Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Review
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
4791
4791
4791
4792
4793
4794
4794
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4790
4796
4796
4797
4798
4799
4799
.
.
.
.
.
4799
4799
4800
4801
4802
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
4813
4813
4814
4814
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
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
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
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
4793
4794
m!1 K
m
(1)
4795
Source
Equations
No.
; "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)
;
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)
(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)
Re "0.568Ar
A
(i)
Horio (1991)
Re "0.936Ar
A
( j)
Re "0.663Ar
A
(k)
(l)
Re "1.243Ar
A
(n)
Re "0.565Ar
A
(o)
(p)
(m)
4796
0.00894
e" 0.796#
D
R
Re
Ar
(7)
(6)
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$cult to identify such
a transition point in their systems, while a close examination of the pressure gradient pro"les reported by
4797
Table 3
Methods for determining transition from turbulent to fast #uidization
Author
Method
Type
Solid concentration
Solid concentration
Solid concentration
Pressure #uctuations
Solid concentration
Emptying-time versus ;
Entrainment
Maximum G versus ;
Q
Elutriability versus d
N
Saturated G versus ;
Q
Entrainment
Entrainment
Entrainment
voidage versus solids circulation rate at various super"cial gas velocities. They de"ned the transport velocity as
the point below which the bed remained in a dense
condition and above which the unit could be operated in
a dilute phase transport state. This transport velocity is
clearly lower than that de"ned by Yerushalmi and
Cankurt (1979).
To increase the accuracy of determining the transport
velocity, Horio, Ishii and Nishimuro (1992) calculated
the maximum [*(!dP/dz)/*GQ ]3 at di!erent gas velocities and then plotted this derivative against the super"cial gas velocity. The resulting curve allows ; to be
determined by extrapolation. Several correlations have
been developed to predict the transport velocity, ; , as
listed in Table 4. In view of the scatter in the experimental
data due to changes in measurement location, column
diameter, height, etc., it is di$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
4798
;
GQ "oN (1!e) !; .
e
(9)
(10)
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
;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
; "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
Table 6
Comparison of ; , ; and ; based on literature data
QC
I
Author
Particles
; (m/s)
I
; (m/s)
QC
; (m/s)
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
4800
(13)
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.
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)
4802
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
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
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
0.3
65
0.45
0.6, 0.9
0.21, 0.60
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
0.20
77.6
0.39
0.59
0.78
0.98
N/A
0.88
1.15
Lu et al. (1997)
Void size
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
0.2
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)
Method
D
R
(m)
d
N
(lm)
0.05
60
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
Fig. 11. Axial solids concentration pro"le: 0.05 m diameter bed, 0.12 m
static bed height (adapted from Venderbosch, 1998).
(16)
4804
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$cient was computed to "t RTD curves from a onedimensional pseudo-homogeneous di!usion model and
was correlated by
DXE "0.1835e\
(17)
;HR
d \
PeE "
"4.4;10\Ar
N
.
DXE
DR
(18)
The same experimental data were also "tted to the twophase model of van Deemter (1980).
Ege (1995) injected pulses of helium into the main
air#ow upstream of the wind chamber. Two thermal
conductivity detectors were aligned vertically, one above
the other in the bed. Pulse injection into the 0.3 m diameter column with 1.4 m static bed height led to a double
peak for a detector 0.4 m above the distributor. This was
attributed to a decrease in the ratio of distributor pressure drop to bed pressure drop, causing #uctuation in the
tracer #ow. Further analysis of the measurements resulted in a core-annulus model (see Section 9). Published
gas mixing data from larger columns is lacking.
Fig. 12. Gas axial dispersion coe$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
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
XE
(m/s)
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
Pulse
0.6
0.6
N/A
0.587
0.838
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
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
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
0.1
0.21}0.94
0.55
Plotted in Fig. 12
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
One dimensional
dispersion
Steady state
58
5.76
1.26
1.41
0.41
3.05
3.4
;HR
H
"3.47Ar
Re
Sc\
R
.
PeE "
DXE
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
4806
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)
0.15
0.81
1.17
1.5
0.36
0.752
0.801
0.824
0.152
1.3
1.3
0.43
0.77
0.97
1.21
0.85
Pulse injection
(z"1.5 m)
0.09
1.0
1.5
0.44
0.774
0.834
0.04
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
0.05
0.4
0.6
0.7
0.58
G (kg/ms)
Q
eD
@E
(m/s)
69
43
15.4
0.03
0.04
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
(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
0.3}1.3
0.85
1.26}1.41
FCC
0.41
5.76
4808
(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. 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.
4809
(26)
d
N
Pr
.
l
R
(27)
k
l"
,
J
(g(o !o )
N
E
(28)
k
l"
.
R
g(o !o )o
N
E E
(29)
4810
Table 13
Summary of correlations for convective bed-to-surface heat transfer coe$cients applicable to turbulent #uidized beds
Author
Correlation
Range
Remark
Staub (1979)
Nu"Nu
20 lm )d )1000 lm
N
107(Ar(698
(Tube at centre of bed)
107(Ar(698
(Tube at r/R"0.5)
149(Ar(2890
0.47(Re (4.0
N
(Freeboard overall heat
transfer coe$cient)
Hashimoto
et al. (1990)
Eq. (30)
;/; '1.2
R
Molerus et al.
(1995)
Eq. (26)
Eq. (27)
Ar)10
Ar'10
150
d ;10
N
;
0.42o (1!e )DZ
N
K
;
o
E
1#
!
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
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
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\)
0.080
0.65
53
1000
0.47
N/A
0.195
0.45
60
530
0.37
N/A
0.10
0.65
60
540
0.37
0.053
2.3
55
1050(o )
N
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
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
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.
(36)
4813
Table 15
Summary of correlations for interphase mass transfer for turbulent beds
Author
Correlation
Remarks
Dt
*
k a "3.7
E '
d
k a "1.631Sc
;
E '
D
k "1.74;10\Re
Sc
E
N
d
N
to create a better understanding of transfer and to establish reliable correlations for determining interphase mass
transfer coe$cients.
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
4815
*C
*C
t D
* *C
G* !t D
G* ! * PE*
t u
r G*
*
* * *z
* XE *z
r
*r
*r
(44)
*C
t D
*C
* *C
G& !t D
G& ! & PE&
r G&
t u
& XE& *z
& & *z
*r
r
*r
Avidan (1982)
Edwards and Avidan
(1986)
Authors
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
XE 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: ;
dC
dC
G #Rate "0
Single phase: ; G !D
XE dz
G
dz
Bubble/void phase: ;
Key assumptions
Table 16
Summary of turbulent #uid bed reactor models
Remarks
4816
H. T. Bi et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 4789}4825
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
XE dz
dC
dC
G* !D
G*
u
* dz
XE* dz
* *C
*C
*C
D
G* !D
G* ! PE*
u
r G*
* *z
XE* *z
r *r
*r
*C
*C
D
* *C
G& !D
G& ! PE&
H!phase: u
r G&
& *z
XE& *z
r *r
*r
L!phase:
dC
dC
G& !D
G&
H!phase: u
& dz
XE& 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
CE dz
BC ' C
B
C
Emulsion phase:
Bubble/void phase: ;
No particles in voids.
Plug #ow of gas in voids.
No net gas #ow through dense phase.
4818
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.
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
XE PE
D
solid axial dispersion coe$cient, m/s
XQ
e
emissivity, dimensionless
E
axial dispersion coe$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
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
Greek letters
a
b
c
GGH
d
d
T
*P
*Z
K
e
e
e
A
e
A
e
G
p
j
E
k
l
B
o
t
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
CSTR
DPF
GBT
GFBR
PDF
PF
PSD
RTD
TDH
TFB
TPWD
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
4822
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
4823
4824
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,
4825