Master Thesis

Computational fluid dynamic modelling

and simulation of a dual fluidized bed
cold-flow model

For the purpose of obtaining the academic degree

“Master of Science”

Under the direction of

Pfeifer Christoph, Univ. Prof. Dipl.-Ing. Dr. techn.

Frohner Andreas, Dipl.-Ing.

H89300
Institute of Chemical and Energy Engineering

University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna

Department of Material Sciences and Process Engineering

Gerfried GREILER, BSc

01240107

Vienna, April 2019 ..…..……………………….

Signature
 Statutory Declaration

I declare that I have authored this thesis independently, that I have not used
sources/resources other than the declared, and that I have explicitly marked all material that
has been quoted either literally or in content from the used sources.

Eidesstattliche Erklärung

Ich erkläre an Eides statt, dass ich die vorliegende Arbeit selbstständig verfasst, andere als
die angegebenen Quellen / Hilfsmittel nicht benutzt, und die den benutzten Quellen
wörtliche und inhaltlich entnommene Stellen als solche kenntlich gemacht habe.
 Acknowledgement

I would first like to express my gratitude to my supervisors Univ.Prof. Dipl.Ing. Dr.techn.

Christoph Pfeifer and Dipl.Ing. Andreas Frohner of the Institute of Chemical and Energy
Engineering at the University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna. The doors to
their offices were always open whenever I ran into a trouble or had a question about my
research or writing. They consistently allowed this paper to be my own work but steered me
in the right direction whenever they thought I needed it.

I would also like to thank the experts who were involved and my colleagues who gave me
useful input and very valuable comments on this thesis.
Finally, I must express my gratitude to my parents and my brother for providing me with
dependable support and continuous encouragement throughout my years of study at this
university and abroad, and during the process of researching and writing this thesis. This
accomplishment would not have been possible without them.

Thank you all.

Gerfried Greiler
 Summary
The aim of this thesis is the modelling and simulation of a circulating dual fluidized bed cold-flow model from the
Institute of Chemical and Energy Engineering at the University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna.
The simulation is carried out using the computational fluid dynamics (CFD) software of Ansys Fluent. The
prediction and verification of simulations are a powerful instrument, for this reason the aim of this thesis is to
simulate and model a downscaled cold-flow model with two fluidized beds. The simulation is carried out as a 3D
model with the Euler-Euler approach, which is unusual for dense particles with a bulk density of 3435 kg/m³ as
used in this thesis. The model consists of a combustion riser, a cyclone, two siphons, and a bubbling fluidized
pyrolysis reactor. The pyrolysis reactor as well as the combustion riser are simulated as a fluidized bed with
fluidization rates for the combustion riser of 𝜑𝐹𝐶 = 0.40 and 𝜑𝐹𝑃 = 0.07 for the pyrolysis. A slow peak load
approach of the fluidization rates is required to run the simulation properly. With the pressure results from the
simulation of the dual fluidized bed, a relationship between the pressure results from experiments can be
established. The duration of the simulation in this thesis is 65 seconds. The results show a start of the circulation
of this model after 10 seconds of simulated time. The further simulated time is precisely described in this thesis
exhibit a steady flow with no deviations.

Keywords: CFD, Euler-Euler Approach, 3D, Fluidized Bed.

Table of Content
INTRODUCTION 1

AIM AND SCOPE 1

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 2
3.1. THERMOCHEMICAL CONVERSION 2

3.2. MAIN CATEGORIES OF PYROLYSIS 3

3.3. PARTICLE CHARACTERIZATION 5

3.3.1. PARTICLE SIZE 5

3.3.2. PARTICLE SHAPE 6

3.3.3. PARTICLE DENSITY 7

3.3.4. POROSITY 8

3.4. FLUIDIZATION VELOCITIES AND PRESSURE DROP 8

3.4.1. CLASSIFICATION OF FLUIDIZED PARTICLES 12

3.5. FLUIDIZATION REGIMES 14

TYPES OF FLUIDIZED BED REACTORS 16

4.1. NON-CIRCULATING FLUIDIZED BEDS COMBUSTION BOILERS 17

4.2. CIRCULATING FLUIDIZED BEDS 18

4.3. ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES 19

4.4. COMPARISON, PROCESSING, AND PREPARING OF BIOMASS IN FLUIDIZED BEDS 20

MODELLING FLUIDIZED BED REACTOR VIA CFD 21

5.1. OVERVIEW OF CFD SOFTWARE PACKAGES 21

5.2. COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS (CFD) 23

5.3. MATHEMATICAL MODELS FOR TRANSPORT IN FLUIDIZED BEDS 23

5.3.1. EULER-EULER APPROACH 23
5.3.2. EULER-LAGRANGE APPROACH 24
5.4. HARDWARE 27

EXPERIMENTAL SETUP 28
6.1. GEOMETRY 28
6.2. MESH 30
6.3. PRESSURE MEASUREMENT POINTS 34

NUMERICAL SIMULATION 36
7.1. SIMULATION PARAMETERS AND BOUNDARY CONDITIONS 36
7.2. STARTING CONDITIONS AND PEAK LOAD APPROACH 40

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 43

8.1. PRESSURE TREND AND PRESSURE PROFILE 43
8.2. TEMPERATURE PROFILE 55

CONCLUSION AND PERSPECTIVE 56

LIST OF CITED LITERATURE 58

LIST OF FIGURES 60

LIST OF TABLES 61

LIST OF ABBREVIATION 62
 INTRODUCTION
The establishment of circulating fluidized beds with additional pyrolysis technology began in
the mid-1970s. A reason for this was the oil crisis during this time period. This led to processes
being developed for producing liquid fuels from lingo-cellulosic biomass (Czernik and
Bridgwater, 2004).
Fluidization is a natural phenomenon that can occur in anywhere in everyday life. This
technology was used in agriculture and mining to separate solids in early times. It is a powerful
method to process a variety of solid particulate materials in different industries (Horio, 2013).
Nowadays, fluidization is used in fluid catalytic cracking in the petroleum industry, in catalytic
processes, in gas phase polymerization processes of polyethylene and polypropylene, in the
chlorination process of metals, in the granulation process for pharmacy, in fluidized bed
combustion of solid fuels (e.g. coal, wastes and biomass) to generate steam for boilers, and in
waste incineration of solids and sludge, among other applications.
The experimental development of fluidized beds plants in different areas are cost-intensive.
For this reason, a prior simulation of new plants is favoured, as it is in this case.

AIM AND SCOPE

Due to the complexity of the physical processes involved in fluidization and the inherent
interactions between the fluid and solid particles and the particles themselves, modelling
and simulating hydrodynamics from a dual fluidized bed cold-flow model is a very
challenging task.
The aim of this thesis is to predict and verify a simulation of a downscaled cold-flow model
with two fluidized beds and the corresponding modelling. The fluidized beds are simulated in
computational fluid dynamics (CFD) in three dimensions (3D) with ambient conditions and
carried out as Euler-Euler-Approach, which is unusual for dense particles as used in this
thesis. Hence, the results should give deeper insights into the possibility of simulation and
the research on upscaling cold flow models to hot models.
To simulate the circulating dual-fluidized bed, the software Ansys Fluent was used.

1
 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
The following chapters cover the fundamentals of the different types of pyrolysis and the
characterisations of particles as well as the classification of fluidized particles. Furthermore,
the fluidization regimes are discussed.

3.1. Thermochemical Conversion

Pyrolysis is a thermo-chemical process that converts biomass into fluid-like or solid-like
products (Kaltschmitt, Hartmann and Hofbauer, 2013). Pyrolysis is one of four broad pathways
of thermo-chemical processes. The other pathways are combustion, gasification, and
liquefaction. The primary driver of these four pathways is the production of thermal energy
(Basu, 2015).

The difference of these pathways is found in the transformation processes, which can either
dependent or not on each other. Physical and chemical reactions as well as temperature levels
are diverse in each phase. One of the main variations is the input of oxygen. To classify the
supply of oxygen, the air ratio is a well-known characterisation. The equation for the air ratio
is as follows:

𝑂𝑥𝑦𝑔𝑒𝑛 𝑎𝑣𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑚𝐴𝑖𝑟,𝑎

𝜆= = (1)
𝑑𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑂𝑥𝑦𝑔𝑒𝑛 𝑚𝐴𝑖𝑟,𝑑

whereas the air ratio (λ) is defined as the ratio between available oxygen and the demand for
oxygen in order to pyrolyze, gasify, combust, or liquefy, as explained above (Kaltschmitt,
Hartmann and Hofbauer, 2013).

The combustion process converts biomass through high temperatures in excess air into
carbon dioxide and steam. Additionally, the gasification process works with a chemical
reaction in an oxygen-deficient environment. On the other hand, the total absence of oxygen
and a relatively low temperature are needed for pyrolysis. For liquefaction, the process
happens in the presence of a catalyst and lower temperatures than those needed for pyrolysis.
The reason is that the large feedstock molecules are decomposed into liquids with smaller
molecules (Basu, 2013).

Figure 1 shows the complexity of thermochemical conversion. Products can be conducive as

reagents to other conversions.

2
Figure 1: Overview of thermochemical conversion (Zhang et al., 2010).

3.2. Main categories of pyrolysis

In industry, pyrolysis is categorized into three main types, which depends on time and
temperature. However, strict lines between slow, flash, and fast pyrolysis do not exist.

To define slow pyrolysis, some specific values will be elucidated. The execution time is
relatively long, in the range up to several days, and the heating temperature does not reach
more than 500°C. The third factor is the heating rate, which is between 0.1 and 2°C/s. These
three values change over the different types of pyrolysis. Char and tar are the major slow
pyrolysis products. They depend on the long residence time of gases and other pyrolysis
products where the depolymerisation/recombination take place. They also depend on the
type of biomass used, which influences the ratios of char, pyrolysis-oil, and gas produced. The
next phase is the extraction of biochar, bio-oil, and biogas as energy sources. The valuable
chemicals extracted, such as acetone, methanol, and acetic acid, are as important as the
commercial products (Fahmy et al., 2018). Moreover, charcoal is the main product of the slow-
pyrolysis (Kaltschmitt, Hartmann and Hofbauer, 2013).

Flash pyrolysis is a relatively modern process and is a special type of pyrolysis (Kaltschmitt,
Hartmann and Hofbauer, 2013). The difference in flash pyrolysis and slow pyrolysis is that
flash pyrolysis takes place in the temperature range from 400 to 600°C (not exceeding
1´000°C), has fast heating rates of about 2´500°C/s, and has a short time span of about 0.1 to
0.5s. The liquid phase represents the major component, but the type of biomass determine

3
the ratios between solid, liquid, and gaseous phases. Bio-oil yields can be as high as 75-80 wt%
(Fahmy et al., 2018).

Fast pyrolysis is related to flash pyrolysis but has slower heating rates – from 10 to 200°C/s –
and short residence times – typically less than 2s but between 0.5 and 10s. The major
conditions are the liquid and gaseous phases. Yields of bio-oil are up to 70 wt% but not less
than 50 wt% (Kan et al., 2016 and Evans, 2016 and Fahmy et al., 2018).

Nowadays, the major outcomes of flash and fast pyrolysis are pyrolysis oil and bio-oil, which
is mirrored in the wt% (Kaltschmitt, Hartmann and Hofbauer, 2013).

Table 1: Comparison between the different types of pyrolysis.

Heating Temperature [°C] Heating Rate [°C/s] Residence Time [s]

Slow Pyrolysis < 500 0.1 - 2 several days

usually 400 - 600

Flash Pyrolysis 2500 0.1 - 0.5
may reach 1000
usually 400 - 600 typically < 2
Fast Pyrolysis > 10 - 200
may reach 1000 but between 0.5 and 10

Table 1 summarizes the main differences between pyrolysis processes.

4
3.3. Particle characterization
In general, particle characterization supplies information about transport behaviour, the
design of solids flow systems, and chemical reactors. Essential static parameters as size, shape,
density, and other physical properties are included and called intrinsic static parameters.
Dynamic behaviour is also included in the forms of particle fluid interactions, inter-particle
interactions (drag coefficient), and fluid characteristics (Yang, 2003).

Basically, particle behaviour depends on material and geometrical properties. Geometrical

properties include shape, size, and size distribution. Material properties include density,
elastic and plastic deformations, strength, and porosity.

3.3.1. Particle size

An important part of biomass’s ability to be heated up in a given heat flux environment is its
particle size (Scahill, Diebold and Feik, 1997). Empirically, the particle shape is usually non-
spherical and polydisperse. Moreover, the shape influences the flowability and packing of the
powder. Different particle diameters are defined depending on either geometric parameters
or flow dynamic characteristics, but they are all equivalent. Common calculation-methods for
non-spherical diameters include the Sieve diameter, Martin’s diameter, Feret’s diameter, and
Sauter’s diameter.

The most frequently applied method is the Sauter diameter. The calculation takes the average
of several measurements on the same sample of particles. The Sauter mean diameter is
generally defined in terms of the surface diameter, ds, and the volume diameter, d v, as
depicted in Equation (2) and Equation (3).

𝐴𝑝
𝑑𝑠 = √ (2)
𝜋

3 6𝑉
𝑝
𝑑𝑣 = √ (3)
𝜋

5
In these equations, ds describes the diameter of a sphere having the same surface area as a
given particle. On the other hand, the volume diameter, dv, describes the diameter of a sphere
having the same volume as the given particle. The expression of the Sauter mean diameter,
Equation (4), is the diameter of a sphere that has the same volume-to-surface-area ratio as
the particle of interest (Wang and Fan, 2013).

𝑑𝑣3
𝑑32 = 2 (4)
𝑑𝑠

3.3.2. Particle shape

In general, particle shape descriptions are somewhat easier to make compared to particle size.
Nevertheless, particle shapes are more difficult to define and measure.
The particle shape as useful quantitative parameter relates the properties of irregular-shaped
particles and regular particle shapes (spheres). Effects of the particle shape concern physical
properties, such as flowability, packing density, strength, and particle fluid interactions (Wang
and Fan, 2013).
The equation for sphericity was written by Wadell (1933). The “degree of true sphericity” is
defined as:

𝑆𝑢𝑟𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 − 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑠𝑝ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑑𝑉 2 𝑑𝑆𝑉

𝜓= =( ) (5)
𝑆𝑢𝑟𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑙𝑒 𝑑𝑆 𝑑𝑉

If the result is equal to 1, it describes a true sphere. Therefore, for non-spherical particles, the
sphericity is always less than 1 (Yang, 2003). As a rough guide, the more the aspect ratio
departs from 1, the lower the sphericity (Yang, 2013). For drag coefficient, the particle shape
is claimed to be useful (see Wadell, 1933, Yang, 2013).

To define the aspect ratio, the smallest diameter to the largest diameter in its orthogonal
direction is used. This is described in the following equation.

6
 𝑑𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝐴𝑅 = (6)
𝑑𝑚𝑎𝑥

The values of the normalized aspect ratio vary from near zero to near 1 (Merkus, 2009).
A further characterisation is the circularity, as defined by Wadell (1933).

𝐶𝑖𝑟𝑐𝑢𝑚𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑖𝑟𝑐𝑙𝑒 ℎ𝑎𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑒 𝑐𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑎𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑙𝑒

⊄= (7)
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛

The circularity can more easily be determined experimentally from microscopic or

photographic observation compared to the sphericity (Yang, 2003). The value of a perfect
circle is 1, and has no particle size distribution.

3.3.3. Particle density

Along with other physical properties such as particle size, the density of particles is an
important feature. Aspects of particle density include material density, particle density, and
bulk density. The main differences occur in the porosity and packaging arrangement of
particles (Zhang et al., 2006).

𝑀𝑝 𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑙𝑒

𝜌𝑝 = =
𝑉𝑝 𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑙𝑒 𝑤𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑 𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑐𝑒 (8)
𝑖𝑓 𝑖𝑡𝑠 𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝑤𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑛𝑜𝑛𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑠

“The material density, or true density, of a solid or powder is the density of the particles that
make up the powder, and is defined as the ratio of particle mass to its actual volume excluding
internal pores” (Wang and Fan, 2013). The ratio of particle mass to its volume without internal
pores is the simplest definition of the material density. The material density is not dependent
on the degree of compaction of the particle.

7
The particle density, which is usually lower than the material density described above, is
defined as the mass of the particle divided by the solid volume, including the volume occupied
by internal pores.

For a fluidized bed, bulk density is relevant. The definition of the bulk density is the density
for bulk powder in a specific medium with a certain packing condition. For this definition, the
ratio of the solid mass to the bulk volume, which contains the void of the packaging (αg), is
consulted. Another important relationship is that the bulk and material densities depend on
void of the packaging (αg) and the particle porosity (φ) (Wang and Fan, 2013).

3.3.4. Porosity
To characterize a particle, the porosity should not be disregarded. The definition of the
porosity is as follows:

𝑉
𝜙 = 𝑉𝜈 . (9)
𝑇

The porosity is the ratio between the volume of the void space (𝑉𝜈 ) and the total bulk volume
of the material (𝑉𝑇 ). The range is from 0 to 1. For materials, the classification of pores is
divided into three categories according to their widths. Pores less than 2 ƞm are defined as
micropores, pores between 2 and 50 ƞm as mesopores, and pores more than 50 ƞm in width
as macropores. The spread and heterogeneity of the pore size are accountable for the effects
of porosity, surface area, permeability, and other properties.

3.4. Fluidization velocities and pressure drop

One of the most important parameters for a fluidized bed is the minimum fluidization velocity
Umf (Kunii and Levenspiel, 1991). However, apart from the transformation of fixed beds to
fluidized beds at Umf, in gas-solid fluidized beds, Umb, Ums, and Uc are considerable velocities
too. The minimum bubbling velocity, Umb, is the velocity at which bubbles in fine particle
systems of a fluidized bed appear. Ums stands for minimum slugging velocity, where slugs start
to form (Bi and Grace, 1995). The specific point at which the standard deviation of differential
8
pressure fluctuation reaches a maximum and the transition from bubbling fluidization to
turbulent fluidization occurs is represented as Uc (Bi, Grace and Lim, 1995).

The batch operation of fluidized beds is determined by the entrainment of bed particles
beyond the superficial velocity (U), where the particles with a velocity of U se are entrained,
captured, and returned to the bed efficiently (Bi, Grace and Zhu, 1995).

For calculating the Umf, the pressure drop has to be known requires the pressure drop, which
is an important issue from the perspective of fluid mechanics (Subramanian, 2004).

The onset of fluidization occurs when the drag force of upward moving gas equals the weight
of particles. Another definition is when the pressure drop across the bed multiplied by the
cross-sectional area of the tube equals the volume of the bed multiplied by the fraction
consisting of solids multiplied by the specific weight of solids, which is depicted in Equation
(10) (Kunii and Levenspiel, 1991).

𝑔
Δ𝑝𝑏 ∗ 𝐴𝑡 = 𝐴𝑡 ∗ 𝐿𝑚𝑓 ∗ (1 − 𝜀𝑚𝑓 ) ∗ [(𝜌𝑠 − 𝜌𝑔 ) ] ( 10 )
𝑔𝑐

The pressure drop of the packed bed appears because of the frictional resistance at the
particle surface and because of the expansion and contraction of flow through the
interstices among the particles (Yang, 2003).
One of the possible approaches is the pipe flow analogy model (capillary tube model). A
further approach is the constricted tube model. The major contributions to the literature in
the past follow the constricted tube model, which is “an assembly of tortuous channels of
varying cross section simulates the varying dimensions and curvatures of pores in the packed
bed (Yang, 2003)”.
This approach follows the major contributions of Blake (1922), Konzeny (1927), Carman
(1937), and Ergun (1952), which are the most commonly applied works (Yang, 2003). The
following equations show the Ergun equation, the friction factor, and the Reynolds number
(Subramanian, 2004).

150
𝑓𝑝 = + 1.75 ( 11 )
𝑅𝑒𝑝

9
 ∆𝑝 𝑑𝑝 𝜀3
𝑓𝑝 = ( ) ( 12 )
𝐿 𝜌𝑉 2 𝑠 1 − 𝜀

𝑑𝑝 𝑉𝑠 𝜌
𝑅𝑒𝑝 = ( 13 )
(1 − 𝜀)𝜇

The following Ergun correlation for the pressure drop uses the explained equations above
over a fixed length L.

150(1 − εbd )2 L μg U 1.75(1 − εbd )L ρg U 2

Δpb = 2+ ( 14 )
ε3bd (ψdp ) ε3bd ψdp

The variable U defines the superficial velocity of the gas as explained above. ρp is the
density, µg is the viscosity,εbd is the voidage in the bed, dp is the mean diameter of the
particles, and ψ is their sphericity.
To obtain the well-known Wen-Yu correlation for the minimum fluidization velocity Umf,
which is the superficial fluid velocity at minimum fluidization conditions, the particle
Reynolds number (Equation (15)) for minimum fluidization and the Archimedes number
(Equation (16)) are needed (Horio, 2013).

𝑑𝑝 𝑢𝑚𝑓 𝜌𝑓
𝑅𝑒𝑚𝑓 = ( 15 )
𝜇

𝑑𝑝 3 𝜌𝑓 (𝜌𝑝− 𝜌𝑓 )𝜚
𝐴𝑟 = ( 16 )
𝜇

10
Figure 2: Pressure drop across a bed of particles in the vicinity of minimum fluidization: (a) monosized distribution of
particles, (b) distribution of particle sizes (Dennis, 2013).

Figure 2 depicts the relationship between the pressure drop across a vertical bed of
particles, uniform in shape and size and supported on a porous or perforated distributor,
and the superficial velocity of the gas (Dennis, 2013).

In curve ABCD, the trend of the increased superficial velocity is pointed until it reached its
minimum fluidization velocity Umf at point C. After that significant point, the particles are
supported by the flow of the gas. Prior to the superficial velocity of Umf, an increase in the
pressure drop at point B is recorded. This appears because of the particles that became
“locked” in the packed state. Towards C, a constant pressure drop across the bed persists
(Pigford, 1968). Besides Figure 2a, with the initial pressure drop, another unlocked effect of
particles happens. The reason is that when the packed bed is vigorously fluidized, the curve
follows DCA. It is usual to measure Umf after the start of the fluidized state because it yields
the defined point C. The point C constitutes the transition between the fluidized and fixed
beds (Dennis, 2013).

11
3.4.1. Classification of fluidized particles
For particle characterization, a classification into four main groups of fluidized particles is
described by Geldart. Those groups are expressed in terms of the density (material density)
difference between the particles and the gas (ϱs-ϱ) and the average particle diameters dp
(Wang and Fan, 2013).

Figure 3: Geldart’s classification of particles for air at ambient conditions (Geldart, 1973).

Figure 3 shows the different classifications of fluidized particles by Geldart under ambient
conditions of temperature and pressure. Those groups are described below:

− Group A:
Group A includes materials with small mean sizes and/or a low particle densities (less than 1.4
g/cm³) (Geldart, 1973). These particles are designated as fine and easily fluidized with a size
range of roughly 30-100 µm. Group A powders exhibit a non-bubbling fluidization regime
(Wang and Fan, 2013).

− Group B:
Particles of group B contains manly materials in the rough mean size range from 100-800 µm.
Bubbling of the powder starts immediately at minimum fluidization velocity and collapse
promptly if the velocity and therefore the gas-supply stops (Wang and Fan, 2013)

12
 − Group C:
Group C powders are cohesive and do not fluidize in the strict sense. The interparticle force
dominates the hydrodynamic forces in the fluidized bed (Wang and Fan, 2013).

− Group D:
Group D consists of particles that are very coarse and/or dense. Powders in group D cannot
be easily fluidized and produce deep spouted beds (Wang and Fan, 2013).

Geldart’s classification system has been widely used for the design of fluidized beds (Wang,
Rahman and Rhodes, 2007). To consolidate the particle characterization for this thesis, all
selected particles fall into the Geldart group B class.

13
3.5. Fluidization regimes
When operating a fluidized bed, different regimes of fluidization occur. These regimes cause
the introduction of gas from the bottom of a column where a bed of solid particles acquires
fluid-like properties (Shimizu, 2013). The fluidization regimes in dense-phase fluidization are
as follows: fixed beds, particulate fluidized beds, bubbling and turbulent beds, slugging,
spouting, and channelling, as shown in Figure 4 from Wang and Fan (2013).

Figure 4: Dense phase fluidization regimes: (a) fixed bed, (b) particulate fluidization, (c) bubbling fluidization, (d) turbulent
fluidization, (e) slugging, (f) spouting, and (g) channelling.

Fluidization regimes:

• Fixed bed (0 < U < Umf): By starting the gas flow with a low rate through a bed of solid
particles, the gas flows through the cavern without disturbing the patched bed. The
bed behaves like a porous medium and is called a fixed bed (see Figure 4a).

• Particulate fluidization (Umf < U < Umb): With increased gas velocity, the point at which
the force of the gas velocity reaches the drag is called particulate fluidization. If the
pressure and gas density increase, the operating range of the particulate regime
expands (Figure 4b).

• Bubbling fluidization (Umb < U < Ums): A further increase in the velocity of gas to the
bottom of the column leads to bubbles forming out of the bed and is called
aggregative, heterogeneous, or bubbling fluidization. This velocity is above the
14
 minimum fluidization velocity. For particle classification groups B and C, the bubbling
starts shortly after the velocity of the gas reaches the minimum fluidization velocity.
Bubbles generate strong, vigorous motion of particles and both bubble coalescence
and breakup take place throughout the bed. The coalescence of bubbles increases with
rising gas velocity. Furthermore, the bubble phase and the emulsion phase can both
be easily identified in this regime.

• Slugging (Ums < U < Uc): In Figure 4e, slugging has occurred. This happens when the ratio
between the height/diameter is large or the diameter of the fluidized bed is small
(Wang and Fan, 2013). The appearance of slugging transpires if bubbles coalesce and
the cavity of these bubbles occupies the whole cross section (Shimizu, 2013). The
transformation from slugging regime to turbulent fluidized bed or fast fluidized bed
happens when the slugs break up from an adequately high gas velocity (Wang D).

• Turbulent fluidization (Uc < U < Use): A pressure fluctuation with maximum gas velocity
denotes the onset of the turbulent fluidization regime. The bubble and emulsion
phases, which occur in the bubbling regime, become less distinguishable than before
due to enhanced turbulence. Repercussions of this regime are that the bubbles do not
appear to be as large, the bed surface is not as sharp, and the freeboard activities
enhance considerably.

• Fast fluidization (Use < U < VCA): Fast fluidization accrues no distinguishable upper bed
surface and the particles are transported out at the top. The discharged particles that
were carried out at the top have to be replaced by adding solids near the bottom. Gas
and entrained broadly dispersed particles move upward in the interior, while clusters
move downward as strands of particles. At a fixed solid feed rate, U is increasingly
diluted when increased (Kunii and Levenspiel, 1997). In fast fluidization, a massive
entrainment of solids in the fluidized bed takes place. Therefore, the bed must be
supplemented with the same material. This takes place in turbulent fluidization as well
as in bubbling fluidization.

• Pneumatic transport/dilute-phase transport (VCA < U): The final fluidization regime is
reached at sufficiently high velocity and carries a sizable fraction of particles out of the
bed. There is no axial variation of solid concentration except in the bottom
acceleration section. Moreover, some particle strands are still identified near the wall.

• Spouting: If a high gas velocity is vertically introduced into the bed through the centre
of a conical base, spouting occurs. The forced jet penetrates the particle bed.
Afterwards, the particle spouts out and rains down to the region where the particles
are entrained (Figure 4f) (Wang and Fan, 2013).

• Channelling: As the name implies, channelling exists when the aggregation of cohesive
particles takes place due to interparticle contact forces, as noted by Wang (2013).

15
The dense region of each regime has rather a uniform inner bed structure. These fine particles
are produced through attrition in the bed. First, to operate a fluidized bed, an entrainment of
bed material has not necessarily to exist. To prevent a breakdown of the fluidized bed, the
bed mass must be supplemented with the same material (Horio, 2013).

TYPES OF FLUIDIZED BED REACTORS

The fundamental phenomena of fluidization relate to a wide variety of scientific and
engineering areas. To understand the power of fluidization, the knowledge of related forces
is needed. This includes gravitational forces, fluid mechanical forces, elastic/plastic collision
forces, electromagnetic forces, surface forces, yield forces of material, and so on.

In general, in fluidized beds, an upstream flow in the column fluidizes the packed bed. The
energetic conversion occurs in the hot bed material, which is typically an inert substance –
mostly a mix of sand and ash. The upstream flow is partly preheated and fluidizes the bed
material to reach a homogenized temperature distribution (Kaltschmitt, Hartmann and
Hofbauer, 2013). Two main types of fluidized bed reactors exist. The first, a non-circulating
fluidized bed, is known as a bubbling fluidized bed (BFB), and the second, a circulating fluidized
bed (CFB), both can be seen in Figure 5 (Yang, 2003).

A so-called circulating fluidized bed is a fluidized bed for which the supplement of the bed is
done by returning the entrained particles back to the bed by separating them from the
outgoing fluid by a separator. In this thesis, a cyclone is used for this separation.
Fluidized bed combustion (FBC) and fluidized bed gasification (FBG) have a major difference,
which can be found in the fuel concentration – coal and char – in the bed and in the volatile
or tar concentration in the freeboard (Horio, 2013).

16
Figure 5: Simplified scheme of a bubbling fluidized bed (left) and a circulating fluidized bed (right) (Adamczyk, 2017).

In the following sections, these different fluidized bed schemes will be explained in detail.

4.1. Non-circulating fluidized beds combustion boilers

As described above, non-circulating fluidized beds are also called BFBs. As the name says,
the supplementing of the bed is not done by returning the entrained particles back to the
bed. Beds that have no such direct solid circulation are also called stationary beds (Horio,
2013).
Bubbling fluidized beds are used for a wide variety and different applications of fuels. In
addition to coal combustion, they are also used for the combustion and gasification of
biomass and related waste (Kaltschmitt, Hartmann and Hofbauer, 2013). Those apparatus
with no direct returns, as mentioned above, are also called stationary fluidized beds (Horio,
2013).
A BFB especially for thermal applications is characterized by a typically velocity of about 2
m/s for the fluidization of the column. The gas velocity can be lower by decreasing particle
size. For CFB boilers, the fluidization velocity is much higher. A feature of BFBs is that the
column has a high freeboard with additional air injection in several tiers. Once the BFB has
been operating, the process should be steady. To do this, the fluidized bed is fed with fuel.
17
The fuel blows through one or several fuel feeders. There are two ways to inject the fuel:
ether from the lower part of the bed or onto the top of the bed. It is simpler and safer to
inject the fuel onto the surface of the bed. Advantages of injection onto the top are that the
fuel is distributed over a wider surface area and the lateral particle dispersion is largest at
the top, which spreads the fuel better (Leckner, 2013).

4.2. Circulating fluidized beds

“A circulating fluidized bed is a fluidized bed where the supplementing of the bed is done by
returning the entrained particle back to the bed by separating them from the outgoing fluid
by a separator such as a cyclone” (Horio, 2013). A CFB uses massive entrainment of particles
due to high gas velocities, which need to be captured to prevent the partial emission of
combustible material (Kaltschmitt, Hartmann and Hofbauer, 2013).
The particles are circulating continuously in a flow loop, with captured particles immediately
returned to the base of a vertical shaft by cyclones. This vertical shaft is also referred to in the
literature as a riser reactor (Grace and Lim, 2013).
Major commercial applications for circulating fluidized beds are solid–catalysed gas reactions
and gas-solid reactions as well as physical operations. Fluid catalytic cracking (FCC); Fischer-
Tropsch synthesis; the combustion of coal, biomass, and wastes; off-gassing; gasification, and
flue gas dry scrubbing of HF, HCl, SO2, dioxins, and mercury are other examples of applications
(Yang, 2003).

The range of key operating variables in a riser for commercial operations according to Yang
(2003) are as described in Table 2.

Table 2: Range of key operating variables in a riser for commercial operations.

Key Operating Variables

Superficial gas velocity: 2-12 [m/s]

Net solids flux through the riser: 10-1000 [kg/m2s]

Temperature: between 20 and 950 [°C]

Pressure: 100-2000 [Pa]

Mean particle diameter: 50-500 [µm]

Overall riser height: 15-40 [m]

18
4.3. Advantages and disadvantages
Some features of CFB boilers are unique and attractive in both, process and the environment,
such as following:

• Fuel Flexibility
The flexibility of fuels is the main advantage of CFB technology. Circulating
fluidized beds can handle a variety of fuels with different sulphur contents and
will meet the strict emission control regulations (Nowak and Mirek, 2013).

• High Combustion Efficiency

The combustion efficiency is about 97.5-99.5%. This high efficiency is a result
of better gas-solid mixing, a higher burning rate, and a majority of unburned
fuel particles being recycled back to the furnace. The higher efficiency causes a
flow loop of fine carbon particles. Therefore, nearly all particles go back to the
furnace (Basu, 2015).

• Efficient In-situ Sulphur Removal

The average resident time of the flue gas in the combustion zone is about 1-2
seconds in BFB, whereas in CFB, it is 3-4 seconds. This time is very long to
capture the sulphur. However, the sulphur dioxide has to stay in contact with
e.g. calcined sorbent in order to capture a specific amount of SO2 (Anthony and
Hack, 2013).

• Low NO2 Emissions

To lower the NO2 emissions in CFB, a substoichiometric amount of air is
supplied through the base of the furnace as primary air. That means that the
fuel nitrogen, if released, does not encounter enough oxygen to produce
oxides. The secondary air is added above the lower reducing zone, which
represents an amount up to 20% of the total amount of oxygen. In most cases,
the nitrogen is already transformed into molecular nitrogen in the lower part
of the boiler. Hence, there is less opportunity to form NO2 (Basu, 2015).

• Smaller Furnace Cross Section

This leads back to the higher heat release rate per unit furnace cross section.
Verses a BFB, a CFB has a higher superficial gas velocity, and therefore the
furnace can be smaller because of the higher thermal output (Basu, 2015).

• Fewer Feed Points

A CFB has a simpler fuel feed system compared to a BFB and less grate area for
a given thermal output. However, an increased fluidized bed capacity is
possible with the same footprint of the old boiler (Basu, 2015).

19
 • Stable operating conditions and good turndown ratio
The simple control over heat absorption and relatively high fluidization velocity
allows a rather rapid response to varying loads (Hotta, 2010; Basu, 2015).

Further investigations tend to develop the capacity and the plant efficiencies of fluidized beds
(Nowak and Mirek, 2013).

All in all, the attractiveness of fluidization for combustion/ gasification comes from the fuel
flexibility, the low cost of desulphurization and denitrification, and the fuel preparation. The
burning of low-quality coals, biomass, sludge, and waste in fluidized combustors cause no
problems at all. Low emissions of NOx and SO2 can be attributed to lower combustion
temperatures and additional flue gas treatment facilities (Adamczyk, 2017).

4.4. Comparison, processing, and preparing of biomass in fluidized beds

The main differences between BFBs and CFBs are the higher gas velocity and higher particle
loading in the upper furnace of a CFB (Leckner, 2013).
The use of biomass in fluidized bed requires preparation. When using wood, pieces should not
be larger than 100 mm for a BFB. In a CFB, pieces should not be larger than 60 mm. Other
forms of biomass that can be used are stalk-like biomass, slurry, and dry sludge. The maximum
length of the material is between 10 and 30 cm. Therefore, additional fuels only need marginal
prior preparation for fluidized beds (Kaltschmitt, Hartmann and Hofbauer, 2013).

20
 MODELLING FLUIDIZED BED REACTOR VIA CFD
The modelling of processes, mainly processes based on steam and for energy production,
started in the 1950s and 1960s. These calculations were made for the circulations of
stationary steam power plants and were very expensive. Nowadays, models are simpler
calculations, with the improvement of computational calculations.
Later, in addition to stationary calculations, non-stationary calculation programs were
developed. In the 80s, new 3D simulation methods have been used commercially.

5.1. Overview of CFD Software Packages

To give an overview of the development of CFD software packages, the decreasing costs of
computational power since the 1950s have not been in contrast to the slow developement
of adequate computational modelling (Dalgleish et al., 2007)

To distinguish between the different CFD software packages, the following four categories
can be observed (A Comparison of CFD Software Packages, 2018).

Open-source: The use of open-source software is free of cost. The free license permit users
to study, change, and improve the source code of the software. For these reasons, open-
source software reaches a wide range of audiences and developers.
One of the most well-known and frequently used open-source CFD software packages is
OpenFOAM. The general types are blueCFD-core and openFOAM+. Other free CFD codes,
such as SU2 from Stanford University and Palabos solver from Lattice-Boltzmann, are used
much less frequently.
In spite of the limited user support, reduced usability, a lack of specialized capabilities, and
the requirement of additional software for pre- and postprocessors, the use of open-source
software is very cost-efficient and characterized by increasing demand.
Open-source wrappers: Wrapped codes were developed to make open-source software, like
OpenFOAM, more user-friendly. The graphical user interface (GUI) especially has been
expanded for pre- and post-processors. Visual-CFD, HELYX, and simFlow are some open-
source software programs with advanced packages. Furthermore, SimScale is an example of
a web browser-based simulation. A good argument for upgrading to a wrapper platform is
that users can purchase some of the convenience of a full-service commercial platform but
at a lower price. Disadvantages of such a platform are the limited user support and the lack
of specialized capabilities, as well as adding another level of software with potential bugs
that may be poorly supported and developed. These listed factors are key limitations of
open-source software.

21
Computer-aided design (CAD)-integrated: Software for CFD based on computer-aided
design (CAD) include, for example, SolidWorks and Autodesk Inventor. Such CFD packages in
CAD software are primary used for product designers to solve steady-state, singe-phase,
non-reacting flow problems. Simple uses of these kinds of software are required. Easy
meshing and post-processing tools are included. Heat transfer, fluid-structure interactions,
chemical interaction, and multiphase flows are some capabilities that are respectively
unattainable with this software.
Specialty: Specialty software programs are targeted for niche markets with special individual
functions and can be very cost-effective through their specific competencies.

Table 3: Overview of the different CFD software packages.

Speciality Software Focus on…

... automotive, internal combustion market segment
CONVERGE
regards to moving meshes , multiphase flows and turbulent combustion
AVL Fire ... the automotive engine market

FloTHERM ... the electronic industry

FINE/Marine … marine applications

6Sigma … data center ventilation

EXA … external aerodynamics

XFlowCFD … Lattice-Boltzmann simulations

SPH-flow … smoothe particle hydrodynamic simulations

CPFD … fluidized bed reactors

CFX … turbomachinery
… improving performance on very large scale simulations
EXN/Aero
by combining CPU and GPU processing

Comprehensive packages: Standard comprehensive packages for CFD simulations are Fluent
and Star-CCM+. The main scope of Fluent is in electronic and industrial product markets.
Star-CCM+ has its prime market in the aerospace, automotive, and energy industries.

Other packages of CFD programs are COMSOL’s CFD Module and Altair’s AcuSolve with
broader Multiphysics simulations. The downsides of these packages are the prices.

22
5.2. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD)
In order to investigate fluid dynamics, there are two main methods for the multiphase model
for Ansys Fluent that will be discussed. One method is called the discrete phase, which uses
the Lagrangian frame of reference. The second approach is the MULTIPHASE MODEL. This uses
the Euler-Euler approach. The Dense Discrete Phase Model is another method, and is a hybrid
of the Euler-Euler and Euler-Lagrange methods.
As mentioned above, this master’s thesis is implemented with the CFD program Ansys Fluent.

5.3. Mathematical Models for Transport in Fluidized Beds

Different mathematical models were used in this research. These were briefly described
above. A closer look will be taken in the following chapters.

5.3.1. Euler-Euler Approach

The basic requirement of the Euler-Euler approach is that both phases, the gas as well as the
dispersed phase, are treated as interpenetrating continua. The set of Navier-Stokes and
continuity equations of both phases are solved in cooperation with the energy and turbulence
closure equations. The Euler-Euler approach’s main disadvantage is that the real distribution
of particle diameters cannot be modelled directly. This means that all of the solid particles in
one dispersed phase are identical. Therefore, the particle size distribution is represented by a
mean characteristic diameter and density.
For a more accurate resolution of particle size distribution, several dispersed phases have to
be modelled. This leads to greater expenses in computational calculations. Additional
complexity with the varying mass of the solid phase occurs in the process of combustion,
where the diameters of the particles change (Adamczyk, 2017).

The general equations used by the Eulerian multiphase model for describing particle transport
in isothermal conditions (cold-flow) are the conservations of mass and momentum. The mass
conservation equation is shown in its general form.

𝑛
𝜕
(𝛼 𝜌 ) + ∇. (𝛼𝑞 𝜌𝑝 𝜐⃗⃗⃗𝑞 ) = ∑(𝑚𝑝𝑞 − 𝑚𝑞𝑝 ) + 𝑆𝑞 ( 17 )
𝜕𝑡 𝑞 𝑝
𝑝=1

23
The momentum conservation equation is written in its general form as:

𝑛
𝜕
(𝛼𝑞 𝜌𝑝 ⃗⃗⃗
𝜐𝑞 ) + ∇. (𝛼𝑞 𝜌𝑝 ⃗⃗⃗
𝜐𝑞 ⃗⃗⃗
𝜐𝑞 ) = −𝛼𝑞 ∇p + ∇. τ̿𝑞 + 𝛼𝑞 𝜌𝑝 𝑔 + ∑ (𝑅⃗𝑝𝑞 +
𝜕𝑡 𝑝=1 ( 18 )
𝑚𝑝𝑞 𝜐𝑝𝑞 − 𝑚𝑞𝑝 𝜐𝑞𝑝 ) + (𝐹𝑞 + 𝐹𝑙𝑖𝑓𝑡,𝑞 + 𝐹𝜐𝑚,𝑞 ).

The partial circumvention of these difficulties, conservation equation of mass and

momentum, can be done by applying the population balance method. This method represents
the particle size distribution by the set of moments in the dispersed phase.
The use of this method has the difficulty of the necessity of performing transient calculations.
Further calculations need sufficiently small time steps in order to capture the fast movements
of the solid phase and to ensure a stable calculation process (Mazzei, Marchisio and Lettieri,
2010). “Euler-Euler technique is based on a non-physical assumption of treating the particles
as a continuous phase”(Adamczyk, 2017). A complexity in the description of mass, energy
transfer between phases, and chemical reactions is added by the non-physical assumption
that makes it a complex case (Adamczyk, 2017).

5.3.2. Euler-Lagrange Approach

According to the Euler-Lagrange approach, the dispersed phase particles are traced as they
travel in the moving fluid (Adamczyk, 2017). For this reason, the particle motion is controlled
by particle-particle interaction and called a dense flow. This approach has two basic categories
that describe the application of the discrete element method for modelling dense phase flows.

The discrete second phase (DPM) uses a Lagrangian frame of references and is made up of
spherical particles, which are dispersed in the continuous phase.

Ansys Fluent is designed to simulate a wide range of discrete phase problems. The following
options describe the modelling of a discrete phase:

• the calculation of a discrete phase trajectory using a Lagrangian formulation that

operates with inertia, hydrodynamic drag, and the force of gravity for steady and
unsteady flows;

24
 • the prediction of turbulence, which has an impact on the dispersion of particles by
reasons of turbulent eddies present in the continuous phase;
• heating or cooling of the discrete phase as well as vaporization and boiling of liquidate
droplets;
• coal combustion, including volatile evolution and combustion particles, and also char
combustion;
• droplet breakup and coalescence and consideration of particle/particle collisions, as
well as voidage of the discrete phase;
• coupling of the continuous phase flow field prediction to the discrete phase calculation
as well as droplet breakup and coalescence; and
• consideration of particle collisions and voidage of the discrete phase.

Furthermore, there are some other ways to treat the discrete phase particles to get
reasonable results.
The effects of fluids that change the particles play an important role in the impacts of the fluid.
Therefore, two alternatives are available to operate these effects: coupled and uncoupled
discrete phase models (DPMs).
The coupled DPM simulation affects the particles and the flow solution. The effects of the flow
solution are transferred to the DPM solution as flow and should be combined for a self-
consistent solution. On the other hand, the uncoupled DPM’s only purpose is postprocessing.
These particles are not tracked unless particle tracking is desired.
Another concept to choose is the tracking of particles. With steady and unsteady tracking, the
starting conditions of particles for the injections will be defined, as well as how they interact
with other zones in the geometry and the specifying boundary conditions.
Steady tracking causes the particles to be tracked until they reach their final destination. It
depends on the specified boundary behaviour or a fixed number of particle time steps. Each
particle travels through many cells of the model and changes the DPM source while interacting
with the flow. The flow solution can be steady or unsteady depending on the iteration or time
steps.

In unsteady tracking, the particles are handled by a specified number of particle time steps
and are not guaranteed to reach a destination before the flow solution is updated. When
coupling an unsteady DPM with an unsteady flow solution, it will not necessarily match the
same time steps for DPM and flow.
A further concept is parcels, also called mass flow rate.
The mass flow rate of injected particles is an important input parameter when using the
coupled DPM because it sets the absolute value of the DPM source. For calculating with
parcels in a DPM model, the parcels are chosen in the model settings. The model settings
include the number of injection locations or the injection frequency to adjust the number of
parcels.

25
The number of parcels often depends on the computational power. However, a high number
is often helpful for convergence and for a statistical sample representative of full range of
particle behaviour.

There are several limitations to the described concepts.

Limitations on the Particle Volume Fraction

Limitations on the particle volume fraction enforces that the interaction between particles
and the effects of the particle volume fraction on the gas phase are insignificant. The reason
is to make sure that the second phase is sufficiently diluted. Problems in the mass loading for
the discrete phase, which can be equal or exceed the continuous phase, can be solved.

Limitation on Modelling Continuous Suspensions of Particles

Two major limitations of the discrete phase model exist. The steady-particle Lagrangian is
suited for flows where particle streams are injected into a continuous phase flow, and has
well-defined entrance and exit conditions. The unsteady-particle phase model can be used for
modelling continuous suspensions of particles.

Limitations on Modelling Particle Rotation

Particle rotation where a stochastic particle collision model is implemented does not affect
particle/particle collisions. It is also not available for massless particles and not compatible
with moving reference frame simulations. On DPM, the Magnus lift force will not be included.
For atomizer injections, the initial angular velocity has to set to be zero.

Limitations on Using the Discrete Phase Model with Other Ansys Fluent Models
The discrete phase model cannot be used with multiphase flow models. This includes the VOF,
mixture, and Eulerian models. If the DPM model is used with the Eulerian multiphase model,
tracked particles support only the primary phase to compute drag, heat, and mass transfer.
Coupled simulation is not able to be modelled with streamwise periodic flow and steady
particle tracks, but it can be modelled with transient particle tracks.
Non-reacting particles are the only ones that can be included when the premixed combustion
model is used.
Use of the hybrid parallel method is limited by the dense discrete phase method with the
volume approaching packing limit option and also with the stochastic collision model.

26
Limitations on Using the Lagrangian Wall Film Model
The Lagrangian wall film model can only be used with unsteady particle tracking. The wall film
model is not usable with hanging-node mesh refinements on walls, but it can be adjusted.
Materials that are in the wall film model will automatically be assumed to be liquid particles.
Therefore, the wall film is applied for combusting particles in the wet combustion model for
particles with at least a small rate of liquid fraction. A further limitation is that the Rossland
radiation model does not work with the wall film model.

5.4. Hardware

The used Hardware is described in Table 4. The server software for the CFD simulation was
downloaded onto an off-the-shelf PC and a standard monitor (1920x1200@32Hz) Matrox
Microsoft Basic Display Adapter (Super Micro Computer) were used for graphics.

Table 4: Details of the used hardware.

Hardware
two Intel Xenon E5-2560 0 @ 2.00 GHz
CPU
with eight cores

RAM 32.0 GB DDR3 @799MHz

Operating system Windows 10 Enterprise 64-bit

Storage 931 GB Seagate ST1000NM0011 (SATA) HDD

27
 EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
The complexity of the physical process in the fluidization comes from the inherent interactions
between the fluid and solid particles as well as from the particles themselves. The modelling
of the hydrodynamics of the fluidized bed was a very challenging task based on the
interactions between the particles and the presence of a wide range of space and time scales.

This thesis presents an application of the Euler-Euler approach to model particle transport.
The geometry of the experimental facility was simulated using a 3D model.
In this thesis, the setup was implemented with a material density of 8,750 kg/m³ and a bulk
density of 3,435 kg/m². The material used was bronze powder and the void of the packaging
was 0.61. The gravity was set on the z-axis as a value of -9.81 m/s². The temperature of the
3D-model was around 298.15 K by ambient pressure.

6.1. Geometry
The cold-flow model was adapted for the simulation due to pre-simulations and carried out
material.
By using the original geometry of the cold-flow model, which was transferred as a CFD
model, the particle release was set directly at the nozzle of the cyclone and the pyrolysis
reactor. In this case, the simulated release of the particle in the 3D-model rose significant.
The reasons were that the defined geometry and mathematical model with these two
pressure outlets did not allow the particles to stay in this space. More specifically, the
geometry did not include a long outlet pipe, and therefore the particles seemed to be
carried out of the domain.
The modification concern the space for the pyrolysis reactor, which has been extended by 70
mm in height. Furthermore, the pressure outlets of the cyclone and the pyrolysis reactor
have been modified. The modification was implemented by pipes of a length of 130 mm and
is shown in Figure 6.

The arguments given above prove that the modified geometry is able to create a continuous
simulation without a premature release of particles. This leads to a comprehensible
simulation with sufficient circulating particles in the cold-flow-model.

The following figure shows the whole simulated plant in 3D. Figure 6 depicts the additional
modified geometry of the pyrolysis reactor and the cyclone, displayed by the solid and
transparent parts.

28
Figure 6: 3D draft of the model; additional modified parts are not transparent.

Further changes in the geometry of the CFD-model of the pyrolysis reactor were done to the
inlet of the air flow. In the cold-flow model, 324 inlets at the pyrolysis reactor are used for
experiments. Previously, 324 inlets were utilized to simulate the dual fluidized bed model. By
changing this to fewer inlets with a proportionate and equivalent velocity for fluidization, a
straightforward mesh was realized. Changes in the design of the geometry inlets are marked
in green in Figure 7.

29
Figure 7: Original and modified designs of the inlets from the pyrolysis reactor marked in green.

6.2. Mesh
The generation of a 3D-mesh suitable for the 3D and the Euler-Euler-model required special
attention.
Based on the changes in geometry explained in Figure 7, a mesh without great variation
within small distances was realized. The numerical recommendations by Ansys as well as the
mesh quality which have been achieved are shown in Table 5. Although there is a significant
difference between the recommended and achieved values, the simulation converges.

Table 5: Recommended and achieved mesh quality.

Recommended Achieved
Settings Values
Minimum Orthogonal Quality > 0.1 0.197679
Skewness < 0.8 0.22066
Maximum Aspect Ratio < 100 in Volume 57.1522

To reach the recommended settings of minimum orthogonal quality, skewness, and

maximum aspect ratio, a change in the mesh formation had to be made. The achieved values
represent a sufficient mesh quality to simulate the dual fluidized bed cold flow model.

30
Figure 8: Cross section of the lower part of the meshed riser with both air inlets grey and yellow (left) and detailed view from
the mesh transition of the inlet to the riser (right).

Figure 9: Section plane through the meshed cyclone and the transition from the riser to the cyclone with detailed extract of
the transition from riser to cyclone

31
Figure 10: Cross section through the meshed pyrolysis reactor and extract on the inlets of the reactor.

Figure 11: Closer look from the bottom of the pyrolysis reactor and detailed look on the meshed inlets of the reactor

32
 Figure 12: Section Plane through a meshed siphon

Figure 7, Figure 8, Figure 9, Figure 10, Figure 11, and Figure 12 all depict the final mesh.
Those mesh parts are important, and the means of air inlets and the change from very fine
to coarser mesh should be noted.
As depicted in the previous figures, the meshing technology of the whole fluidized bed plant
was carried out with a tetrahedral mesh with a growth rate of 1.10. Table 6: Mesh
sizing.Table 6 describes the mesh sizing for the experiment. The best mesh design was found
to ensure that the simulation would accurately validate the physical model. In this case, the
model consists of 862,694 elements with 167,003 nodes.

Table 6: Mesh sizing.

Sizing
Minimum Size 0.00026189 [m]
Maximum Face Size 0.026189 [m]
Maximum Tethraedal Size 0.052379 [m]
Growth Rate 1.1 -
Minimum Edge Length 0.00018806 [m]

33
6.3. Pressure Measurement Points

Pressure measurement points, in general, are used to characterize the bed of the fluidized
bed.
In this experiment, the pressure was measured at 19 different measurement points. These
points were labelled P01 to P21, with P04 and P18 not existing in this experiment. The
measurement P04 is usually based at the outlet of the cyclone, and in this case the outlet had
been modified as explained in Section 6.1 – Geometry. P01, P02, and P03 measured the
pressure in siphon 1, with P01 being after and P02 and P03 being before siphon 1. P01 and
P02 were at the same height to compare the fluidization behaviour via the pressure before
and after.

P05 measured the transition from the riser to the cyclone, which gets increasingly narrower.
The pressure measurement points P06 to P15 were in the riser. The points P16 and P17,
which were in sector siphon 2, with P16 being after and P17 being before siphon 2.
The measurement points P19, P20, and P21 were in the pyrolysis reactor. P19 marks the
lowest and P21 the highest measure point. The heights as well as a draft with all the
measurement points can be found in Table 7 and in Figure 13.
Values from the different pressure points were monitored and automatically saved as a .out
file. For the entire simulation time of 65.0008 seconds, 2,531,180 pressure values were
collected, which means 130,220 pressure values per measurement point were collected.

34
 Table 7: Positions and heights of the pressure measurement points.
at the cold-flow-model Pressure Pressure
Named Sections & describtion Measureme Point
nt Point High [mm]
Syphone 1 (pre-pyrolysis)
outlet P01 960
inlet P02 960
Downcomer P03 1138
Cyclone
P05 1670
Riser
thin zone P06 1605
P07 1410
P08 1225
P09 1090
P10 920
P11 770
P12 610
P13 450
P14 285
dense zone P15 123
Syphone 2 (past-pyrolysis)
outlet P16 385
inlet P17 385
Pyrolysis
fluidized bed area P19 745
fluidized bed area P20 765
gas area P21 820
Figure 13: Positions of the pressure measurement

points in the cold-flow model

35
 NUMERICAL SIMULATION
The geometry of the experimental facility as mentioned above was realized in 3D. Therefore,
the numerical simulation required more calculation time as a similar 2D simulation.
Advantages of a 2D model is that a simulation would not require much calculation time and
is specifically used to have more accurate results. In this special thesis a 2D model would not
provide accurate results because of the array of the cold-flow model as well as their specific
geometry.

7.1. Simulation parameters and boundary conditions

The experimental start was required to enable the double precision parameter.
Furthermore, the 3D dimension and the parallel solver with eight processes were necessary.
Eight processes are the maximum possible with the license available at the Institute of
Chemical and Energy Engineering.
In this thesis, the Eulerian multiphase flow was used. The volume fraction was implicit.
Additionally, the number of Eulerian phases was set to two. These were air and bronze
powder (sand), with the bronze powder particles being used as fluidization material.
For the numerical simulation, the software program Ansys Fluent 18.0 was used.
The material type of both phases was set to fluid, and therefore, both were treated as fluids.
The reason for using this category for sand is that it is a requirement of the Euler-Euler
approach. The following table includes the properties of the materials.

Table 8: Material properties of the primary and secondary phases.

Air Bronze powder

Properties Unit
(Primary Phase) (Secondary Phase)
ρ - Density [kg/m³] ideal-gas 3435
cp - Specific Heat Capacity [J/kg-K] 1006.43 1006.43
λ - Thermal Conductivity [W/mK] 0.0242 0.0242
ƞ - dyn. Viscosity [kg/ms] 1.79E-05 1.79E-05

Besides the properties above, for the secondary phase (bed material), the bed material was
set as a granular phase with a particle size of 176 µm.

36
The dual fluidized bed model consisted of five inlets and two outlets. The inlets were default
as velocity inlets and the outlets were default as pressure outlets. It was divided into two
primary inlets at the riser and one each at siphon 1, siphon 2, and the pyrolysis reactor. As
shown in Chapter 6, the four inlets on siphons 1 and 2 as well as the nine inlets at the
pyrolysis reactor were aggregated together as one inlet each for siphon 1, siphon 2, and the
pyrolysis reactor.
The fluidization regime was determined through the gas velocity in the combustion riser.
Additionally, the particle distribution was a consequence of the gas velocity. The experiment
was accomplished with the standard siphon fluidization of 2 Nm³/h. Further velocity settings
for the riser, siphons 1 and 2, and the pyrolysis reactor will be calculated and explained in
the following section.

Table 9: Velocities of the inletspips.

Inlet Velocity [m/s]

Riser 1 26.78

Riser 2 26.78

Siphon 1 4.99

Siphon 2 4.99

Pyrolysis 1.85

Table 9 displays the set values of the velocity inlets. The primary inlets 1 and 2 (riser 1 and 2)
were calculated from the fluidization rate for the combustion riser of 𝜑𝐹𝐶 = 0,40 which is
equivalent to a velocity in the combustion riser of 𝑣𝑐 = 2.84 𝑚/𝑠. The fluidization rate for the
pyrolysis reactor was defined as 𝜑𝐹𝑃 = 0,07 which is equivalent to a velocity in the pyrolysis
reactor of 𝑣𝑝 = 0.6 𝑚/𝑠 to ensure adequate bed flow through the whole system at high
circulation rates.

𝑈 − 𝑈𝑚𝑓
𝜑𝐹 = ( 19 )
𝑈𝑠𝑒 − 𝑈𝑚𝑓

Equation (19) depicts the coherence of the minimum fluidization velocity Umf, the
sedimentation velocity Use, and the fluidization rate.

37
The setup for the Eulerian multiphase model with two Eulerian phases was characterized as
follows. The Eulerian phases are depicted in Table 8 for air and sand with implicit volume
fraction parameters. The secondary phase with the ceased material sand which defined as
particulate granular discrete, is further accurately described in Table 10 with the preferred
phase properties.

Table 10: Properties of particulate flow for dense particles (bronze powder).

Dense Particulate Flow

Diameter [m] 0.000176 [m]
Granular viscosity [kg/ms] Gidaspow
Bulk viscosity [kg/ms] Lun et. al
Frictional viscosity [kg/ms] Schaeffer
Angle of internal friction [°] default
Frictional Pressure [Pa] Johnson et. al
Frictional modulus [Pa] derived
Frictional packaging limit - 0.55
Granular temperature [m²/s²] algebraic
Solids Pressure [Pa] Lun et. al
Radial distribution function - Lun et. al
Elasticity Modulus [Pa] derived
Packaging Limit - 0.63

As mentioned in Table 10, the diameter of the particles is 0.000176 m, with no variation.
The phase interaction plays an important role between both phases, especially in the drag
function for the calculation of the momentum exchange coefficient. Table 11 shows the
modification for the phase interaction. Other modifications were not used and set to none.

Table 11: Modifications used for the phase interaction.

Phase Interaction

Virtual Mass Modeling constant (0.5)

Drag Coefficient Gidaspow

Heat Transfer Coefficient Gunn

38
The constant value of 0.5 was used as a default for the virtual mass. The fluid-solid drag
function selected by gidaspow was particularly for a dense fluidized bed, as is simulated in this
thesis. To reach an adequate heat removal in the plant, the gunn heat transfer coefficient was
chosen for Eulerian multiphase simulations with a granular phase involved.

Settings for the solution controls as well as for the solution methods are depicted in Table 12
and 12. The under-relaxation factors were chosen during the simulation to concede a steady
simulation and increase the stability to its maximum.

Table 12: Solution controls. Table 13: Solution methods.

For the Eulerian multiphase and transient solver, the phase coupled simple scheme is
recommended. The algorithm for the velocities in a segregated fashion as well as the fluxes
were reconstructed at the faces of the control volume, and therefore a pressure correction
equation was built based on total continuity.
The order of discretization – the first-order-upwind method – was chosen to obtain a better
convergence of the simulation.

39
7.2. Starting Conditions and Peak Load Approach

To obtain comparable results from the simulation, the starting conditions are an important
factor. The mathematical Euler-Euler method was used with a heavy load. Therefore, the start
of the model must be adapted.
The Table 14 and Table 15 provide an insight into the simulation start.
The material being used to simulate the dual fluidized bed is bronze powder with a bulk
density of 3,435 kg/m³. Table 14 shows the starting allocation of the powder. Siphon 1 and
siphon 2 have the same masses, given their equal quality structures. The mass has to fill up
the whole siphon, otherwise the inflow air at the air inlets generate an interference flux and
a simulated circulation of the fluidized bed is not possible. The pyrolysis reactor had been filled
up with the result that the bronze powder covered the air inlets but did not reach the
freeboard. To reach the total mass goal of 1.937 kg, the riser had to be filled up. Figure 14
depicts the patched plant with the starting mass in red as described in Table 14. The setting
for the bed’s initial volume fraction was 0.55.

40
Table 14: Patched starting mass of the simulated bronze powder.

Starting Bronze Mass [kg]

patch
Siphon 1 0.176
Siphon 2 0.176
Pyrolysis reactor 0.176
Riser 1.408
Total Mass 1.937

Figure 14: Fluidized bed plant with visualized patched starting mass in red.

The peak load approach was realised as shown in Table 15 with the velocities S1 of siphon 1,
S2 of siphon 2 and P of pyrolysis reactor . For faster approaches, the simulation would not
work correctly due to an unrealistic starting speed of the fluidized bed plant.
The enhancement of the velocities ensured an average of 100 time step numbers. At the
beginning of the simulation, the time step size and time step number were adjusted. The
adjustments took place if the simulation had been steady and the scaled residuals showed
continuously converging lines. The increase in the velocities has been set for 1 m/s. The
material mass was steady through the entire peak load approach.

41
 Velocity Time Step Time Material [kg] Velocity [m/s]
Time [s]
Riser [m/s] Size Number Steps Mass Loss S1 S2 P
0.0008 1.00 0.00001 80 80 1.933749 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.0068 1.00 0.00005 120 200 1.933749 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.0108 1.00 0.0001 40 240 1.933749 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.0608 1.00 0.0005 100 340 1.933749 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.1608 1.50 0.0005 200 540 1.933749 0.00 1.50 1.50 1.50
0.2108 2.00 0.0005 100 640 1.933749 0.00 2.00 2.00 1.86
0.2608 3.00 0.0005 100 740 1.933749 0.00 3.00 3.00 1.86
0.3108 4.00 0.0005 100 840 1.933749 0.00 4.00 4.00 1.86
0.3608 5.00 0.0005 100 940 1.933749 0.00 4.99 4.99 1.86
0.4108 6.00 0.0005 100 1040 1.933749 0.00 4.99 4.99 1.86
Table 15: Peak load approach of velocities and time steps.

1.3608 25.00 0.0005 100 2940 1.933749 0.00 4.99 4.99 1.86
1.4108 26.00 0.0005 100 3040 1.933749 0.00 4.99 4.99 1.86
1.4608 26.78688 0.0005 100 3140 1.933749 0.00 4.99 4.99 1.86
1.5708 26.78688 0.0005 220 3360 1.933749 0.00 4.99 4.99 1.86

42
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The duration of the simulation, after calculation of the set parameters as described above,
took about 1´216 hours for 65 seconds of simulated time.

8.1. Pressure Trend and Pressure Profile

The following graphs show the pressure trend from the start of the simulation until the start
of the circulation of the fluidized bed. The following diagrams depict the fluidization between
0-10 seconds of simulated time of the riser, siphons 1 and 2 as well form the pyrolysis reactor.
After 10 seconds of simulated time, the circulation of the dual fluidized bed started. As briefly
mentioned in the beginning of this chapter, the duration of the simulation of 65 seconds of
simulated time took about 1´216 hours. The peak load of velocities was reached after 1.4
seconds of simulating time.
After reaching the peak load velocities, the beginning of the circulation of the fluidized bed
started after 10 seconds of simulated time. Ten seconds of simulated time converted into real
time was approximately 195 hours.

Figure 15: Pressure trend from the beginning of the experiment to the start of the circulation of the riser.

The pressure trend as depicted in Figure 15 shows the pressure in the riser. Pressure point
P06 describes the highest point, whereas P15 measured the lowest point of the riser near the
air inlets. The pressure trend of the riser shows the rising pressure in the riser bed and the

43
upcoming fluidization of the bed material. P15 especially showed a drastic pressure drop in
the first few milliseconds due to the packed bed of particles. The further pressure trend shows
a fine pressure profile of the riser from the dense zone to the flattening at the end of the
diagram. With less material left in the riser, the pressure drops.
Right after the start of the simulation, the pressure of P15 increased drastically. Hence, a fixed
bed of particles was batched at the beginning in the riser. The slow increase of the velocity
dispersed the particles through the combustion riser, leading to a pressure distribution from
pressure point P15 with the highest pressure to P06 with the lowest pressure in the riser. With
this rise, the particulate fluidization started and the minimum fluidization rate, Umf, was
already reached. After further increasing the velocity in the riser, a short period of bubbling
fluidization appeared. This can be seen in the rapid increase and drop in pressure. In this state,
the coalescence of bubbles increased. After this, the pressure increased again and the
coalescence of bubbles evoked the slugging regime. The cavity of this coalescence occupied
the entire cross section and led to turbulent fluidization, which can be seen in the lack of
fluctuation from point P09 to P15. Meanwhile, the peak load of velocity in the riser were
reached at 1.4 seconds and a great number of particles had been released out of the riser to
the cyclone. The peak of all pressure points dominated due to fewer particles in the riser and
consistent distribution. The fast fluidization regime dominated the riser after the high-
pressure peak until the pressure distribution stopped. Hence, pneumatic transport appeared
with fewer particles and the pressures at P06 through P15 were similar and decreased.

Figure 16: Pressure trend from the beginning to the start of the circulation. Pressure lines depict siphons 1 and 2 as well as
the measure point of the transition.

Figure 16 represents both siphons: siphon 1 before and siphon 2 after the pyrolysis reactor.
There were clear increases in pressure at points P16 and P17, which were the measurement
points of siphon 2. The high fluidization flux of air at the beginning effected a flow in reverse

44
direction through siphon 2. This reverse flow caused an uncovered status from the secondary
phase, bronze powder, of siphon 2. Therefore, the pressure rose from the beginning. The
reach of the high-pressure peak of P16 and P17 occurred from the fast fluidization in the riser,
which can be seen on the pressure peak in Figure 15 as well. The two pressure points (P16 and
P17) of siphon 2 generated the same pressure values, hence an unfilled siphon is evident. Until
siphon 2 reached a covered status, circulation did not start.
As it is depicted, siphon 1 with P01, P02, and P03 had a low pressure at the beginning until the
flux and until the particles reached siphon 1. Further fluidization did not affect the impact of
siphon 2.
The transition from the riser to the cyclone is represented in pressure point P05. After 2
seconds of simulated time, the graph of P05 increased, caused by the upcoming bronze
powder in the riser. It is clearly shown that the pressure of P05 operated on the lower part.
The specific reason is that the bulk of the bronze powder had already passed this pressure
point, and less material was coming through.

The pressure trend in Figure 17 displays the pressure in points P19, P20, and P21 of the
pyrolysis reactor. The full speed of the air inlets at the pyrolysis reactor was reached after 0.2
seconds of simulated time. The first peak of pressure was at point P19, where 34.7 mbar
appeared after 95 time steps and 0.00155 seconds of simulated time. This can be explained
by the packed bed, such as in the combustion riser. The peak load was reached after 1.4
seconds of simulated time, whereas the second pressure peak was reached after 2.3 seconds
of simulated time. The pressure peaks occurred through the accumulation of the secondary
phase (bronze powder), also referred as dense particles. The frequent peaks refer to the
reverse flow direction through siphon 2, as mentioned above. The effects of the reverse flow
from siphon 2 and accurate from siphon 1 are the accumulation of bronze powder and hence
the output of bed material via pressure outlet at the pyrolysis reactor, which lasted from 1.4
to 9 seconds of simulated time. The diagram of the pyrolysis reactor depicted clearly a similar
fluidization as appeared in the riser. As mentioned above, the first peak illustrates the packed
bed. Afterwards, bubbling fluidization started until the pressure peak from all measurement
points in the pyrolysis reactor. This and the further peaks came from the accumulation of the
secondary phase with the consequences of a material loss of 0.43 kg, as mentioned above,
from 1.4 to 9 seconds of simulated time. These can be seen at pressure point P21 as well in
Figure 22.

45
Figure 17: Pressure trend from the beginning to the start of the circulation, as seen at pressure points of the pyrolysis
reactor.

The following figures show the trends of the pressure points. Once more, to give a better
overview, the pressure trends of the riser, siphons 1 and 2, and the pyrolysis reactor will be
pointed out.

Pressure trend: 10-30 seconds of the Riser

140

120

100
Pressure [mbar]

80

60

40

20

Seconds of simulated Time [s]

P06 P07 P08 P09 P10 P11 P12 P13 P14 P15

Figure 18: Pressure trend of the riser from 10 to 30 seconds of simulated time.

46
The further pressure trend of the riser from the start of the circulation at 10 seconds of
simulated time to 30 seconds of simulated time is depicted in Figure 18. The narrow pressure
lines in the diagram represent the pneumatic transport regime in the riser. With upcoming
material in the riser from siphon 2, and therefore the start of circulation, slugging occurs. In
the slugging regime, the entire cross section is occupied by the cavity of the coalescence
bubbles and wild pressure fluctuations exist. There is a clearly defined pattern to the graph,
and this can be taken to mean that the secondary phase is circulating in the model. The three
upcoming peaks came from accumulation and loading of the secondary phase in siphon 2 and
therefore the material is coming to the riser batchwise.
The accumulation and engorging of siphon 2 can be seen in Figure 19. Pressure points P16 and
P17 show an up and down movement of the pressure until the accumulation of bronze powder
engorges the siphon (see Figure 25). This engorging affects the bubbling regime and leads to
slugging with high pressure variations. As the shape of the graph demonstrates, the upcoming
slugging regime effects the regime in the riser with the batchwise supply of material. Siphon
1, with the measurement points P01 and P02, depicts a bubbling regime that is due to a more
permanent supply of material caused of the cyclone. The pressure point P03 in the
downcomer between the cyclone and siphon 1, with the pressure rise depicting the material
feed. The transition from riser to cyclone is seen in P05 and depicts the material feed in
between as well.

Pressure trend: 10-30 seconds of Siphone 1 & 2

140

120

100
Pressure [mbar]

80

60

40

20

Seconds of simulated Time [s]

P01 P02 P03 P05 P16 P17

Figure 19: Pressure trend from 10 to 30 seconds of simulated time. The graph shows siphons 1 and 2 as well as the
downcomer and the transition between riser and cyclone.

47
The next pressure trend of the second fluidized bed in the pyrolysis reactor is represented in
Figure 20. P21 is constantly at very low pressure, which indicates no material loss. The regime
of bubbling fluidization is clearly depicted in P20 and P21, with no drastic rise of pressure.

Pressure trend: 10-30 seconds of the Pyrolysis

14

12

10
Pressure [mbar]

Seconds of simulated Time [s]

P19 P20 P21

Figure 20: Pressure trend from 10 to 30 seconds of simulated time for the pyrolysis reactor.

Figure 21 depicts the volume fraction, with dense zones in red and thin zones in blue.
Additionally, the flow vectors are displayed.

48
Figure 21: Pyrolysis reactor with flow vectors coloured according to the volume fraction.

Figure 22 represents the material loss of bronze powder between the first 1.4 to 9 seconds of
simulated time. The loss of material arises mainly in the pyrolysis reactor. All in all, 22.3%, or
0.43 kg of 1.93 kg, were discharged during this 7.6 seconds of simulated time. The loss can be
seen in the pressure rise of P21 in Figure 17. In comparison to the simulation, the discharged
bronze powder from the cold-flow model is used again for various experiments.

49
 Material loss
1.93
2.00

1.90

1.80 1.88
Mass in the system [kg]

1.83 1.68

1.70
1.76

1.60

1.50

1.50 1.50

1.40

Seconds of Simulating Time [s]

Figure 22: Material loss of bronze powder from 1.4 to 9 seconds of simulated time.

Depicted in Figure 23 is the simulation of the first 30 seconds of simulated time with all
pressure curves. Overall, the simulation duration was 65 seconds. As mentioned above, the
start of the circulation occurred after 10 seconds of simulated time. The graph in Figure 24
illustrates the pressure peaks for the first 30 seconds. In the next 35 seconds of simulated
time, the pressure graph showed a steady repeatable pressure trend with no distinctive
changes in pressure.

50
 P21
P20
P19
P17
P16
P15
P14
Pressure Trend (P01-P21): 0-30 seconds

P13
Second of simulated Time [s]

P12
P11
P10
P09
P08
P07
P06
P05
P03
P02
P01
140

120

100

0
80

60

40

20

Pressure [mbar]

Figure 23: Pressure trend of the pressure values (P01-P21) shown from the beginning of the simulation thorough to 30
seconds of simulated time.

51
According to Figure 24, for the pressure profiles of the CFD-simulated dual fluidized bed as
well as those of the cold-flow model, the values of the pressure points from the model and
the simulation are similar. Higher pressure values of the CFD-simulated riser and siphon 2 are
shown. The riser depicts a steady trend during all measurement points, and with these a
comparison of the simulation and cold flow model can be made. Higher pressure values for
the combustion riser and thereby a higher pressure at siphon 2 might have occurred from the
surface tension as well from the cohesiveness of the bronze powder, which occurred because
it was treated as a fluid. Pressure point P05, which represented the pressure from the
transition, as well as from the downcomer P03, is linked up to the pressure of the riser. In this
simulation, no pressure point P04 were measured, which can be seen in Figure 13 and Figure
24 due to the changed geometry of the CFD model. This missing measurement point could
lead to the difference between the pressure (P03 and P05) of the cold-flow model and the
CFD- simulation. By setting the pressure of P04 equal the pressure outlet of the cyclone, the
pressure profile could be more identically. The pressure behaviours of siphon 1 and the
pyrolysis reactor were related to the cold-flow model. Although P04 is missing in the CFD-
simulation the characteristic of the pressure profile of both, the cold-flow model and the CFD-
simulation, is superior presentable.
The pressure trend of the CFD simulation was recorded for merely 65 seconds of simulated
time, whereas the cold-flow model was operated for multiple minutes.

52
 Pressure-profile
2000

P05 P04 P05

1800
P06
P06

1600
P07
P07

1400
P08
P08
P03
P03
P09
1200
P02
P02
P10
Height [mm]

P01
P01
1000 P11

P12
800
P13

600
P19 P17
P17
P21
P13
400 P20 P16
P14
P14
P16
200
P15
P15
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Pressure [mbar]

CFD-Simulation
Cold-Flow Model

Figure 24: Relationship between the CFD-simulated pressure profile and the existing pressure profile of the cold-flow model.

Figure 25 represents the volume fraction of the secondary phase (bronze powder; called
sand in the CFD software) and therefore shows the distribution of the bronze powder during
the simulation. It clearly shows a charge of siphon 2 before the slugging regime occurred, as
described in Figure 19.
In Figure 25, the accumulated parts after 30 seconds of simulated time of the secondary
phase can be seen. The volume fraction depicts the dense zones in red and the thin zones in
blue.

53
Figure 25: Volume fraction of bronze powder after 30 seconds of simulation.

54
8.2. Temperature Profile
The desired temperature of the CFD-simulated cold-flow model was set to ambient
temperature. To obtain the desired temperature, the thermal conditions of the wall were set
to 298.15 °K. In addition, the heat transfer coefficient of the phase interaction was chosen as
a Gunn model.

Figure 26: Temperature profiles of primary (air) and secondary (sand) phases.

Figure 26 displays the static temperatures of the primary and secondary phases. The
temperature contour of the primary phase air shows that the air inlets of the riser were
warmish compared to the rest of the fluidized bed. The temperature of 297 °K was where
less particles stayed, for example, at the top of the riser and at siphons 1 and 2. At the
pyrolysis reactor, the particles were confined to the lower part were the flux was. The upper
part of the pyrolysis reactor was near ambient temperature due to less delay of particles.
The changed geometry at the pyrolysis and outlet pipes influenced the temperature due to
the greater volume and lateral surface. This figure shows evidence for the right
parametrisation.

55
 CONCLUSION AND PERSPECTIVE
Within the scope of this master’s thesis an existing cold-flow model was successfully
simulated with computational fluid dynamics. The two-phase dual fluidized bed was studied
experimentally and numerically using Ansys Fluent. Furthermore, the pressure of the riser
was measured at different points along the column, the behaviour of the flow was
monitored, and flow pictures of the fluidized bed on the x and y axes were recorded. Other
flow pictures were recorded through the second fluidized bed (or the pyrolysis reactor) as
well at siphon 1, including the downcomer and the cyclone, and siphon 2. Additionally, the
pressure of the pyrolysis reactor, the siphons, and the downcomer as well from the
transition between the riser and cyclone were measured at significant points for better
commensurability by Ansys Fluent 18.0.
The contribution of this thesis rests on four areas.
First of all, the simulation represents a cold-flow model, which can relate to upscaling
fluidized bed plants. The next major area is the CFD simulation, with special attention in 3D
simulation. The third point concentrates on the Eulerian multiphase method that was used.
Both phases, air and bronze powder, were treated as fluids although the bulk density of
bronze powder, at 3,435 kg/m3 is classified as very high and is not a typical density for fluid-
like simulations. The last point is that the conditions of the simulation for the dual fluidized
bed were chosen as ambient temperature and pressure.
In conclusion, the correct parametrisation of such a dual fluidized bed simulation is time
intensive, but leads to presentable results in a pressure profile. The circulation of the
fluidized bed model was reached after 10 seconds of simulated time with the main discharge
of material during this time. The overall discharge of bronze powder was measured at 0.43
kg from the beginning mass of 1.93 kg, and clearly shows that the main discharge occurs in
the pyrolysis reactor, which can be seen in pressure point P21. The pressures in the
combustion riser and siphon 2 are offset to the pressure from the compared cold-flow
model.

Future research should concentrate on:

• implementing boundary layers to get high subsurface result gradients;

• a particle size distribution with different Sauter diameters that leads to an

Euler-Lagrangian approach and intensive calculation time;

• the use of second-order-upwind in the solution methods to achieve a higher

accuracy of results;

• a simulation of different gas velocities, and therefore, different fluidization

rates, of the combustion riser as well as the pyrolysis and siphons; and

56
• diminishing the offset of pressure from the combustion riser and siphons by
means of adding equations and values to simulate the surface tension and
cohesiveness of the particles from the secondary phase.

57
 LIST OF CITED LITERATURE
A Comparison of CFD Software Packages (2018) resolvedanalytics.com. Available at:
https://www.resolvedanalytics.com/theflux/comparing-cfd-software.

Adamczyk, W. P. (2017) ‘Application of the Numerical Techniques for Modelling Fluidization

Process Within Industrial Scale Boilers’, Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering.
doi: 10.1007/s11831-016-9186-z.

Anthony, E. J. and Hack, H. (2013) ‘19 - Oxy-fired fluidized bed combustion: technology,
prospects and new developments’, in Woodhead Publishing Series in Energy. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1533/9780857098801.4.867.

Basu, P. (2013) Biomass Gasification, Pyrolysis and Torrefaction: Practical Design and Theory,
Biomass Gasification, Pyrolysis and Torrefaction: Practical Design and Theory. doi:
10.1016/C2011-0-07564-6.

Basu, P. (2015) Circulating fluidized bed boilers: Design, operation and maintenance,
Circulating Fluidized Bed Boilers: Design, Operation and Maintenance. doi: 10.1007/978-3-
319-06173-3.

Bi, H. T. and Grace, J. R. (1995) ‘Flow regime diagrams for gas-solid fluidization and upward
transport’, International Journal of Multiphase Flow. doi: 10.1016/0301-9322(95)00037-X.

Bi, H. T., Grace, J. R. and Lim, K. S. (1995) ‘Transition from Bubbling to Turbulent
Fluidization’, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research. doi: 10.1021/ie00038a041.

Bi, H. T., Grace, J. R. and Zhu, J. (1995) ‘Regime transitions affecting gas-solids suspensions
and fluidized-beds’, Chemical Engineering Research & Design. doi:
dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0301-9322(97)88189-X.

Czernik, S. and Bridgwater, A. V. (2004) ‘Overview of applications of biomass fast pyrolysis

oil’, Energy and Fuels. doi: 10.1021/ef034067u.

Dalgleish, T. et al. (2007) Simulation von Kraftwerken und wärmetechnischen Anlagen,

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. Wien.

Dennis, J. S. (2013) ‘3 - Properties of stationary (bubbling) fluidised beds relevant to

combustion and gasification systems’, in Woodhead Publishing Series in Energy. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1533/9780857098801.1.77.

Fahmy, T. Y. A. et al. (2018) ‘Biomass pyrolysis: past, present, and future’, Environment,
Development and Sustainability, (0123456789), pp. 1–16. doi: 10.1007/s10668-018-0200-5.

Geldart, D. (1973) ‘Types of gas fluidization’, Powder Technology. doi: 10.1016/0032-

5910(73)80037-3.

Grace, J. R. and Lim, C. J. (2013) ‘Properties of circulating fluidized beds (CFB) relevant to
combustion and gasification systems’, in Fluidized Bed Technologies for Near-Zero Emission
Combustion and Gasification. doi: 10.1533/9780857098801.1.147.

Horio, M. (2013) ‘Overview of fluidization science and fluidized bed technologies’, in

Fluidized Bed Technologies for Near-Zero Emission Combustion and Gasification. doi:
58
10.1533/9780857098801.1.3.

Hotta, A. (2010) ‘Foster wheeler’s solutions for large scale CFB boiler technology: features
and operational performance of Łagisza 460 MWe CFB boiler’, 20th Int. Conf. on Fluidized
Bed Combustion.

Kaltschmitt, M., Hartmann, H. and Hofbauer, H. (2013) Energie aus Biomasse Grundlagen,
Techniken und Verfahren, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling. doi:
10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004.

Kan, T., Strezov, V. and Evans, T. J. (2016) ‘Lignocellulosic biomass pyrolysis: A review of
product properties and effects of pyrolysis parameters’, Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.185.

Kunii, D. and Levenspiel, O. (1991) ‘Fluidization and Mapping of Regimes’, Fluidization

Engineering, pp. 61–94. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-08-050664-7.50009-3.

Kunii, D. and Levenspiel, O. (1997) ‘Circulating fluidized-bed reactors’, Chemical Engineering

Science. doi: 10.1016/S0009-2509(97)00066-3.

Leckner, B. (2013) ‘Atmospheric (non-circulating) fluidized bed (FB) combustion’, in Fluidized

Bed Technologies for Near-Zero Emission Combustion and Gasification. doi:
10.1533/9780857098801.3.641.

Mazzei, L., Marchisio, D. L. and Lettieri, P. (2010) ‘Direct quadrature method of moments for
the mixing of inert polydisperse fluidized powders and the role of numerical diffusion’,
Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research. doi: 10.1021/ie901116y.

Merkus, G. H. (2009) Particle Size Measurements, Particle Technology Series. doi:

10.1007/978-1-4020-9016-5.

Nowak, W. and Mirek, P. (2013) ‘Circulating fluidized bed combustion (CFBC)’, in Fluidized
Bed Technologies for Near-Zero Emission Combustion and Gasification. doi:
10.1533/9780857098801.3.701.

Pigford, R. L. (1968) ‘Fluidized Particles. By J. F. Davidson and D. Harrison. Cambridge

University Press, 1963. 155 pp. 35 s. or $6.50.’, Journal of Fluid Mechanics. doi:
10.1017/S0022112068221560.

SCAHILL, J., DIEBOLD, J. P. and FEIK, C. (1997) ‘Developments in Thermochemical Biomass

Conversion’, Developments in Thermochemical Biomass Conversion. doi: 10.1007/978-94-
009-1559-6.

Shimizu, T. (2013) ‘Pressurized fluidized bed combustion (PFBC)’, in Fluidized Bed

Technologies for Near-Zero Emission Combustion and Gasification. doi:
10.1533/9780857098801.3.669.

Subramanian, R. (2004) ‘Flow through Packed Beds and Fluidized Beds’, The Pennsylvania
State University. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2013.11.015.

Wadell, H. (1933) ‘Sphericity and Roundness of Rock Particles’, The Journal of Geology. doi:
10.1086/624040.

59
Wang, D. and Fan, L. S. (2013) ‘Particle characterization and behavior relevant to fluidized
bed combustion and gasification systems’, in Fluidized Bed Technologies for Near-Zero
Emission Combustion and Gasification. doi: 10.1533/9780857098801.1.42.

Wang, X. S., Rahman, F. and Rhodes, M. J. (2007) ‘Nanoparticle fluidization and Geldart’s
classification’, Chemical Engineering Science. doi: 10.1007/s00254-007-1166-z.

Yang, W.-C. (2003) ‘Handbook of fluidization and fluid-particle systems’, China Particuology.
doi: 10.1016/S1672-2515(07)60126-2.

Zhang, J. et al. (2010) ‘Decoupling gasification: Approach principle and technology

justification’, Energy and Fuels. doi: 10.1021/ef101036c.

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Overview of thermochemical conversion (Zhang et al., 2010). .................................. 3
Figure 2: Pressure drop across a bed of particles in the vicinity of minimum fluidization: (a)
monosized distribution of particles, (b) distribution of particle sizes (Dennis, 2013). ............ 11
Figure 3: Geldart’s classification of particles for air at ambient conditions (Geldart, 1973). .. 12
Figure 4: Dense phase fluidization regimes: (a) fixed bed, (b) particulate fluidization, (c)
bubbling fluidization, (d) turbulent fluidization, (e) slugging, (f) spouting, and (g) channelling.
.................................................................................................................................................. 14
Figure 5: Simplified scheme of a bubbling fluidized bed (left) and a circulating fluidized bed
(right) (Adamczyk, 2017). ......................................................................................................... 17
Figure 6: 3D draft of the model; additional modified parts are not transparent. ................... 29
Figure 7: Original and modified designs of the inlets from the pyrolysis reactor marked in
green......................................................................................................................................... 30
Figure 8: Cross section of the lower part of the meshed riser with both air inlets grey and
yellow (left) and detailed view from the mesh transition of the inlet to the riser (right). ...... 31
Figure 9: Section plane through the meshed cyclone and the transition from the riser to the
cyclone with detailed extract of the transition from riser to cyclone ..................................... 31
Figure 10: Cross section through the meshed pyrolysis reactor and extract on the inlets of
the reactor. ............................................................................................................................... 32
Figure 11: Closer look from the bottom of the pyrolysis reactor and detailed look on the
meshed inlets of the reactor .................................................................................................... 32
Figure 12: Section Plane through a meshed siphon................................................................. 33
Figure 13: Positions of the pressure measurement ................................................................. 35
Figure 14: Fluidized bed plant with visualized patched starting mass in red. ......................... 41

60
Figure 15: Pressure trend from the beginning of the experiment to the start of the circulation
of the riser. ............................................................................................................................... 43
Figure 16: Pressure trend from the beginning to the start of the circulation. Pressure lines
depict siphons 1 and 2 as well as the measure point of the transition. .................................. 44
Figure 17: Pressure trend from the beginning to the start of the circulation, as seen at
pressure points of the pyrolysis reactor. ................................................................................. 46
Figure 18: Pressure trend of the riser from 10 to 30 seconds of simulated time. ................... 46
Figure 19: Pressure trend from 10 to 30 seconds of simulated time. The graph shows siphons
1 and 2 as well as the downcomer and the transition between riser and cyclone. ................ 47
Figure 20: Pressure trend from 10 to 30 seconds of simulated time for the pyrolysis reactor.
.................................................................................................................................................. 48
Figure 21: Pyrolysis reactor with flow vectors coloured according to the volume fraction. ... 49
Figure 22: Material loss of bronze powder from 1.4 to 9 seconds of simulated time. ........... 50
Figure 23: Pressure trend of the pressure values (P01-P21) shown from the beginning of the
simulation thorough to 30 seconds of simulated time. ........................................................... 51
Figure 24: Relationship between the CFD-simulated pressure profile and the existing
pressure profile of the cold-flow model. ................................................................................. 53
Figure 25: Volume fraction of bronze powder after 30 seconds of simulation. ...................... 54
Figure 26: Temperature profiles of primary (air) and secondary (sand) phases. .................... 55

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Comparison between the different types of pyrolysis ................................................. 4
Table 2: Range of Key Operating Variables in a Riser for Commercial Operations. ................ 18
Table 3: Overview of the different CFD Software Packages. ................................................... 22
Table 4: Recommended and Achieved Mesh Quality .............................................................. 30
Table 5: Mesh sizing ................................................................................................................. 33
Table 7: Positions and heights of the Pressure Measurement Points at the cold-flow-model35
Table 8: Material properties of the Primary and Secondary Phase ......................................... 36
Table 9: Velocities of the inlets ................................................................................................ 37
Table 10: Properties of Particulate Flow for Dense particles (Bronze Powder) ...................... 38
Table 11: Used modifications for the Phase Interaction.......................................................... 38
Table 12: Solution Controls Table 13: Solution Methods .................................................. 39
61
Table 14: Patched starting mass of the simulated bronze powder ......................................... 41
Table 15: Peak load approach of Velocities and Time Steps.................................................... 42

LIST OF ABBREVIATION

2D two-dimensional -
3D three-dimensional -
Ap external surface area m2
Ar archimedes number -
AR aspect ratio -
At cross-sectional area of the tube m²
BFB bubbling fluidized bed -
CAD computer-aided design -
CFB circulating fluidized bed -
CFD computational fluid dynamics -
d32 sauter diameter m
dp mean diameter of the particles m
DPM discrete second phase -
ds surface diameter m
dsv surface-volume mean particle diameter m
dv volume diameter m
e.g. for example -
FCC fluid catalytic cracking -
fp friction factor -
g acceleration of gravity m/s²
GUI graphical user interface -
HCL hydrochloric acid -
HF hydrofluoric -
L length of a fixed bed m

62
Lmf bed height m
mAir,a available oxygen kg
mAir,d demand for oxygen kg
Mp mass of the particle kg
NOx nitrogen oxides -
P velocity of pyrolysis reactor m/s
Remf particle Reynolds number for minimum fluidization -
Rep particle Reynolds number -
S1 velocity of siphon 1 m/s
S2 velocity of siphon 2 m/s
SO2 sulfure dioxide -
U superficial velocity m/s
Uc superficial gas velocity at which pressure fluctuations are a maximum m/s
Umb minimum bubbling velocity m/s
Umf minimum fluidization velocity m/s
Ums minimum slugging velocity m/s
Upf minimum superficial fluidizing velocity of particles m/s
Use significant entrainment velocity m/s
vc fluidization velocity for combustion m/s
VOF volume of fluid -
vp fluidization velocity of pyrolysis m/s
Vp volume of a nonporous particle m3
Vp volume of particle m3
Vs volume of a solid m3
VT total bulk volume of the material m3
VV volume of the void space m3
wt% percent by weight

63
Greek Symbols -

αg void of the packaging -

Δp pressure drob Pa
Δpb Pressure drop across a fixed or fluidized bed Pa
ε local voidage -
εbd voidage in a fixed bed -
εmf voidage at minimum fluidization -
λ air ratio -
µ viscosity Pa s
µg viscosity of a gas Pa s
ρ density kg/m³
ρf density of a fluid kg/m³
ρg density of a gas kg/m³
ρp density of a particle kg/m³
φ Particle porosity -
φF fluidization rate -
φFC fluidization rate for combustion -
φFP fluidization rate of pyrolysis -
ψ Sphericity of a particle -
⊄ Circularity -

64