion

Non-ideal pulse

58

0.09

1.0
1.0
1.0

0.44

0.45
0.51
0.56

Foka et al. (1994)

One dimensional
dispersion

Pulse

75

0.1

0.417

0.47

0.080

(Air}Ar)

0.516
0.614
0.691
0.792
0.892
0.977
1.051
1.142

0.102
0.110
0.195
0.130
0.167
0.097
0.060
0.075

Foka et al. (1996)


(Air}Ar)

Two-phase model of van


Deemter (1980)

Pulse (less than 0.5 s) 75

0.1

0.21}0.94

0.55

Plotted in Fig. 12

Zhang et al. (1996)


(Air}O )


Pseudo-homogeneous
model with axial and
radial dispersion

Steady state

77.6

0.19

0.392
0.588
0.784
1.078

0.50

0.374
0.514
0.619
0.783

Wei et al. (1993)


(Air}#ue gas)

One dimensional
dispersion

Steady state

58

5.76

1.26
1.41

0.41

3.05
3.4

; calculated based on Eq. (o) in Table 2.


A

mixing in the turbulent #uidization #ow regime:

 

;HR
H  
"3.47Ar  Re  Sc\  R
.
PeE "
DX E
DR
(19)
This equation is recommended in the absence of speci"c
data for the unit in question.
A general problem associated with the axial dispersion
model is that it cannot di!erentiate between the spread in
longitudinal velocity and contributions from backmixing

(Briens, Margaritis & Wild, 1995). Continuous tracer


injection yields the steady-state component of di!usion
while eliminating time variations (Louge, 1997). An attempt has been made to quantify radial mixing and
backmixing using Group B particles (Lee & Kim, 1989b).
Tracer gas injected steadily at the column axis was
monitored at four positions, both upstream and downstream. The downstream radial concentration pro"le was
almost uniform. Analysis of variations in the radial dispersion coe$cient indicated that vigorous gas radial

4806

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

Fig. 13. In#uence of gas velocity on gas backmixing: G "15.4 kg/ms


Q
(Li & Wu, 1991).

exchange was present between the dilute and dense


phases. This was attributed to breakdown of slugs into
smaller voids. If the void phase where the tracer is injected into the bed is indeed intermittent, steady-state point
injection of tracer into the bed must be time dependent,
as well as position dependent. The study may provide
some explanations of the mechanism of gas mixing; however, whether the reported values represent the actual
dispersion coe$cients is questionable due to the experimental technique.

The same steady-state technique can be applied with


gas backmixing evaluated from tracer monitored upstream. Down#ow of gas can occur when the downward
velocity of solids exceeds the relative interstitial gas velocity in the dense phase (Stephens, Sinclair & Potter,
1967). As shown in Fig. 13 (Li & Wu, 1991), a considerable radial gradient of tracer concentration exists in the
turbulent #uidization regime. In all backmixing studies
reported, summarized in Table 11, increased tracer concentration was observed near the wall. Tracer was commonly injected at the centre of the column, except for the
City College group (Cankurt & Yerushalmi, 1978; Weinstein, Li, Bandlamudi, Feindt & Gra!, 1989; Li & Weinstein, 1989) who argued that axial injection resulted in
concentrations too low to be detected in the turbulent
#uidization #ow regime. Their study showed that the
injection position greatly a!ected measured gas backmixing. When injecting tracer gases into #uidized beds, the
outcome is signi"cantly a!ected by whether the gas is
injected into voids or the dense phase. They attributed
the detection of tracer on the side of the column opposite
to the injection point as indicating considerable circumferential mixing.
Venderbosch (1998) conducted gas backmixing experiments and interpreted the results using a pseudo-homogeneous model:

ln

CXN \XG
;
"
(z !zG ).
CXG
eD@ E N

(20)

Table 11
Summary of literature data on gas backmixing in turbulent #uidized beds
Investigators

Tracer injection

D (m)
R

; (m/s)

; (m/s)
A

(m)

Cankurt and
Yerushalmi (1978)
(Air}CH )

Weinstein et al.
(1989)
(Air}He)

Steady-state injection from


centre

0.15

0.81
1.17
1.5

0.36

0.752
0.801
0.824

0.05, 0.3, 0.53,


0.84, 1.75

Steady-state injection from


r/R"2/3

0.152

1.3
1.3

0.43

0.77
0.97

0.13, 0.28, 0.61

Lee and Kim


(1989b)
(Air}CO )

Li and Wu (1991)
(Air}H )

Zhang et al. (1996)
(Air}O )


Steady-state upward injection 0.1


from centre (z"0.53 m)

1.21

0.85

0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4

Pulse injection
(z"1.5 m)

0.09

1.0
1.5

0.44

0.774
0.834

0.04

Steady-state injection from


centre (z"1.03 m)

0.19

0.392
0.588
0.784
1.078

0.50

0.632
0.673
0.715
0.776

0.09,0.19,
0.29,0.49,
0.79

Venderbosch (1998) Steady-state injection from


(N }CO)
centre


0.05

0.4
0.6
0.7

0.58

Note: : axial distance between injection and sampling points.


; calculated based on Eq. (o) in Table 2.0.
A

G (kg/ms)
Q

eD
@ E
(m/s)

69
43

15.4

0.03
0.04

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

When this model was applied to other published backmixing data, the backmixing coe$cient gradually increased with ; until it reached a maximum (at ;+;A ),
beyond which it decreased.
Cankurt and Yerushalmi (1978) concluded that gas
backmixing diminishes when the turbulent #ow regime
is achieved. This trend is supported by Li and Wu (1991)
and Bai, Yi, Jin and Yu (1992). As the gas velocity
increased, a higher tracer concentration was detected
by Zhang et al. (1996). Li and Weinstein (1989) reasoned
that as the gas velocity increased, the dilute core
region expanded outwards, resulting in a higher radial
concentration gradient. Gas backmixing gradually
increased with increasing radial position, coinciding
with increasing radial solids concentration (Li & Wu,
1991).
Gas backmixing studies provide information related to
the #ow behaviour of gas in turbulent #uidized beds.
Because of the wide variations of the results, depending
on such factors as injection location, injection technique,
and model applied, care must be exercised when comparing dispersion coe$cients from di!erent studies in the
literature and in applying the results to modelling and
scale-up.
Almost all gas mixing studies have concentrated on
axial mixing. Only Lee and Kim (1990a) provide data on
radial mixing. These data suggest that radial dispersion is
about an order of magnitude less than axial dispersion, as
in bubbling beds. However, the results were only for
group B solids. More work is clearly needed, especially
for group A solids.
5.2. Solids mixing
Solid mixing in#uences gas}solid contacting, heat
transfer, temperature uniformity and gas backmixing
in #uidized-bed reactors. While many solid mixing
studies have been conducted in the bubbling and fast
#uidization regimes applying various experimental techniques, very few pertain to the turbulent regime (see
Table 12).

4807

May (1959) investigated the e!ect of column diameter


on solids mixing, but only up to ;"0.24 m/s. Mixing
was found to be much faster in larger columns, with
smaller-scale mixing superimposed on a gross circulation
pattern. Yerushalmi and Avidan (1985) investigated solid
mixing using a ferromagnetic tracer. Noting the relatively
homogeneous nature of a turbulent #uidized bed, they
applied the one-dimensional dispersion model to obtain
an apparent axial dispersion coe$cient related to a turbulent eddy size and frequency.
One of the few mixing studies on a commercial scale
unit was by Wei et al. (1993) using FCC particles in
a 5.8 m diameter column. The data suggest that the solids
axial dispersion coe$cient is proportional to the square
root of DR when compared with the Yerushalmi and
Avidan (1985) data.
Lee and Kim (1990a) studied axial mixing of solids in
a turbulent #uidized bed from steady-state axial transport of heat. Using Group B particles, they correlated the
axial Peclet number as
PeQ "4.22;10\Ar.
(21)
In the turbulent #uidization regime, the e!ective axial
dispersion coe$cient of solids increased as the gas velocity increased. Fine particles exhibited higher dispersion
coe$cients than coarser ones. This was attributed to
di!erent wake fractions, the in#uence of turbulence,
and vigourous movement of clusters in "ne particle
beds. The authors also found that there was a strong
correlation between the axial solid dispersion coe$cients
and radial gas dispersion coe$cients, as indicated in
Fig. 14, both increasing in a similar manner with
increasing gas velocity in the turbulent #uidization #ow
regime.
Based on the analogy between bubble columns and
gas-#uidized beds, Baird and Rice (1975) applied the
eddy di!usivity concept, based on the isotropic turbulence model, to solids mixing at high gas #ow rates in the
form:
E? "KD
R PK

(22)

Table 12
Summary of literature data on solids mixing in turbulent #uidized regime
Investigators

;
(m/s)

Particles

D
R
(m)

;
A
(m/s)

Model

Observations

Yerushalmi and
Avidan (1985)

0.075}1.10

Catalysts

0.152

N/A

One-dimensional
dispersion model

D proportional to the square root of bed


X Q
diameter

Lee and Kim


(1990b)

0.3}1.3

Coarse particles 0.1

0.85

Mixed tanks in series


connected by perfectly
mixed and plug #ows

D lower for coarser particles, fraction of


X Q
perfectly mixed #ow in dense phase
increases with increasing ;

Wei et al. (1993)

1.26}1.41

FCC

0.41

One-dimensional pseudo- D proportional to square root of bed


X Q
dispersion model
diameter

; calculated based on Eq. (o) in Table 2.


A

5.76

4808

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

transfer due to particle collisions is usually negligible.


Thus, particle}gas and particle}particle heat transfers are
rarely limiting factors in the overall heat transfer analysis. Hence, subsequent discussion is limited to suspension}surface heat transfer.
Suspension-to-surface heat transfer is caused by particle convection due to the convective #ow of particles
from the bulk to the heat transfer surface and conduction
through the gas between the particle and wall, gas convection due to gas percolation through the bed contacting the heat transfer surface, and radiation. Although not
strictly valid, these three components are commonly assumed to be independent of one another and additive so
that
h"hNA #hEA #hP .
Fig. 14. Axial dispersion coe$cient of the solids and radial dispersion
coe$cient of the gas phase as a function of gas velocity: 0.1 m diameter
bed, 362 lm particles (adapted from Lee & Kim, 1990a).

where PK is the energy dissipation rate per unit mass of


solids, de"ned by
PK "(;!;KD )g.
(23)
Although the agreement was poor with respect to data of
May (1959) and de Groot (1967), the clear physical basis
of the correlation represents a useful starting point for
correlating solids mixing. Lee, Kim and Baird (1991)
extended this approach and correlated solid mixing of
Groups A particles by
E
X Q
"0.365Re\ .
(24)
R
+g(;!;KD ),D
R
Given the dearth of data on solids mixing in turbulent
#uidized beds, it may be useful to pursue the analogy
with liquid mixing in bubble columns operated at high
super"cial gas velocities. Such mechanisms as global
convective recirculation, turbulent di!usion due to eddies caused by rising bubbles, and molecular di!usion
(Degaleesan & Dudukovic, 1998) may also explain solids
mixing in turbulent #uidized beds.

(25)

The importance of each component depends on particle properties and operating conditions. Several maps
have been proposed to indicate where each of these
components is important (Decker & Glicksman, 1981;
Saxena & Ganzha, 1984; Flamant, Fatah & Filtris, 1992).
Flamant et al. (1992) extended the scheme of Saxena and
Ganzha (1984) to incorporate temperature, thus e!ectively delineating regions in which contributions from
each of these components are signi"cant. Their proposed
heat transfer diagram } enhanced by Fan and Zhu (1998)
} is shown in Fig. 15. Radiation is insigni"cant below
5003C; gas convective transfer becomes increasingly important with increasing particle size, while the particle
convective component decreases in importance with increasing particle size.
6.1. Convection
While many studies have been conducted on heat
transfer in bubbling #uidized beds (see Wiman &
Almstedt, 1997; Molerus & Wirth, 1997 for recent
reviews), there are only a few studies explicitly for

6. Heat transfer
Three types of heat transfer * gas}particle, particle}particle and suspension}surface heat transfer } can
be considered in #uidized beds. Thermal gradients between the voids and dense phase tend to be very small
due to the large surface area of the particles, with typical
particle}gas heat transfer coe$cients of order
6}23 W/m K (Botterill, 1986). Thermal equilibrium in
the bed is normally attained within about 25 mm of the
grid, although somewhat greater distances may be required for high-velocity jets entering through nozzles and
perforated plates. Conductive particle}particle heat

Fig. 15. E!ects of particle size and temperature on modes of heat


transfer (from Fan & Zhu, 1998).

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

turbulent #uidized beds (Staub & Canada, 1978;


Canada & McLaughlin, 1978; Staub, 1979; Wood,
Kuwata & Staub, 1980; Hashimoto et al., 1990; Basu,
Halder & Nag, 1986; Leu, Hsia & Chen, 1997).
Basu et al. (1986) investigated bed-to-wall heat transfer
in a 102 mm diameter, 4.5 m high column operated over
a wide range of gas velocities (0.01}3.8 m/s). Using sand
particles of average sizes 122 and 348 lm (Group B particles) and ambient air as the #uidizing gas, they found
that h reached a maximum with increasing ; at a super"cial gas velocity close to the transition velocity, ;A .
A similar "nding was reported by Leu et al. (1997). In
both cases the maximum decreased with increasing particle diameter. However, as illustrated in Fig. 16, the
super"cial velocity corresponding to the maximum heat
transfer coe$cient is often lower than ;A . Lacking a
reliable turbulent bed correlation, Basu et al. (1986)
compared their experimental heat transfer data with
predictions from the bubbling bed correlation of
Glicksman (1984) and reported large deviations.
Staub and co-workers (Staub & Canada, 1978; Canada
& McLaughlin, 1978; Staub, 1979; Wood et al., 1980)
extensively studied heat transfer in a column of square
cross-section with immersed horizontal tubes at di!erent
pressures and particle sizes (large particles) covering
a wide range of super"cial gas velocities. Staub (1979)

Fig. 16. Comparison of heat transfer prediction using Eq. (26) with
experimental data of Wunder (1980) for single immersed tube measured
at ambient conditions for mullite particles (adapted from Molerus et al.,
1995).

et al. (1995) presented a single uni"ed correlation, consistent with experimental data covering a wide range of
physical properties and
operating
conditions
(@ &290}1050 K; P@ &0.03}2 MPa; ;};KD up to
2.5 m/s; dN &74}4000 lm; oN 26}11 800 kg/m):

0.125(1!e )[1#33.3+([(;!;

)/; ;( o c /j g)](;!; ),\]\
KD
KD
KD
N N E
KD
1#(j /2c k)+1#0.28(1!e )[o /(o !o )] [([o

c /j g](;!; )]; /(;!; ),
E N
KD
E N
E
N N E
KD
KD
KD
j
h" E

\
\
o
;!;
l
E
KD
#0.165Pr
1#0.05
J
o !o
;
N
E
KD
for Ar)10.

 

developed a heat transfer model based on the dense-#ow


solid suspension concept (incorporating upward and
downward #ow of gas and solids). His model (see Table
13) includes a dependency on super"cial gas velocity.
Using a combination of the #ow model of Staub (1979)
and the correlation for local solid hold-up, Wood et al.
(1980) correlated splash zone experimental data for different static bed heights. Canada and McLaughlin (1978)
investigated heat transfer to immersed horizontal surfaces at pressures up to 10 bar for large particles
(650}2600 lm) and showed that the heat transfer coe$cient increases appreciably with increasing pressure (see
also Molerus, Burschka & Dietz, 1995). Molerus and
Mattmann (1992a, b), Molerus et al. (1995) and Molerus
and Wirth (1997), though mainly concerned with bubbling #uidization, covered super"cial gas velocities
beyond ;A as determined based on Eq. (o) in Table 2.
Heat transfer to the containing wall was determined for
a wide range of Archimedes numbers in terms of the
characteristic laminar and turbulent length scales, gas
velocity and e!ective thermal conductivities. Molerus

4809

 

(26)

Eq. (26) predicts experimental data well over a range of


conditions as shown in Fig. 16. Although the characteristic length scale, l , is used instead of the particle size, d ,
J
N
the equation accounts for the particle size through the
minimum #uidization velocity, ; . For Group D parKD
ticles (Ar'10), the equation of Molerus and Mattmann
(1992b), independent of gas velocity, is suggested for the
turbulent #uidization #ow regime, where transfer is dominated by gas convection:
0.0247j
E
h"
dl
N R

  


d 
N
Pr
.
l
R

(27)

Here l and l are characteristic laminar and turbulent


J
R
length scales given by








k
l"
,
J
(g(o !o )
N
E

(28)


k
l"
.
R
g(o !o )o
N
E E

(29)

4810

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

Table 13
Summary of correlations for convective bed-to-surface heat transfer coe$cients applicable to turbulent #uidized beds
Author

Correlation

Range

Remark

Staub (1979)

Nu"Nu

20 lm )d )1000 lm
N

For 1000 lm(d (3000 lm, use d "10\ m


N
N
N is for empty column (no particles)

Investigation in square columns with immersed horizontal tube banks
(bare tubes). Study focused on e!ect of tube bank and gas density.
Showed e!ect of tube spacing
h lies between 100 and 250 W/m K for ; in the range 0.1}4.5 m/s for
glass beads of sizes 650}2600 lm

Bak et al. (1989) Nu"0.4Ar  Re\ 


N

107(Ar(698
(Tube at centre of bed)

Nu"0.41Ar Re\ 


N
Nu"0.4Ar Re 
N

107(Ar(698
(Tube at r/R"0.5)
149(Ar(2890
0.47(Re (4.0
N
(Freeboard overall heat
transfer coe$cient)

High temperature combustion experiments


Measurements made in both expanded bed section and freeboard with
immersed vertical tubes
Showed e!ects of gas velocity, tube position, bed temperature and
particle size
h lies between 40 and 370 W/m K for ; in the range 0.6}1.9 m/s and
particle size in the range 330}780 lm

Hashimoto
et al. (1990)

Eq. (30)

;/; '1.2
R

Measurements made in freeboard region with immersed vertical tubes


Correlation not applicable for ;/; (1.2
R
h lies between 20 and 700 W/m K for ; in the range 0.07}0.97 m/s and
d "48 lm
N

Molerus et al.
(1995)

Eq. (26)
Eq. (27)

Ar)10
Ar'10

Overall heat transfer coe$cient to containing wall


Developed for bubbling beds, but also covers turbulent regime
Covers a wide range of physical properties and operating conditions
( &290}1050 K; P &0.03}2 MPa; ;!; up to 2.5 m/s;
@
@
KD
d &74}4000 lm; o &26}11 800 kg/m)
N
N





150
 
d ;10
N
;
0.42o (1!e )DZ 
N
K
;
o
E
1#

 

6.2. Heat transfer in the freeboard


Hashimoto et al. (1990) investigated heat transfer in
the freeboard of turbulent #uidized beds in bench scale
(0.074 m ID, 5.2 m high) and pilot scale (0.45 m ID, 7 m
high) columns using Group A particles (d "48 lm,
N
o "2800 kg/m). Using air as the #uidizing gas at
N
;"0.07}0.97 m/s, they studied heat transfer to vertical
tubes in the freeboard at ambient and high temperatures
and pressures. They correlated the particle convective
heat transfer coe$cient for ;/; '1.2 by
R
c   o   D \ 
h
N
C
.
Nu " NA "3.26;10\ Re  N
NA d j
N c
o
d
N E
E
E
N
(30)
Bak, Son and Kim (1989) investigated the e!ects of
location of vertical tubes, average bed temperature, particle size and gas velocity on the overall heat transfer
coe$cient in both the expanded bed and freeboard regions for bubbling and turbulent conditions. In accord
with the "ndings of Hashimoto et al., they found greater
e!ects of particle size and gas velocity in the freeboard
than in the rest of the bed.
Heat transfer in the freeboard should account also for
the in#uence of the distance above the bed surface.

 

George and Grace (1982) developed a correlation to


account for this:
h "h #(h!h )(1#34(3.5z/TDH)V)
(31)
D@


where 5)x)3 for 100 lm)d )900 lm. Note that
N
the heat transfer due to gas alone or gas}particle suspension, h , can be appreciable in the freeboard and should

not be ignored.
6.3. Radiation
For high temperature operations, heat transfer due to
radiation, h , can be as high as 25}45% of the overall
P
heat transfer coe$cient (Vedamurthy & Sastri, 1974;
Flamant & Bergeron, 1992). According to Vedamurthy
and Sastri (1974), h increases with increasing gas velocity
P
and particle size and reported h /h ratio of 25}45% for
P
500 lm particles at an average bed temperature of 9003C
as ;/; increased from 2 to 8. The grey-body equation
KD
commonly employed is
p( !)
U
@
h"
.
(32)
P (1/e #1/e !1)( ! )
U
@
U
@
The e!ective bed emissivity, e , can be estimated as
@
(1#e )/2 as suggested by Grace (1982) based on data of
N

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

Botterill (1975). Flamant and Bergeron (1992) contend


that the contribution due to radiation should account for
the contact resistances introduced by both the gas "lm
(between wall and bed) and the emulsion "lm (thickness
of non-isothermal zone within the bed). Their expressions
can also be employed for the turbulent #uidization #ow
regime with the fraction of surface in contact with voids
estimated from the overall voidage, as covered in Section 4.
Molerus et al. (1995) modelled the dependence of the
temperature di!erences between the wall, adjacent layer
of particles and the bulk of the particles over a broad
range of conditions (see Table 13) including ones corresponding to the turbulent #uidization #ow regime. This
led to

 


!
1
@
U
4p #
U
2#j /c k
1#j /2c k
E N
E N .
h"
(33)
P
[1/e #1/e !1]
U
@
There can be considerable scatter and disparity in the
reported contribution due to radiation, primarily due to
di!erent measurement techniques and di!erent conditions. For instance, Bak et al. (1989) reported h /h(10%
P
for coal combustion in a bed operated at over 10003C,
while Flamant and Bergeron (1992) reported values
greater than 30% for alumina particles of similar size in
a bed operated at 9003C.
7. Mass transfer
Mass transfer in #uidized beds can take place between
particles and gas, high and low density phases and between the bed and an immersed or bounding surface. The
"rst of these is important for large particles, but for
particles smaller than about 1 mm the exchange is usually rapid enough that particles and gas are nearly at
equilibrium. There are few studies reported on the mass
transfer between bed and surfaces. Analogies between
convective heat and mass transfer can be employed when
this type of transfer is important. Most investigations of
mass transfer in gas #uidized beds have been directed
towards interphase interchange.
7.1. Interphase transfer
The most attractive feature of operating in the turbulent regime over the bubbling regime is the enhanced
interphase mass transfer which virtually eliminates the
resistance which tends to be dominant for reactors operated in the bubbling and slug #ow regimes. This improvement is largely due to the short lifetime of voids, yielding
e$cient gas}solid contact throughout the bed. Table 14
summarizes the small number of experimental studies
reported in the open literature dealing with gas}solid
mass transfer in the turbulent #uidization regime.

4811

Several studies have been conducted to evaluate the


e!ect of particle size, column size, and super"cial gas
velocity on interphase mass transfer using CO absorp
tion in air by porous alumina particles impregnated with
NaOH (Furusaki, Nozaki & Nakagiri, 1984; Nozaki,
Furusaki and Miyauchi, 1985; Kai, Imamura &
Takahashi, 1995). Furusaki et al. (1984) analysed experimental data from the literature and their own data obtained in a column of 0.195 m diameter with 60 lm
alumina particles at super"cial gas velocities up to
0.6 m/s. The correlation of Miyauchi, Furusaki, Yamada
and Matsumura (1980) was shown to predict the experimental data in a satisfactory manner. Nozaki et al. (1985)
reached similar conclusions. Kai et al. (1995) showed that
the increase in mass transfer rate for turbulent #uidization is related to the change in #ow pattern and void
behaviour. The mass transfer coe$cient, k , was about
E
0.013 m/s and almost independent of the gas velocity for
the range studied, while the apparent surface area of
bubbles/voids per unit bed volume, a , increased sharply
'
with ; as shown in Fig. 17. Predictions of the interchange
mass transfer coe$cient from some of the correlations in
Table 15 are compared with experimental data in Fig. 18.
While numerous correlations for determining interphase mass transfer coe$cients have been developed for
bubbling beds (e.g. Sit & Grace, 1981; Werther, 1984; van
den Aarse, Beenackers & Van Swaaij, 1986), there have
been only very modest attempts for the turbulent regime.
Table 15 summarizes correlations reported for the turbulent regime. The "rst one includes an equivalent void
diameter, which, as discussed above, is of questionable
validity.
The correlation covering the greatest range of data is
that of Foka et al. (1996), developed using the van Deemter (1980) two-phase model. Predicted values of k a lies
E '
between 0.19 and 4.6 s\ spanning the fully bubbling and
turbulent regimes with ; up to 2.6 m/s for di!erent
particle sizes (75}196 lm). Use of this correlation should
be approached with caution until it has been validated
with more data. Note also that this correlation does not
account for column geometry.
7.2. Gas/particle mass transfer
As noted above, the particle convective component of
mass transfer must be accounted for when treating
Group D particles. Basu and Subbarao (1986) found
enhanced burning rates due to the high gas/particle mass
transfer rates in a turbulent #uidized bed compared to
bubbling conditions and presented the correlation:

 
k d
Ar e 
Sh" E N "2#0.6
Sc .
D
18#0.61(Ar e ) 
(34)
Halder and Basu (1992) reported enhanced gas}solid
mass transfer at high ; leading to improved and faster

4812

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

Table 14
Summary of interphase mass transfer data for turbulent #uidized beds
Source

D
R
(m)

H
KD
(m)

d
N
(lm)

o
@
(kg/m)

;
(m/s)

;
A
(m/s)

t
*
(!)

ka
E '
(s\)

Miyauchi et al. (1980)


(Air}C H )
 

0.080

0.65

53

1000

0.47

N/A

Furusaki et al. (1984)


(Air}CO )


0.195

0.45

60

530

0.37

N/A

Nozaki et al. (1985)


(Air}CO )


0.10

0.65

60

540

0.37

Kai et al. (1995)


(Air}CO )


0.053

2.3

55

1050(o )
N

Foka et al. (1996)


(Air}Ar)

0.1
0.2

N/A

0.3
0.5

N/A

1450(o )
N
2650(o )
N
570
N/A

0.07
0.13
0.19
0.26
0.33
0.40
0.07
0.13
0.17
0.23
0.37
N/A

0.80
0.90
0.93
0.21
0.38
0.50
0.60
0.65
0.27
0.36
0.46
0.51
0.63
0.72
0.25
0.38
0.49
0.57
0.70
0.19&4.6

Farag et al. (1997)


(Air}He)

75
130
196
65

0.2
0.3
0.4
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.6
0&2.6

0.34
0.37
0.41

0.16
0.21
1.06

0.4
0.55
0.7

0.36

0.42
0.32
0.64
N/A

Note: All data were obtained for ambient conditions.


; calculated based on Eq. (o) in Table 2.
A

Fig. 17. E!ect of super"cial gas velocity on apparent surface area of


bubbles/voids per unit volume of bed and the overall gas interchange
coe$cient (data from Kai et al., 1995).

combustion. Halder, Datta & Chattopadhyay (1993) extended this study and proposed a model for calculating
the mass transfer coe$cient of burning carbon particles:

D
k "2
#(1!d )
E
T
d
N

D;
R #d
T
nd
N

 
D;
nd e
N

(35)

Fig. 18. E!ect of super"cial gas velocity on the overall interphase mass
transfer coe$cient based on data in Table 14 and correlations in Table
15.

where the void fraction, d , is given by


T
(e!e )
A
d "
T (1!e )
A

(36)

Work on mass transfer in turbulent #uidized beds is far


from complete. Further experimental studies are required

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

4813

Table 15
Summary of correlations for interphase mass transfer for turbulent beds
Author

Correlation

Remarks

Miyauchi et al. (1980)

Dt
*
k a "3.7
E '
d

Foka et al. (1996)

k a "1.631Sc  ;
E '

Zhang and Qian (1997)

D
k "1.74;10\Re  Sc 
E
N
d
N

Showed dependence of k on D with increasing ;. Fitted their data well


E
k a lies between 0.8 and 1.0 s\ for ; in the range 0.2}0.5 m/s
E '
Column and particle data in Table 14
Used 2-phase model of van Deemter (1980) to back out k a
E '
k a lies between 0.19 and 4.6 s\ for particle sizes in the range (75}196 lm) and ; up
E '
to 2.6 m/s
Predicts data in Table 14 within 9% error
Used 2-phase model with dispersion and steady-state point-source tracer injection
technique
FCC particles (d "77 lm); ;"0.4}1 m/s; D "0.2 m, H "5 m
N
R
R
Predicts their experimental k within 14}31% error
E

to create a better understanding of transfer and to establish reliable correlations for determining interphase mass
transfer coe$cients.

8. Solids entrainment in turbulent 6uidized beds


8.1. Entrainment yux
Total particle entrainment in gas}solids #uidized beds
has been found to increase strongly with increasing
super"cial gas velocity, and this trend is captured in most
correlations in the literature (see Tasirin & Geldart,
1998). When the super"cial gas velocity exceeds the
transition velocity ; , the total particle entrainment inA
creases rapidly, with widespread carryover occurring beyond ; (see Fig. 19). For FCC particles in a 0.2 m
QC
diameter column, Zhang, Guo, Zhang and Li (1995)
found that the particle entrainment increased rapidly
once ; exceeded 0.7 m/s. Similar trends were reported
by Tasirin and Geldart (1998) for columns of diameter
0.076 and 0.152 m. Compared with their experimental
data, Tasirin and Geldart (1998) found that no correlations in the literature gave satisfactory predictions. They
modi"ed the Geldart, Cullinan, Georghiades, Dilvrayu
and Pope (1979) equation to
KH "14.5o ;  exp(!6.4; /;).
(37)

E
R
Eq. (37) has also been found to give improved agreement
with recent experimental data obtained in a 0.29 m diameter turbulent #uidized bed with FCC particles (Morikawa, 1999).
Choi, Ryu, Shun, Son and Kim (1998) studied the e!ect
of temperature (up to 6003C) on particle entrainment
from a #uidized bed of 0.1 m in diameter with particle
sizes ranging from 110 to 263 lm, and ; from 0.65 to
2.3 m/s. The entrainment rate increased after an initial
decrease as the bed temperature was raised. There appeared to be less e!ect of temperature on entrainment
within the turbulent #uidization regime. Choi et al. (1999)

Fig. 19. Solids entrainment rate as a function of super"cial gas velocity


for sand particles as measured by Brereton (1987). (D "0.152 m,
R
d "156 lm).
N

developed a correlation which accounts for the in#uence


of temperature:
KHd
G N "(C Re )  exp[!12.9!0.0135a(H !H)]
" N
R
k

12.1
#Ar  exp 6.66!1.60F !
E
F 
"

(38)

with
F "gd (o !o ),
(39)
E
N N
E
F "C o ;/2,
(40)
"
" E
H /H"1!(1!; /;) 3KD > 3KD ,
(41)
KD
KD
d
d o (;!; ) \ 
N
N E
KD
sd "exp !11.2#210
N
D !d
k
R
N
  o !o  
o gd
N N
N
E
;
C\ .
"
o (;!; )
o
E
KD
E
(42)


  

4814

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

The e!ect of bed pressure on the entrainment rate in


bubbling and turbulent #uidized beds was studied by
Tsukada et al. (1993) in a 0.05 m diameter, 0.4 m tall
column for pressures from 100 to 700 kPa. The entrainment rate increased with increasing pressure, especially
in the turbulent regime. Also, the increase was more rapid
when the pressure rose from 100 to 350 kPa than from
350 to 700 kPa.
The total entrainment #ux was higher in a 0.076 m
diameter column than in a 0.152 m diameter column for
the same FCC particles (Tasirin & Geldart, 1998).
Brereton (1987) showed that the total entrainment rate in
a 0.15 m diameter riser using sand particles of mean size
156 lm at ;"1.5 m/s was higher with a smooth exit
than with a constrained (abrupt) exit. Morikawa (1999)
found that the in#uence of the exit con"guration is more
signi"cant when the unit is operated in the turbulent
#uidization regime rather than in the bubbling regime.
8.2. Transport disengagement height (TDH )
In passing from bubbling to turbulent #uidization, axial
densities change more gradually (Werther & Wein, 1994).
As ; increases it becomes more and more di$cult to
determine the TDH. Lu and Wang (1990) studied the
TDH and particle size distribution above the TDH in
both cold model and commercial units with FCC particles
at gas velocities from 0.26 to 0.9 m/s. The TDH, determined based on axial pressure pro"les, increased from 6 to
9 m when ; increased from 0.3 to 0.9 m/s. When the
column diameter was increased from 0.15 to 1.2 m, the
TDH increased from about 4 to 8 m at a constant super"cial gas velocity of 0.39 m/s. Most correlations underestimated the experimental data. Geldart, Xue and Xie
(1995) determined the TDH in the turbulent regime based
on axial pressure pro"les in a 0.29 m diameter, 5.3 m tall
column with FCC powders of 58 lm mean size. The TDH
increased linearly from 0.3 to 2 m as ; increased from 0.2
to 1.2 m/s. The correlations of Wen and Chen (1982) and
Baron, Briens and Bergougnou (1988) gave fair agreement
with their data, while other correlations tended to overpredict their experimental data.

compared to the abundance of information on bubbling


and fast #uidized bed reactors. Relatively few models
(Edwards & Avidan, 1986; Krambeck et al., 1987; Hashimoto et al., 1989; Sun & Grace, 1990, 1992; Foka et al.,
1994, 1996; Bos, Tromp & Akse, 1995; Chaouki et al.,
1999a; Thompson, Bi & Grace, 1999) deal explicitly with
the turbulent regime. Turbulent #uidized-bed reactor
models have assumed single phase one-dimensional plug
#ow (PF) (van Swaaij, 1978; Fane & Wen, 1982), a continuous stirred tank reactor (CSTR) (e.g. Wen, 1984;
Hashimoto et al., 1989), axially dispersed plug #ow
(ADPF) (Avidan, 1982; Wen, 1984; Edwards & Avidan,
1986; Li & Wu, 1991; Foka et al., 1994) or two-phase
behaviour with interchange of gas between dilute and
dense phases/regions (TPWD) (Krambeck et al., 1987;
Foka et al., 1996; Ege, Grislinga s & deLasa, 1996;
Venderbosch, 1998; Thompson et al., 1999; Abba, Grace,
Bi & Thompson, 1999).
Foka et al. (1994) reported satisfactory prediction of
conversion in a catalytic turbulent #uidized bed methane
combustor with a single-phase axially dispersed plug
#ow model. The CSTR model consistently under-predicted the conversion, while the plug #ow model overpredicted it (see Fig. 20), consistent with experimental
evidence on the behaviour of turbulent beds showing that
there is appreciable backmixing of gas, intermediate between these two idealized cases. Foka et al. (1996) extended this work and carried out model discrimination.
They developed an improved correlation for axial dispersion of gas and correlated the cross-#ow mass transfer
coe$cient of the two-phase model of van Deemter (1980)
in the bubbling and turbulent regimes. Methane conversion in the turbulent regime was well predicted using the
two-phase model with axial dispersion (TPWD), and

9. Modelling and reactor performance


Because of the advantages of the turbulent regime (e.g.
see Massimilla, 1973; Avidan, 1997; Chaouki, Klvana
& Guy, 1999b; Sotudeh-Gharebaagh, Chaouki & Legros,
1999), a number of commercial #uid bed processes operate in the turbulent #uidization regime. Some examples
are listed in Table 1. The bottom section of fast #uidized
beds is also often considered to operate in the turbulent
#uidization #ow regime.
Relatively little has been reported on the reactor performance and modelling for turbulent beds/reactors,

Fig. 20. Experimental and predicted conversion of methane in the


turbulent #ow regime for Pd/Al O catalyst (adapted from Foka et al.,
 
1996).

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

a single phase axially dispersed plug #ow (Pe"2) model


was also satisfactory. While the single phase plug #ow
model clearly over-predicts the conversion, it is not
clear } because of the signi"cant scatter in the experimental data } which of the three models (CSTR, ADPF,
TPWD) best predicts the conversion. Venderbosch
(1998) modelled the oxidation of CO over platinum catalysts for a range of velocities (0.1}0.9 m/s) in a 0.05 m ID
column with ; "0.58 m/s. The main drawback of the
A
axially dispersed plug #ow model for high velocities was
that it cannot predict conversions lower than those obtained in ideally mixed reactors. Therefore, the author
modi"ed the Grace (1984) two-phase model to include
axial dispersion in the dense-phase, and obtained reasonable predictions of the conversion.
Table 16 summarizes models developed for turbulent
#uidized-bed reactors, accounting for interchange of gas
between low- and high-density phases, axial dispersion,
gas convection and reaction. Notably absent in almost all
the models is any radial dispersion term. All these models
are limiting cases of a generalized formulation (Grace,
1986a). The steady-state form can be written as
dC
dC
G !t D
G
tu
G G dz
G X EG dz
#k a t (C !C )#t o Rate "0 (iOj)
(43)
GH ' G G
H
G G
G
where i and j represent the bubble/dilute/low-density
phase or core region (L-phase) and the dense/
emulsion/high-density phase or annular/wall region
(H-phase), respectively. Since dispersion is considered
appreciable in each of the models, the Danckwerts
boundary conditions are generally applied. It is possible
to reduce the model formulation to the classical twophase bubbling bed model, single-phase dispersed plug
#ow model and variants of the core-annulus model at the
fully bubbling, turbulent and fast #uidization limits
through di!erent approaches.
The transition from distinct two-phase bubbling/slugging to a more homogeneous turbulent #uidization regime is di!use, rather than sharp as the transition criteria
suggest. Many processes (e.g. acrylonitrile, phthalic anhydride, etc.) operate between the bubbling and turbulent
regimes (Bolthrunis, 1989; Rhodes, 1996). Coupled with
the fact that there is considerable uncertainty in the
regime transition correlations, this suggests the need for
a di!erent approach. Thompson et al. (1999) presented
a generalized bubbling-turbulent (GBT) model based on
a probabilistic approach to overcome the di$culty in
predicting the transition boundaries and velocities with
certainty. This approach was shown to give good predictions for ozone decomposition and for the phthalic anhydride process (Grace, Abba, Bi & Thompson, 1999b).
As shown in Fig. 21, the GBT model predictions were
signi"cantly better than those of either the TPWD or the
ADPF model.

4815

This approach has been extended by Abba et al. (1999)


to the fast #uidization regime overcoming discontinuities
and the di$culty in predicting the ; transition through
QC
probabilistic averaging of three regime-speci"c models:
the Grace (1984) two-phase bubbling bed model at low
velocities, the dispersed (axially and radially) plug #ow
model at intermediate velocities and the Brereton, Grace
and Yu (1988) core-annulus model at high velocities.
Since the system is represented by global mass balances
for both phases:
Low-density (L) phase:

*C
*C
t D
* *C
G* !t D
G* ! * P E*
t u
r G*
*
* * *z
* X E *z
r
*r
*r

#k a t (C !C )#t o Rate "0


*& ' * G*
G&
* *
G*

(44)

High-density (H) phase:

*C
t D
*C
* *C
G& !t D
G& ! & P E&
r G&
t u
& X E& *z
& & *z
*r
r
*r

#k a t (C !C )#t o Rate "0


*& ' * G&
G*
& &
G&
(i"1, N
)
(45)
 
and a set of hydrodynamic bed and phase balances,
continuity is fully satis"ed over the complete range of ;.
A schematic representation of the generalized onedimensional model is shown in Fig. 22. Key hydrodynamic variables (u , k , D * , t , etc.) are evalu*
* *& X E
ated through probabilistic averaging of the limiting
values of these variables in the fully bubbling, turbulent
and fast #uidization conditions. This approach leads to
improved predictions of reactor performance variables
compared with any of the three separate models for
individual #ow regimes and avoids discontinuities at the
boundaries between the regimes. Established correlations
are used to calculate bed hydrodynamics. Predictions are
in good agreement with the ozone decomposition data of
Sun (1991), as shown in Fig. 23. This approach gives
improved agreement over other models. Although the
preliminary validation results are encouraging, more rigorous model validation with industrial-scale data is
needed to consolidate this approach.
An important aspect of the modelling e!ort for turbulent bed reactors is to account for the solids hold-up in
the bed and its vertical variation (Hashimoto et al., 1989).
Several approaches have been considered ranging from
the Richardson-Zaki (1954) equation to the sigmoidshape pro"le of Kwauk, Wang, Li, Chen and Shen (1985)
originally proposed for the fast #uidization #ow
regime. Venderbosch (1998) showed improved representation of the solid hold-up using a combination of
modi"ed forms of these correlations. Werther and
Wein (1994) considered a combination of a bubbling bed
model to represent the lower dense part of the reactor
and a fast #uidization model for the freeboard. The

Ege et al. (1996)

Foka et al. (1994, 1996)

Sun and Grace (1990)

Avidan (1982)
Edwards and Avidan
(1986)

Authors

Solid fraction in dilute phase is signi"cant.


Negligible gas #ow through emulsion phase.
Signi"cant gas interchange between dilute and
emulsion phases represented by cross #ow
mass transfer coe$cient, k .
@C
Signi"cant e!ect of "nes on conversion.

dC
G@ #k a e (C !C )#k
C "0
@C '
G@
GC
P@ @ G@
dz
Emulsion phase: k a e (C !C )#k
C "0
@C '
GC
G@
PC C GC


#c )"0




dC
u A @A #k (C C !C A )#k (C A !C ? )(c
@P dz
@C @
C
@? @
@


Annulus region:

dC
ab
? !c
A k (C !C )
u
? dz
 (1!a)e @? @C
?
?
ab
1
A k
!c
&C dz!C
 (1!a)e @? H  @A
?
?
a(1!b )e
A CA k (C !C )"0
!c
# (1!a)e
C? @A
?
?

!c k (C A !C ? )"0
# C? C
@

b
1 &
A
Emulsion in core: u (C A  !C A )#k
C A dz!C A
C C
C
@C (1!b )e H
C
@
A C


Bubbles in core:

dC
dC
G !D
G #Rate "0
X E dz
G
dz
dC
Bubble/void phase: ; G@ #k a e (C !C )"0
@C '
G@
GC
dz
2P
Emulsion phase:
k a e (C !C )#Rate "0
@C '
GC
G@
GC

1P Single phase: ;

Plug #ow (PF) of gas through bubbles and


perfectly mixed (PM) emulsion in core.
Gas #ow through annulus as PF or PM.
Gas interchange between bubble, emulsion
phases and annulus region.

Solid fraction in dilute phase and gas #ow


through emulsion phases negligible.
Gas interchange between dilute and emulsion
phases represented by cross-#ow mass transfer
coe$cient, k .
@C
Maximum stable bubble/void size considered.

Overall homogeneity of bed assumed.


Gas bubbles completely suppressed if "nes
((45 lm) content'15%.
Axial dispersion in bed and freeboard di!er.

dC
dC
G #Rate "0
Single phase: ; G !D
X E dz
G
dz

Bubble/void phase: ;

Key assumptions

Main model equations

Table 16
Summary of turbulent #uid bed reactor models

Combination of PF, CSTR in bubble,


emulsion and annulus simulated.
Only cold model presented (no reaction).
Transient term included to predict tracer
concentration. Model prediction satisfactory.

Velocity range, ;"0.77-1.1 m/s; catalyst:


Pd/Al O (d "196 lm).
  N
Temperature range (450}5003C).
Experimentally determined ; "1.07 m/s
A
(@5003C).
Compared PF, CSTR, TPWD model of
Werther (1980), ADPF models.
Model discrimination inconclusive.

Studied e!ect of PSD on ozone conversion in


bubbling, turbulent and fast #uidization
regimes.
Investigation over velocity range,
;"0.1}1.8 m/s; FCC particles (d "60 lm)
N
D "0.1 m, H "2 m.
R
R

Studied methanol-to-gasoline process in


bench scale (D "0.04 m) pilot-plant
R
(D "0.1 m) and demonstration plant
R
(D "0.6 m) units.
R
Velocity range, ;"0.05}0.6 m/s
Studied e!ect of ba%es on conversion.
Maintained conversion e$ciency in scale-up.

Remarks

4816
H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

Abba et al. (1999)

Grace et al. (1999b)

Thompson et al. (1999)

Chaouki et al. (1999a)

Venderbosch (1998)


dC
G@ #k a (C !C )"0
@C ' G@
GC
dz
dC
GC #k a (C !C )#Rate "0
!D
@C P GC
G@
GB
X E dz

#k a t (C !C )/t #o Rate "0


*& ' * G*
G& *
*
G*

dC
dC
G* !D
G*
u
* dz
X E* dz

 

 

#k a t (C !C )/t #o Rate "0


*& ' * G*
G& *
*
G*

* *C
*C
*C
D
G* !D
G* ! P E*
u
r G*
* *z
X E* *z
r *r
*r

#k a t (C !C )/t #o Rate "0


*& ' * G&
G* &
&
G&

*C
*C
D
* *C
G& !D
G& ! P E&
H!phase: u
r G&
& *z
X E& *z
r *r
*r

L!phase:

#k a t (C !C )/t #o Rate "0


*& ' * G&
G* &
&
G&

dC
dC
G& !D
G&
H!phase: u
& dz
X E& dz

L!phase:




Dilute phase:

dC
B #k a (C !C )!Rate "0
u
B dz
BC ' B
C
B
dC
dC
C
C
Emulsion phase: u
!D
#k a (C !C )#Rate "0
C dz
C E dz
BC ' C
B
C

Emulsion phase:

Bubble/void phase: ;

Velocity range, ;"0.1}1.15 m/s; FCC


catalyst (d "60 lm). D "0.1 m;
N
R
Probabilistic averaging of hydrodynamic
variables.
L-phase and H-phase converges into single
phase in fully turbulent limit.
Smooth transition across bubbling-turbulent
regimes.
Satisfactory predictions of ozone and phthalic
anhydride conversion trends.

L-phase and H-phase converge into a single


phase in fully turbulent limit, then segregate
into a dilute core and dense annulus at higher
;.
Other remarks as for Thompson et al. (1999).

Core-annulus model valid at the high velocity


limit, beyond fully turbulent conditions.
Radial dispersion signi"cant.
Other assumptions as in Thompson et al.
(1999).

Applied to catalytic oxidation of


natural gas for synthesis of
ethylene
Model compared with experimental results
from 0.2 m reactor in which conversions and
selectivities were measured.

Rate includes e!ectiveness factor and dilution


ratio for catalyst activity control.
Tested for CO oxidation over Pt catalysts:
(D "0.05 m, d "65 lm, ;"0.1}0.9 m/s).
R
N
Model performance satisfactory.

Grace (1984) two-phase bubbling bed model


valid in fully bubbling limit; ADPF model
valid in the fully turbulent limit.
Gaussian PDF represents uncertainty in
regime boundary correlation.
Gas #ows through both L- and H-density
phases.
Solids present in both phases.
Signi"cant gas interchange between phases.
Appreciable dispersion in both regimes.

One-dimensional #ow in two phases.


Plug #ow in dilute phase; axially dispersed
#ow in emulsion phase.
Catalytic reaction in emulsion phase;
homogeneous reaction on both phases.
Correlations for voidages in the two phases
and interphase mass transfer.

No particles in voids.
Plug #ow of gas in voids.
No net gas #ow through dense phase.

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825


4817

4818

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

Fig. 21. Comparison of model predictions with experimental ozone


decomposition data obtained by Sun (1991) for k "2.41 s\ and
P
k "8.95 s\. FCC particles, d "60 lm, o "1580 kg/m,
P
N
N
D "0.1 m, H "2 m (Thompson et al., 1999).
R
R

Fig. 23. Generic #uid bed reactor model of Abba et al. (1999) compared
with experimental ozone decomposition data of Sun (1991) and corresponding regime-speci"c models. () Experimental conversion (Sun,
1991); (***) GFBR conversion; (===) Conversion predicted
from separate regime-speci"c models; (- - - - - -) Probability functions.

Fig. 22. Schematic representation of a generalized one-dimensional,


two-phase/region model.

one-dimensional core-annulus model and its variants


have also been reported to have had some success in
accounting for the solids hold-up (Ege et al., 1996).
Few papers have addressed scale-up issues in turbulent
beds. Edwards and Avidan (1986) successfully scaled up
Mobil's methanol-to-gasoline reaction for turbulent conditions from a 0.04 m diameter bench-scale reactor
through a 0.1 m pilot-scale unit to a 0.6 m diameter
demonstration plant. They highlighted the usefulness of
having a wide catalyst size distribution, with a minimum
of about 15% "nes ((40 lm) to ensure that conversion
does not deteriorate on scale-up.
Pell and Jordan (1988) studied e!ects of "nes on reactor performance for the propylene-based acrylonitrile
process in a pilot-scale reactor (0.5 m ID, 9 m high) using
commercial catalysts (average size: 47 lm) over a velocity
range 0.38}0.66 m/s. Conversion increased as the proportion of "nes ((45 lm) was increased as shown in Fig. 24.
Ihara et al. (1996) investigated the e!ect of "nes on yield
and selectivity for the maleic anhydride process. Al-

Fig. 24. E!ect of "nes on conversion for acrylonitrile process for


;"0.66 m/s; d "47 lm; "4503C; P"70 kPa (gage); catalyst inN
ventory"500 kg (adapted from Pell & Jordan, 1988).

though the transition velocity, ; , did not vary appreciA


ably when "ne particle ((45 lm) content was raised
from 20 to 60%, addition of very "ne particles ((20 lm)
appreciably decreased ; , leading to improved reactor
KD
performance and greater bed expansion. The e!ect of
broadening the particle size distribution (PSD) on reactor performance, is most bene"cial for beds operated in
the turbulent regimes (Sun & Grace, 1990, 1992).
Regardless of the model adopted for the turbulent
#uidized-bed reactors, one must account appropriately
for interchange of gas between the low and high-density
structures, dispersion due to chaotic motion of gas, and
the solid hold-up pro"le within the bed. Most modelling

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

e!orts have been based on Geldart A particles. Extension


to larger particles is required, especially given that it is
not clear whether the turbulent #uidization regime constitutes a separate hydrodynamic regime for group B and
D solids (Lim, Zhu & Grace, 1995).
10. Conclusions and outlook
While signi"cant progress has been made in recent
years to gain improved understanding of the turbulent
#uidization #ow regime, substantial work remains to be
done. Some of the areas that require further attention are
as follows:
It is not clear at this point whether the three types of
turbulent #uidization identi"ed in Section 2 are su$ciently
distinct that they should be treated separately rather than
being grouped together under a single #ow regime.
Given the word `turbulenta in the title of this #ow
regime, it is surprising that more e!orts have not been
made to use conventional turbulence descriptors and
experimental characterization techniques to gain a better
understanding of turbulent #uidization. E!orts in this
direction appear to be warranted.
There is an unresolved di!erence of opinion in the
literature as to whether turbulent #uidization is a twophase #ow regime or whether it is su$cient to treat it as
a single-phase homogeneous #ow regime with superimposed axial dispersion and, perhaps, radial voidage
gradients. This dichotomy needs to be resolved, particularly with respect to reactor models.
It would appear that such properties as column diameter, particle size distribution and ba%e design exert
strong in#uence on the #ow and mixing properties of
beds operated in this regime. Pressure and temperature
are also clearly important. Su$cient experimental data
are needed to allow these in#uences to be better characterized and understood.
Fluidized beds are chaotic systems, and the turbulent
#ow regime appears to exhibit unique chaotic characteristics. This avenue of research needs to be developed
further, in parallel with other approaches. Similarly,
while it is premature to expect computational #uid dynamic (CFD) codes to be able to handle #ows as concentrated and complex as those associated with this #ow
regime, long-term contributions from CFD are anticipated. Experimentalists and modellers need to work together to gain improved understanding of what can be
learned from these and other alternative approaches.
Notation
a
'
Ar

interphase transfer surface area per unit volume


of gas in low-density/bubble phase, m\
Archimedes number ("o (o !o )gd /k), diE N
E N
mensionless

4819

A
cross-sectional area of column, m
b
constant in Eq. (16), dimensionless
c
speci"c heat capacity, J/kg K
C
drag coe$cient, dimensionless
"
C
concentration of species i, mol/m
G
C
concentration at axial height of z, mol/m
X
d
equivalent bubble diameter, m
d
maximum stable bubble diameter, m

d
mean particle diameter, m
N
D
molecular di!usivity, m/s
D
gas backmixing coe$cient, m/s
@ E
D
equivalent column diameter, m
C
D
bed/reactor diameter, m
R
D ;D axial and radial gas dispersion coe$cients, m/s
X E P E
D
solid axial dispersion coe$cient, m/s
X Q
e
emissivity, dimensionless
E
axial dispersion coe$cient, continuous phase in
?
Eq. (22)
E
e!ective axial dispersion coe$cient of solids, m/s
X
f
constant in equations by Jin et al. (1986) in Table
2, dimensionless
F
drag force on the particle per projection area, Pa
"
F
gravitational force minus buoyancy force per
E
projection area, Pa
g
gravitational acceleration, m/s
G
solid circulation rate, kg/m s
Q
h
overall heat transfer coe$cient, W/m K
h
heat transfer due to gas alone or gas}particle

suspension, W/m K
H
expanded bed height, m
H
height of bed at minimum #uidization condition,
KD
m
H
Column height, m
R
k
mass transfer coe$cient, m/s
k
gas interchange coe$cient between L-/bubble
GH
and H-/dense phases, m/s
k
reaction rate constant, 1/s
P
K
constant in Eq. (22), dimensionless
KH
elutriation rate constant, kg/m s

l
characteristic laminar length scale, de"ned in
J
Eq. (28), m
l
characteristic turbulent length scale, de"ned in
R
Eq. (29), m

axial distance between injection and sampling


points of tracer, m
m
exponent in the modi"ed Richardson}Zaki
equation in Eq. (1), dimensionless
n
coe$cient in Eq. (12), dimensionless
N
number of bubbles per unit bed volume, 1/m
N
number of reaction units ("k H/;), dimensionP
P
less
N
Nusselt number ("hd /k ), dimensionless
N E
Nu
Nusselt number for gas ("h D /k ), dimension
E R E
less
P
bed pressure, Pa
Pe
Peclet number, dimensionless

4820

P
K
Pr
r
R
Re
Re
A
Re
I
Re
N
Re
QC
Re
R
s
Sc
Sh

C
u
;
;H
R
;
;
A
;
A
;
G
;
I
;
QC
;
 
;

;

=

x
>
z
z
A
z
G
z
N

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

energy dissipation rate per unit mass of solids


de"ned by Eqs. (22) and (23), m/s
Prandtl number, dimensionless
radial coordinate, m
column radius, m
Reynolds number, dimensionless
Reynolds number based on ; ("o ; d /k),
A
E A N
dimensionless
Reynolds number based on ; ("o ; d /k),
I
E I N
dimensionless
particle Reynolds number ("o ;d /k), dimenE N
sionless
Reynolds number based on ; ("o ; d /k),
QC
E QC N
dimensionless
Reynolds number based on ; ("o ; d /k), diR
E R N
mensionless
decay constant, m\
Schmidt number, dimensionless
Sherwood number, dimensionless
Bed temperature, K
time required to empty given amount of particles
from column, s
phase velocity, m/s
super"cial velocity of gas in bed, m/s
e!ective terminal cluster velocity, m/s
bubble/void rise velocity, m/s
transition velocity at which standard deviation
of pressure #uctuations reaches a maximum, m/s
transition velocity at which dilute suspension
collapses, m/s
terminal velocity of particle clusters, m/s
super"cial gas velocity corresponding to levelling out of pressure #uctuation amplitude as ; is
increased, m/s
transition velocity to fast #uidization regime,
corresponding to signi"cant solids entrainment,
m/s
slip velocity between gas and particles, m/s
terminal velocity of isolated particle, m/s
transport velocity, m/s
total solids inventory, kg
exponent in Eq. (31), dimensionless
ratio of actual bubble #ow rate to value predicted
by simple two phase theory, dimensionless
axial coordinate, m
height in Eq. (2) de"ned in Eq. (4), m
height of tracer injection, m
axial position of probe above distributor, m

Greek letters
a
b
c
G GH

area of core divided by total column cross-sectional area, dimensionless


solid concentration ("1!e), dimensionless
#ags in model equations of Ege et al. (1996) in
Table 17, dimensionless

d
d
T
*P
*Z
K
e
e
e
A
e
A
e

G
p
j
E
k
l
B
o
t

particle to bed diameter ratio ("d /D ), dimenN R


sionless
void phase fraction, dimensionless
pressure drop, Pa
distance between centres of tubes or tube pitch,
m
bed voidage, dimensionless
bubble fraction, dimensionless
cluster voidage, dimensionless
bed voidage at ; ("; ), dimensionless
A
cross sectional average voidage, dimensionless
fraction of bed volume occupied by solids associated with phase i, dimensionless
Stefan}Boltzmann constant ("5.67;10)
W/m K
thermal conductivity of gas, m/s
gas viscosity, kg/m s
kinematic viscosity of #uidized dense phase,
m/s
density, kg/m
phase volume fraction, dimensionless

Subscripts
a
b
br
bubb
B
c
cA
d
e
fast
fb
g
gc
H

mf
0
p
pc
r
s
se
t
turb
v
w
z

annulus, apparent
bed, bulk
bubble rise
bubbling
bubble
core, critical
accumulative chocking
dense
emulsion
fast #uidization
freeboard
gas
gas convective
high density phase
low density phase
minimum #uidization
initial
particle
particle convective
radial, radiative
solid
signi"cant entrainment
terminal
turbulent
void
wall
axial

Abbreviations
ADPF axially dispersed plug #ow
APF
absolute pressure #uctuation

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

CSTR
DPF
GBT
GFBR
PDF
PF
PSD
RTD
TDH
TFB
TPWD

continuos stirred tank reactor


di!erential pressure #uctuation
generalized bubbling}turbulent
generic #uid bed reactor
probability distribution function
plug #ow
particle size distribution
residence time distribution
transport disengagement height
turbulent #uidized bed
two-phase with dispersion

References
Abba, I. A., Grace, J. R., Bi, H. T., & Thompson, M. L. (1999). An
integrated approach to #uidized bed reactor modelling in #uidization and #uid-particle systems. A.I.Ch.E. meeting pre-prints, Dallas,
TX, October (pp. 120}128).
Abed, R. (1984). The characterization of turbulent #uid bed hydrodynamics. In D. Kunii & R. Toei, Fluidization IV (pp. 137}144). New
York: Engineering Foundation.
Adanez, J., de Diego, L. F., & Gayan, P. (1993). Transport velocities of
coal and sand particles. Powder Technology, 77, 61}68.
Avidan, A. A. (1980). Bed expansion and solid mixing in high velocity
yuidized beds. Ph.D. dissertation, City University of New York,
New York.
Avidan, A. A. (1982). Turbulent #uid bed reactors using "ne powder
catalysts. In Proceedings of the AIChE-CIESC joint meeting, Beijing,
September (pp. 411}423). Beijing: Chemical Industry Press.
Avidan, A. A. (1997). Future prospects. In J. R. Grace, A. A. Avidan,
& T. M. Knowlton, Circulating yuidized beds (pp. 568}577). London: Chapman & Hall.
Avidan, A. A., & Yerushalmi, J. (1982). Bed expansion in high velocity
#uidization. Powder Technology, 32, 223}232.
Bai, D. R., Issangya, A. S., & Grace, J. R. (1999). Characteristics of gas
#uidized beds in di!erent #ow regimes. Industrial and Engineering
Chemistry Research, 38, 260}269.
Bai, D., Yi, J., Jin, Y., & Yu, Z. (1992). Residence time distribution of gas
and solids in a circulating #uidized bed. In O. E. Potter, & D. J.
Nicklin, Fluidization VII (pp. 195}202). New York: Engineering
Foundation.
Baird, M. H. I., & Rice, R. G. (1975). Axial dispersion in large unba%ed
columns. Chemical Engineering Journal, 9, 171}174.
Bak, Y. C., Son, J. E., & Kim, S. D. (1989). Heat transfer characteristics
of a vertical tube in a #uidized bed combustor. International Chemical Engineering, 29, 166}176.
Baron, T., Briens, C. L., & Bergougnou, M. A. (1988). Study of the
transport disengaging height. Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, 66, 749}760.
Basu, P., Halder, P. K., & Nag, P. K. (1986). Heat transfer in turbulent
#uidized beds. In C. L. Tein, V. P. Carey, & J. K. Ferrell, Proceedings of the eighth international heat transfer conference (pp.
2599}2603). Washington: Hemisphere Publishing.
Basu, P., & Subbarao, D. (1986). An experimental investigation of
burning rate and mass transfer in a turbulent #uidized bed. Combustion and Flame, 66, 261}269.
Bendat, J. S., & Piersol, A. G. (1971). Random data: Analysis and
measurement procedures. New York: Wiley-Interscience.
Bi, X. (1994). Flow regime transitions in gas}solid yuidization and transport. Ph.D. dissertation, University of British Columbia, Vancouver,
Canada.
Bi, H. T., & Fan, L. S. (1992). Existence of turbulent regime in gas}solid
#uidization. A.I.Ch.E. Journal, 38, 297}301.

4821

Bi, H. T., & Grace, J. R. (1995). E!ects of measurement method on


velocities used to demarcate the transition to turbulent #uidization.
Chemical Engineering Journal, 57, 261}271.
Bi, H. T., Grace, J. R., & Lim, K. S. (1995a). Transition from bubbling to
turbulent #uidization. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research, 34, 4003}4008.
Bi, H. T., Grace, J. R., & Zhu, J. X. (1995b). Regime transitions a!ecting
gas}solids suspensions and #uidized beds. Transactions of the Institution of Chemical Engineers, 73, 154}161.
Bi, H. T., Jiang, P. J., & Fan, L.-S. (1991). Hydrodynamic behaviour of
the circulating #uidized bed with low density polymer particles.
A.I.Ch.E. annual meeting, Los Angeles, November, 1991, C101d.
Bolthrunis, C. O. (1989). An industrial perspective on #uid bed reactor
models. Chemical Engineering Progress, 85(5), 51}54.
Bos, A. N. R., Tromp, P. J. J., & Akse, H. N. (1995). Conversion of
methanol to lower ole"ns: Kinetic modelling, reactor simulation,
and selection. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research, 34,
3808}3816.
Botterill, J. S. M. (1986). Fluid bed heat transfer. In D. Geldart, Gas
yuidization technology. Chichester: Wiley (Chapter 9).
Botterill, J. S. M. (1975). Fluid bed heat transfer. New York: Academic
Press.
Brereton, C. M. H. (1987). Fluid mechanics of high velocity yuidised beds.
Ph.D. dissertation, University of British Columbia, Vancouver,
Canada.
Brereton, C. M. H., & Grace, J. R. (1992). The transition to turbulent
#uidization. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 70,
246}251.
Brereton, C. H. M., Grace, J. R., & Yu, J. (1988). Axial gas mixing in
circulating #uidized bed. In P. Basu, & J. F. Large, Circulating yuidized bed technology II (pp. 307}314). Oxford: Pergamon
Press.
Briens, C. L., Margaritis, A., & Wild, G. (1995). A new stochastic model
and measurement errors in residence time distributions of multiphase reactors. Chemical Engineering Science, 50, 279}287.
Cai, P. (1989). The transition of yow regime in dense phase gas}solid
yuidized bed. Ph.D. dissertation, Tsinghua University, Beijing,
China.
Cai, P., Chen, S. P., Jin, Z. Q., & Wang, Z. W. (1989). E!ect of operating temperature and pressure on the transition from bubbling to
turbulent #uidization. A.I.Ch.E. Symposium Series, 85(270), 37}43.
Cai, P., Jin, Y., Yu, Z. -Q., & Wang, Z. -W. (1990). Mechanism of #ow
regime transition from bubbling to turbulent #uidization. A.I.Ch.E.
Journal, 36, 955}956.
Canada, G. S., & McLaughlin, M. H. (1978). Large particle #uidization
and heat transfer at high pressures. A.I.Ch.E. Symposium Series,
74(174), 27}37.
Canada, G. S., McLaughlin, M. H., & Staub, F. W. (1978). Flow regimes
and void fraction in gas #uidization of large particles in beds
without tube banks. A.I.Ch.E. Symposium Series, 74(176), 14}26.
Cankurt, N. T., & Yerushalmi, J. (1978). Gas backmixing in high
velocity #uidized beds. In Fluidization II (pp. 387}393). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Chaouki, J., Gonzalez, A., Guy, C., & Klvana, D. (1999a). Two-phase
model for a catalytic turbulent #uidized-bed reactor: Application to
ethylene synthesis. Chemical Engineering Science, 54, 2039}2045.
Chaouki, J., Klvana, D., & Guy, C. (1999b). Selective and complete
catalytic oxidation of natural gas in turbulent #uidized beds. Korean
Journal of Chemical Engineering, 16, 494}500.
Chehbouni, A., Chaouki, J., Guy, C., & Klvana, D. (1994). Characterization of the #ow transition between bubbling and turbulent #uidization. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research, 33,
1889}1898.
Chehbouni, A., Chaouki, J., Guy, C., & Klvana, D. (1995). E!ets de
di!eH rents parame`tres sur les vitesses du transition de la #uidisation
en reH gime turbulent. Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, 73,
41}50.

4822

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

Chen, B. Y., Li, Y., Wang, F., Wang, Y., & Kwauk, M. (1980). Studies on
fast #uidization. Chemical Metallurgy, 5, 30}38 (in Chinese).
Choi, J. H., Chang, I. Y., Shun, D. W., Yi, C. K., Son, J. E., & Kim, S. D.
(1999). Correlation on the particle entrainment rate in gas #uidized
beds. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research, 38, 2491}2496.
Choi, J. H., Ryu, H. J., Shun, D. W., Son, J. E., & Kim, S. D. (1998).
Temperature e!ect on the particle entrainment rate in a gas
#uidized bed. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research, 37,
1130}1135.
Chyang, C.-S., & Huang, W.-C. (1988). Characteristics of large particle
#uidization. Journal of Chinese Institute of Chemical Engineering, 19,
81}89.
Crescitelli, S., Donsi, G., Russo, G., & Clift, R. (1978). High velocity
behaviour of #uidized beds: Slugs and turbulent #ow. In S. Schlosser, Selected papers presented at the sixth international congress
CHISA '78, Prague (pp. 1}11).
Davidson, J. F., & Harrison, D. (1963). Fluidized particles. London:
Cambridge Press.
Decker, N. A., & Glicksman, L. R. (1981). Conduction heat transfer at
the surface of bodies immersed in gas-#uidized beds of spherical
particles. A.I.Ch.E. Symposium Series, 77(208), 341}346.
de Groot, J. H. (1967). Scaling-up of gas-#uidized bed reactors. In
A. A. H. Drinkenburg, Proceedings of the international symposium on
yuidization (pp. 348}361). Amsterdam: Netherlands University
Press.
Degaleesan, S., & DudukovicH , M. P. (1998). Liquid backmixing in
bubble columns and the axial dispersion coe$cient. A.I.Ch.E. Journal, 44(11), 2369}2378.
Dunham, G. E., Mann, M. D., & Grewal, N. S. (1993). Dependence of
transition to turbulent #uidization on static bed depth in a #uidized
bed. In A. A. Avidan, Preprints of the fourth international conference
on circulating yuidized beds, Somerset, PA.
Edwards, M., & Avidan, A. (1986). Conversion model aids scale-up of
Mobil's #uid bed MTG process. Chemical Engineering Science, 41,
829}835.
Ege, P. E. (1995). Investigation of the yow structure of turbulent yuidized
beds. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Trondheim, Norway.
Ege, P., Grislinga s, A., & deLasa, H. I. (1996). Modelling turbulent
#uidized bed reactors: Tracer and "bre optic probe studies. Chemical Engineering Journal, 61, 179}190.
Fan, L. S., & Zhu, C. (1998). Principles of gas}solid yows. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press (Chapter 12).
Fane, A. G., & Wen, C. Y. (1982). Fluidized bed reactors. In G.
Hetsroni, Handbook of multiphase systems. Washington: Hemisphere
Publishing (Chapter 8.4).
Farag, H. I., Ege, P. E., Grislinga s, A., & deLasa, H. I. (1997). Flow
patterns in a pilot plant-scale turbulent #uidized bed reactor: Concurrent application of tracers and "ber optic sensors. Canadian
Journal of Chemical Engineering, 75, 851}860.
Flamant, G., & Bergeron, A. (1992). Radiative contribution to heat
transfer between a #uidized bed and a wall. International Chemical
Engineering, 32, 409}420.
Flamant, G., Fatah, N., & Filtris, Y. (1992). Wall-to-bed heat transfer in
gas}solid #uidized beds: Prediction of heat transfer regimes. Powder
Technology, 69, 223}232.
Foka, M., Chaouki, J., Guy, C., & Klvana, D. (1994). Natural gas
conversion in a catalytic turbulent #uidized bed. Chemical Engineering Science, 49, 4269}4276.
Foka, M., Chaouki, J., Guy, C., & Klvana, D. (1996). Gas phase
hydrodynamics of a gas}solid turbulent #uidized bed reactor.
Chemical Engineering Science, 55, 713}723.
Furusaki, S., Nozaki, Y., & Nakagiri, K. (1984). Mass transfer coe$cients and amounts of direct-contact catalysts in #uidized
catalysts beds. Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, 62,
610}616.
Gao, S., Zhao, G., Qiu, S., & Ma, W. (1991). Solid circulating rate in fast
#uidized bed. In M. Kwauk, & M. Hasatani, Proceedings of the

fourth China-Japan conference on yuidization (pp. 76}85). Beijing:


Science Press.
Geldart, D. (1986). Particle entrainment and carryover. In D. Geldart,
Gas yuidization technology (pp. 123}153). New York: Wiley.
Geldart, D., Cullinan, J., Georghiades, S., Dilvrayu, D., & Pope,
D. J. (1979). The e!ect of "nes on entrainment from gas #uidized
beds. Transactions of the Institution of Chemical Engineers, 57,
269}275.
Geldart, D., & Rhodes, M. J. (1986). From minimum #uidization to
pneumatic transport: A critical review of the hydrodynamics. In P.
Basu, Circulating yuidized bed technology (pp. 21}31). Toronto:
Pergamon Press.
Geldart, D., Xue, Y., & Xie, H.-Y. (1995). Measurement of bottom bed
and transport disengagement heights in beds of fresh FCC catalyst.
A.I.Ch.E. Symposium Series, 91(308), 93}102.
George, S. E., & Grace, J. R. (1982). Heat transfer to horizontal tubes in
the freeboard region of a gas #uidized bed. A.I.Ch.E. Journal, 28,
759}765.
Glicksman, L. R. (1984). Heat transfer in #uidized bed combustors. In
P. Basu, Fluidized bed boilers: Design and application (pp. 70}76).
Toronto: Pergamon Press.
Grace, J. R. (1970). The viscosity of #uidized beds. Canadian Journal of
Chemical Engineering, 48, 30}33.
Grace, J. R. (1982). Fluidized bed heat transfer. In G. Hetsroni, Handbook of multiphase systems. Washington: Hemisphere Publishing
(Chapter 8.2).
Grace, J. R. (1984). Generalized models for isothermal #uidized bed
reactors. In L. K. Doraiswamy, Recent advances in the engineering
analysis of chemically reacting systems (pp. 237}255). New Delhi:
Wiley.
Grace, J. R. (1986a). Modelling and simulation of two-phase #uidized
bed reactors. In H. I. deLasa, Chemical reactor design and technology
(pp. 245}289). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijho! Publishers.
Grace, J. R. (1986b). Contacting modes and behaviour classi"cation of
gas}solid and other two-phase suspensions. Canadian Journal of
Chemical Engineering, 64, 353}363.
Grace, J. R., Abba, I. A., Bi, H. T., & Thompson, M. L. (1999b).
Fluidized bed catalytic reactor modelling across the #ow regimes.
Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, 77, 305}311.
Grace, J. R., & Hosny, N. (1985). Forces on horizontal tubes in gas
#uidised beds. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 63,
191}198.
Grace, J. R., Issangya, A. S., Bai, D., & Bi, H. T. (1999a). Situating the
high-density circulating #uidized bed. A.I.Ch.E. Journal, 45,
2108}2116.
Grace, J. R., & Sun, G. (1990). Fines concentration in voids in #uidized
beds. Powder Technology, 62, 203}205.
Grace, J. R., & Sun, G. (1991). In#uence of particle size distribution on
the performance of #uidized bed reactors. Canadian Journal of
Chemical Engineering, 69, 1126}1134.
Guo, F. (1987). Gas #ow and mixing behavior in "ne-powder #uidized
bed. A.I.Ch.E. Journal, 33, 1895}1898.
Halder, P. K., & Basu, P. (1992). Attrition of spherical electrode carbon
particles during combustion in a turbulent #uidized bed. Chemical
Engineering Science, 47, 527}532.
Halder, P. K., Datta, A., & Chattopadhyay, R. (1993). Combustion of
single char particles in a turbulent #uidized bed. Canadian Journal of
Chemical Engineering, 71, 3}9.
Han, G. Y., Lee, G. S., & Kim, S. D. (1985). Hydrodynamics of
a circulating #uidized bed. Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering,
2, 141}147.
Harrison, D., Davidson, J. F., & de Kock, J. W. (1961). On the nature of
aggregative and particulate #uidization. Transactions of the Institution of Chemical Engineers, 39, 202}211.
Hashimoto, O., Haruta, T., Mori, S., Hiraoka, S., Yamada, I., Kuwa,
M., & Saito, Y. (1989). Simulation model of turbulent #uidized bed

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825


catalytic reactor. Kagaku Kogaku Ronbunshu, 15, 336}342 (in
Japanese).
Hashimoto, O., Mori, S., Hiraoka, S., Yamada, I., Kojima, T., & Tsuji,
K. (1990). Heat transfer to the surface of vertical tubes in the
freeboard of a turbulent #uidized bed. International Chemical Engineering, 30, 254}258.
Hewitt, G. F., & Jayanti, S. (1993). To churn or not to churn. International Journal of Multiphase Flow, 19, 527}529.
Horio, M. (1991). Hydrodynamics of circulating #uidization: Present
status and research needs. In P. Basu, M. Horio, & M. Hasatani,
Circulating yuidized bed technology III (pp. 3}14). Oxford: Pergamon.
Horio, M., Ishii, H., & Nishimuro, M. (1992). On the nature of turbulent
and fast #uidized beds. Powder Technology, 70, 239}246.
Horio, M., & Nonaka, A. (1987). A generalized bubble diameter correlation for gas}solid #uidized beds. A.I.Ch.E. Journal, 33, 1865}1872.
Hyre, M., & Glicksman, L. (1997). Brief communication on the assumption of minimum energy dissipation in circulating #uidized beds.
Chemical Engineering Science, 32, 2435}2438.
Ihara, T., Kayou, A., & Natori, Y. (1996). Scale-up study of the turbulent #uidized bed reactor. A.I.Ch.E. Symposium Series, 92(313),
81}85.
Issangya, A. S. (1998). Flow dynamics in high density circulating yuidized
beds. Ph.D. dissertation, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Jin, Y., Yu, Z. Q., Wang, Z. W., & Cai, P. (1986). A criterion for
transition from bubbling to turbulent #uidization. In K. "stergaard,
& A. S+rensen, Fluidization V (pp. 289}296). New York: Engineering
Foundation.
Kai, T., & Furusaki, S. (1985). Behaviour of #uidized beds of small
particles at elevated temperatures. Journal of Chemical Engineering
of Japan, 18, 113}118.
Kai, T., Imamura, T., & Takahashi, T. (1995). Hydrodynamic in#uences
on mass transfer between bubble and emulsion phases in a "ne
particle #uidized bed. Powder Technology, 83, 105}110.
Kehoe, P. W. K., & Davidson, J. F. (1970). Continuously slugging
#uidized beds. Chemeca '70, Institution of Chemical Engineers Symposium Series, vol. 33 (pp. 97}116). Australia: Butterworths.
King, D. F. (1989). Estimation of dense bed voidage in fast and slow
#uidized beds of FCC catalyst. In J. R. Grace, L. W. Shemilt, &
M. A. Bergougnou, Fluidization VI (pp. 1}8). New York: Engineering
Foundation.
Klinzing, G. E. (1981). Gas}solid transport. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Knowlton, T. M. (1992). Pressure and temperature e!ects in
#uid}particle systems. In O. E. Potter, & D. J. Nicklin, Fluidization
VII (pp. 27}46). New York: Engineering Foundation.
Krambeck, F. J., Avidan, A. A., Lee, C. K., & Lo, M. N. (1987).
Predicting #uid bed reactor e$ciency using adsorbing gas tracers.
A.I.Ch.E. Journal, 33, 1727}1738.
Kwauk, M., Wang, N., Li, Y., Chen, B., & Shen, Z. (1985). Fast
#uidization at ICM. In Circulating yuidized bed technology (pp.
33}62). Toronto: Pergamon Press.
Lancia, A., Nigro, R., Volpicelli, G., & Santoro, L. (1988). Transition
from slugging to turbulent #ow regimes in #uidized beds detected
by means of capacitance probes. Powder Technology, 56, 49}56.
Lanneau, K. P. (1960). Gas}solids contacting in #uidized beds. Transactions of the Institution of Chemical Engineers, 38, 125}137.
Le Palud, T., & Zenz, F. A. (1989). Supercritical phase behaviour of
#uid}particle systems. In J. R. Grace, L. W. Shemilt, & M. A.
Bergougnou, Fluidization VI (pp. 121}128). New York: Engineering
Foundation.
Lee, G. S., & Kim, S. D. (1988). Pressure #uctuations in turbulent
#uidized beds. Journal of Chemical Engineering of Japan, 21,
515}521.
Lee, G. S., & Kim, S. D. (1989a). Rise velocities of slugs and voids in
slugging and turbulent #uidized beds. Korean Journal of Chemical
Engineering, 6(1), 15}22.

4823

Lee, G. S., & Kim, S. D. (1989b). Gas mixing in slugging and


turbulent #uidized beds. Chemical Engineering Communications, 86,
91}111.
Lee, G. S., & Kim, S. D. (1990a). Axial mixing of solids in turbulent
#uidized beds. Chemical Engineering Journal, 44, 1}9.
Lee, G. S., & Kim, S. D. (1990b). Bed expansion characteristics and
transition velocity in turbulent #uidized beds. Powder Technology,
62, 207}215.
Lee, G. S., Kim, S. D., & Baird, M. H. I. (1991). Axial mixing of
"ne particles in #uidized bed. Chemical Engineering Journal, 47,
47}50.
Leu, L.-P., Huang, J.-W., and Gua, B.-B. (1990). Axial pressure distribution in turbulent #uidized beds. Proceedings of the second Asian
conference on yuidized-bed and three-phase reactors (pp. 71}79).
Leu, L. P., Hsia, Y. K., & Chen, C. C. (1997). Wall-to-bed heat transfer
in a turbulent #uidized bed. A.I.Ch.E. Symposium Series, 93(317),
83}86.
Lewis, W. K., Gilliland, E. R., & Bauer, W. C. (1949). Characteristics of
#uidized particles. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 41,
1104}1117.
Li, J., Kwauk, M., & Reh, L. (1992). Role of energy minimization in
gas}solid #uidization. In O. E. Potter, & D. J. Nicklin, Fluidization
VII (pp. 83}91). New York: Engineering Foundation.
Li, J., Reh, L., Tung, Y., & Kwauk, M. (1990). Comparison of #uidization behaviour in di!erent #ow regimes. Proceedings from the xfth
national yuidization conference (pp. 110}113) (in Chinese).
Li, J., & Weinstein, H. (1989). An experimental comparison of gas
backmixing in #uidized beds across the regime spectrum. Chemical
Engineering Science, 44, 1697}1705.
Li, Y., & Kwauk, M. (1980). The dynamics of fast #uidization. In J. R.
Grace, & J. M. Matsen, Fluidization (pp. 537}544). New York:
Plenum Press.
Li, Y., & Wu, P. (1991). A study on axial gas mixing in a fast #uidized
bed. In P. Basu, M. Horio, & M. Hasatani, Circulating yuidized bed
technology III (pp. 581}586). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Lim, K. S., Zhu, J. X., & Grace, J. R. (1995). Hydrodynamics of
gas}solid #uidization. International Journal of Multiphase Flow, 21,
141}193.
Lin, Q., Wei, F., & Jin, Y. (2000). The transient density signal analysis
and two-phase micro-structure #ow in gas}solids #uidization.
Chemical Engineering Science, in press.
Louge, M. (1997). Experimental techniques. In J. R. Grace, A. A.
Avidan, & T. M. Knowlton, Circulating yuidized beds (pp. 312}368).
London: Chapman & Hall.
Lu, C. X., & Wang, Z. W. (1990). Studies on TDH of FCC catalysts.
Proceedings of the xfth Chinese yuidization conference, Beijing, China
(pp. 48}51).
Lu, C. X., Xi, Y., Shi, M., Shen, F., Zhao, M., & Peng, J. (1996). Radial
voidage distribution in a large scale gas}solids turbulent #uidized
bed. Journal of Petrochemistry, 25(5), 315}317.
Lu, C., Xu, Y., Shi, M., & Shen, F. (1997). Two-area model for bubble
distribution in a turbulent #uidized bed of "ne particles. Chinese
Journal of Chemical Engineering, 5(4), 287}295.
Marzocchella, A., & Salatino, P. (1996). The dynamics of #uidized beds
under pressure. A.I.Ch.E. Symposium Series, 92(313), 25}30.
Massimilla, L. (1973). Behavior of catalytic beds of "ne particles at high
gas velocities. A.I.Ch.E. Symposium Series, 69(128), 11}12.
Matheson, G. L., Herbst, W. A., & Holt, P. H. (1949). Characteristics of
#uid}solid systems. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 41,
1099}1104.
Matsen, J. M. (1982). Mechanism of choking and entrainment. Powder
Technology, 31, 21}34.
May, W. G. (1959). Fluidized-bed reactor studies. Chemical Engineering
Progress, 55, 49}56.
M'chirgui, A., Tadrist, L., & Radev, S. (1999). Analysis of the hydrodynamic instabilities in a gas #uidized bed. In J. Werther, Circulating yuidized bed technology VI (pp. 137}142). Frankfurt: Dechema.

4824

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825

Miyauchi, T., Furusaki, S., Yamada, K., & Matsumura, M. (1980).


Experimental determinations of the vertical distribution of contact
e$ciency inside #uidized catalysts. In J. R. Grace, & J. M. Matsen,
Fluidization (pp. 571}585). New York: Plenum Press.
Molerus, O., Burschka, A., & Dietz, S. (1995). Particle migration at solid
surfaces and heat transfer in bubbling #uidized beds } II: Prediction
of heat transfer in bubbling #uidized beds. Chemical Engineering
Science, 50, 879}885.
Molerus, O., & Mattmann, W. (1992a). Heat transfer mechanisms in
gas-#uidized beds. Part 1: maximum heat transfer coe$cients.
Chemical Engineering Technology, 15, 139}150.
Molerus, O., & Mattmann, W. (1992b). Heat transfer mechanisms in
gas-#uidized beds. Part 2: dependence of heat transfer on gas velocity. Chemical Engineering Technology, 15, 240}244.
Molerus, O., & Wirth, K. E. (1997). Heat transfer in yuidized beds.
London: Chapman & Hall.
Morikawa, H. (1999). Entrainment from pilot scale turbulent yuidized
beds with FCC particles. Internal Report, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Morooka, S., Kawazuishi, K., & Kato, Y. (1980). Holdup and #ow
pattern of solid particles in freeboard of gas}solid #uidized bed with
"ne particles. Powder Technology, 26, 75}82.
Nakajima, M., Harada, M., Asai, M., Yamazaki, R., & Jimbo, G. (1991).
Bubble fraction and voidage in an emulsion phase in the transition
to a turbulent #uidized bed. In P. Basu, M. Horio, & M. Hasatani,
Circulating Fluidized Bed III (pp. 79}84). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Nauman, E. B., & Bu!ham, B. A. (1983). Mixing in continuous yow
systems. New York: Wiley (Chapter 3).
Nozaki, Y., Furusaki, S., & Miyauchi, T. (1985). Determination of the
parameters of a #uidized bed of "ne catalyst particles by gas absorption. International Chemical Engineering, 25, 499}506.
Palchonok, G.I., Johnsson, F., & Leckner, B. (1997). Estimates of
turbulence e!ects in CFB boilers. In M. Kwauk, & J. Li, Circulating
yuidized bed technology V (pp. 440}445). Beijing: Science Press.
Peeler, P. K., Lim, K. S., & Close, R. C. (1999). E!ect of temperature on
the turbulent #uidization regime transition. In J. Werther, Circulating yuidized bed technology VI (pp. 125}130). Frankfurt: Dechema.
Pell, M., & Jordan, S. P. (1988). E!ect of "nes and velocity on #uid
bed reactor performance. A.I.Ch.E. Symposium Series, 184(262),
68}73.
Perales, J. F., Coll, T., Llop, M. F., Puigjaner, L., Arnaldos, J., & Casal,
J. (1991). On the transition from bubbling to fast #uidization regimes. In P. Basu, M. Horio, & M. Hasatani, Circulating yuidized
bed technology III (pp. 73}78). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Rapagna, S. P., Foscolo, U., & Gibilaro, L. G. (1994). The in#uence of
temperature on the quality of gas #uidization. International Journal
of Multiphase Flow, 20, 305}313.
Rhodes, M. J. (1996). What is turbulent #uidization? Powder Technology, 88, 3}14.
Rhodes, M. J. (1997). Turbulent #uidization: Myth or reality? In M.
Kwauk, & J. Li, Circulating yuidized bed technology V (pp. 254}259).
Beijing: Science Press.
Rhodes, M. J., & Geldart, D. (1986a). The hydrodynamics of re-circulating #uidized beds. In P. Basu, Circulating yuidized bed technology
(pp. 193}200). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Rhodes, M. J., & Geldart, D. (1986b). Transition to turbulence? In K.
"stergaard, & A. S+rensen, Fluidization V (pp. 281}288). New York:
Engineering Foundation.
Richardson, J. F., & Zaki, W. N. (1954). Sedimentation and #uidization:
part I. Transactions of the Institution of Chemical Engineers, 32,
35}53.
Rowe, P. N. (1976). Prediction of bubble size in a gas #uidized bed.
Chemical Engineering Science, 31, 285}288.
Rowe, P. N., & MacGillivray, H. J. (1980). The structure of a 15 cm
diameter gas #uidized bed operated at up to 1 m/s and seen by
X-rays. In J. R. Grace, & J. M. Matsen, Fluidization (pp. 545}553).
New York: Plenum Press.

Satija, S., & Fan, L.-S. (1985). Characteristics of slugging regime and
transition to turbulent regime for #uidized beds of large coarse
particles. A.I.Ch.E. Journal, 31, 1554}1562.
Saxena, S. C., & Ganzha, V. L. (1984). Heat transfer to immersed
surfaces in gas-#uidized beds of large particles and powder classi"cation. Powder Technology, 39, 199}208.
Schnitzlein, M. G., & Weinstein, H. (1988). Flow characterization in
high-velocity #uidized beds using pressure #uctuations. Chemical
Engineering Science, 43, 2605}2614.
SchuK gerl, K. (1967). Experimental comparison of mixing processes in
two- and three-phase #uidized beds. In A. A. H. Drinkenburg,
Proceedings of international symposium on yuidization (pp. 782}796).
Amsterdam: Netherlands University Press.
SchuK gerl, K., Merz, M., & Fetting, F. (1961). Ermittlung der Dichteverteilung in gasdurchstromtem Fliessbettsystemen durch RoK ntgenstrahlen. Chemical Engineering Science, 15, 39}74.
Sit, S. P., & Grace, J. R. (1981). E!ect of bubble interaction on interphase mass transfer in gas #uidized beds. Chemical Engineering
Science, 36, 327}335.
Sotudeh-Gharebaagh, R., Chaouki, J., & Legros, R. (1999). Natural gas
combustion in a turbulent #uidized bed of inert particles. Chemical
Engineering Science, 54, 2029}2037.
Staub, F. W. (1979). Solids circulation in turbulent #uidized beds and
heat transfer to immersed tube banks. Journal of Heat Transfer, 101,
391}396.
Staub, F. W., & Canada, G. S. (1978). E!ect of tube bank and gas
density on #ow behavior and heat transfer in #uidized beds. In J. F.
Davidson, & D. L. Keairns, Fluidization (pp. 339}344). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Stephens, G. K., Sinclair, R. J., & Potter, O. E. (1967). Gas exchange
between bubbles and dense phase in a #uidized bed. Powder Technology, 1, 157}166.
SterneH us, J., Johnsson, F., Leckner, B., & Palchonok, G. I. (1999). Gas
and solids #ow in circulating #uidized beds: Discussion on turbulence. Chemical Engineering Science, 54, 5377}5382.
Sun, G. L. (1991). Inyuence of particle size distribution on the performance of yuidized bed reactors. Ph.D. dissertation, University of
British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Sun, G. L., & Chen, G. (1989). Transition to turbulent #uidization
and its prediction. In J. R. Grace, L. W. Shemilt, & M. A. Bergougnou, Fluidization VI (pp. 33}44). New York: Engineering Foundation.
Sun, G. L., & Grace, J. R. (1990). The e!ect of particle size distribution
on the performance of catalytic #uidized bed reactors. Chemical
Engineering Science, 45, 2187}2194.
Sun, G. L., & Grace, J. R. (1992). E!ect of particle size distribution in
di!erent #uidization regimes. A.I.Ch.E. Journal, 38, 716}722.
Svensson, A., Johnsson, F., & Leckner, B. (1993). Fluid-dynamics of the
bottom bed of circulating #uidized bed boilers. In L. N. Rubow,
Proceedings of the 12th international conference on yuidized bed
combustion, vol. 2 (pp. 887}897). New York: ASME.
Tasirin, S. M., & Geldart, D. (1998). Entrainment of FCC from #uidized
beds: A new correlation for the elutriation rate constant KH . Pow
der Technology, 95, 240}247.
Taxil, I., Guigon, P., Archimbault, F., & Gauthier, T. A. (1998). Gas
#ow characterization in turbulent #uidization for FCC catalyst. In
L. S. Fan, & T. M. Knowlton, Fluidization IX (pp. 69}76). New York:
Engineering Foundation.
Thiel, W. J., & Potter, O. E. (1977). Slugging in #uidized beds. Industrial
and Engineering Chemistry Fundamentals, 16, 242}247.
Thompson, M. L., Bi, H. T., & Grace, J. R. (1999). A generalized
bubbling/turbulent #uidized bed reactor model. Chemical Engineering Science, 54, 2175}2185.
Tsukada, M., Nakanishi, D., & Horio, M. (1993). The e!ect of pressure
on the phase transition from bubbling to turbulent #uidization.
International Journal of Multiphase Flow, 19, 27}34.
Tsukada, M., Nakanishi, D., & Horio, M. (1994). E!ect of pressure on
transport velocity in a circulating #uidized bed. In A. A. Avidan,

H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825


Circulating yuidized bed technology IV (pp. 209}215). New York:
A.I.Ch.E.
van Deemter, J. J. (1980). Mixing patterns in large-scale #uidized beds.
In J. R. Grace, & J. M. Matsen, Fluidization (pp. 69}76). New York:
Plenum Press.
van den Aarse, F. G., Beenackers, A. A. C. M., & van Swaaij, W. P. M.
(1986). Bubble-to-dense phase mass transfer kinetics in gas}solid
#uidized beds. In W. P. M. van Swaaij, & N. H. Afgan, Heat and
mass transfer in xxed and yuidized beds (pp. 397}414). New York:
Hemisphere Publishing.
van der Stappen, M. L. M. (1996). Chaotic hydrodynamics of yuidized
beds. Ph.D. dissertation. Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands.
van Swaaij, W. P. M. (1978). The design of gas-solids yuid beds and
related reactors. ACS Symposium Series, vol. 72, (pp. 193}222).
Washington, D.C.: American Chemical Society.
Vedamurthy, V. N., & Sastri, V. M. K. (1974). An analysis of conductive
and radiative heat transfer to wall of #uidized bed combustor.
International Journal of Heat Transfer, 17, 1}9.
Venderbosch, R. H. (1998). The role of clusters in gas}solids reactors.
Ph.D. dissertation, Twente University, Netherlands.
Wallis, G. B. (1969). One-dimensional two-phase yow. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Wang, C., Wang, Y., Jin, Y., & Yu, Z. (1997). E!ect of particle mean size
on the performance of #uidized beds with FCC particles. Symposium
of the xrst annual conference of Chinese society of particle technology,
Beijing, China, September (pp. 333}337) (in Chinese).
Wang, Z., & Wei, F. (1997). Similarity of the particles concentration
distribution between bubbling and turbulent #uidized beds. Symposium of the xrst annual conference of Chinese society of particle
technology, Beijing, China, September (pp. 396}400) (in Chinese).
Wei, F., Lin, S., & Yang, G. (1993). Gas and solids mixing in a commercial FCC regenerator. Chemical Engineering Technology, 16, 109}113.
Weinstein, H., Li, J., Bandlamudi, E., Feindt, H. J., & Gra!, R. A. (1989).
Gas backmixing of #uidized beds in di!erent regimes and di!erent
regions. In J. R. Grace, L. W. Shemilt, & M. A. Bergougnou,
Fluidization VI (pp. 57}64). New York: Engineering Foundation.
Wen, C. Y. (1984). Flow regimes and #ow models for #uidized bed
reactors. In L. K. Doraiswamy, Recent advances in the engineering
analysis of chemically reacting systems (pp. 256}290). New Delhi:
Wiley.
Wen, C. Y., & Chen, L. H. (1982). Fluidized bed freeboard phenomena:
entrainment and elutriation. A.I.Ch.E. Journal, 28, 117}128.
Werther, J. (1980). Mathematical modelling of #uidized bed reactors.
International Chemical Engineering, 20, 529}537.
Werther, J. (1984). Hydrodynamics and mass transfer between the
bubble and emulsion phases in #uidized beds of sand and cracking
catalyst. In D. Kunii & R. Toei, Fluidization (pp. 93}101). New
York: Engineering Foundation.
Werther, J., & Wein, J. (1994). Expansion behavior of gas #uidized
bed in the turbulent regime. A.I.Ch.E. Symposium Series, 90(301),
31}44.
Wiman, J., & Almstedt, A. E. (1997). Hydrodynamics, erosion and heat
transfer in a pressurized #uidized bed: In#uence of pressure, #uidization velocity, particle size and tube bank geometry. Chemical
Engineering Science, 52, 2677}2695.

4825

Wood, R. T., Kuwata, M., & Staub, F. W. (1980). Heat transfer to


horizontal tube banks in the splash zone of a #uidized bed of large
particles. In J. R. Grace, & J. M. Matsen, Fluidization (pp. 235}242).
New York: Plenum Press.
Wunder, R. (1980). Heat transfer between gas #uidized beds and vertical
surfaces, PhD. dissertation, Technical University of Munich,
Munich, Germany (in German).
Xu, G., Sun, G., Nomura, K., Li, J., & Kato, K. (1999). Two distinctive
variational regions of radial particle concentration pro"les in circulating #uidized bed risers. Powder Technology, 101, 91}100.
Yamazaki, R., Asai, M., Nakajima, M., & Jimbo, G. (1991). Characteristics of transition regime in a turbulent #uidized bed. Proceedings of
the forth China-Japan yuidization conference (pp. 720}725). Beijing:
Science Press.
Yang, W. C. (1984). Mechanistic models for transitions between regimes
of #uidization. A.I.Ch.E. Journal, 30, 1025}1027.
Yang, W. C., & Chitester, D. C. (1988). Transition between bubbling
and turbulent #uidization at elevated pressure. A.I.Ch.E. Symposium
Series, 84(262), 10}21.
Yang, Y. R., Rong, S. X., Chen, G., & Chen, B. C. (1990). Flow regimes
and regime transitions in turbulent #uidized beds. Chemical Reaction Engineering Technology, 6, 9}16 (in Chinese).
Yerushalmi, J., & Avidan, A. A. (1985). High velocity #uidization. In J.
F. Davidson, R. Clift, & D. Harrison, Fluidization (pp. 225}291).
London: Academic Press.
Yerushalmi, J., & Cankurt, N. T. (1979). Further studies of the regimes
of #uidization. Powder Technology, 24, 187}205.
Yerushalmi, J., Cankurt, N. T., Geldart, D., & Liss, B. (1978). Flow
regimes in vertical gas}solid contact systems. A.I.Ch.E. Symposium
Series, 174(176), 1}12.
Yerushalmi, J., Turner, D. H., & Squires, A. M. (1976). The fast #uidized
bed. Industrial and Engineering Chemical Process Design and Development, 15, 47}51.
Zenz, F. A. (1949). Two-phase #uidized-solid #ow. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 41, 2801}2806.
Zhang, X., Guo, S., Li, L., & Zhang, Y. (1996). Gas mixing behaviors in
the turbulent #uidized bed with FCC particles. In Circulating
yuidized bed technology V (pp. DGS2-1-6). Beijing: Science Press.
Zhang, X. P., Guo, S. Y., Zhang, Y. B., & Li, L. (1995). Overall #uidizing
behaviours of "ne particles in a turbulent #uidized bed.
Journal of South China University of Technology, 23(10), 52}56
(in Chinese).
Zhang, X., & Qian, Y. (1997). Mass transfer between the bubble and
emulsion phase in a turbulent #uidized bed with FCC particles. In
Q. Yu & C. Huanqin, Advances in environmental engineering and
chemical engineering (pp. 190}193). Guangzhou, China: South
China University of Technology Press.
Zhang, X., Qian, Y., Guo, S., & Zhang, Y. (1997). Application
of the optical "bre probe to the measurement of the bubble
characteristics in a turbulent #uidized bed with FCC particles.
Journal of South China University of Technology, 25(8), 20}24 (in
Chinese).
Zhao, X., & Yang, G. L. (1991). Critical turbulent velocity for #uidized
beds with ba%es. In M. Kwauk, & M. Hasatani, Proceedings of the
fourth China-Japan yuidization conference (pp. 196}201). Beijing:
Science Press.