Doctoral school of energy and geotechnology
January 16–21, 2006. Kuressaare, Estonia
Heat Transfer in
Circulating Fluidized Bed
Pavel Rusheljuk
Tallinn University of Technology
Abstract
Heat transfer in the circulating fluidized bed is, apart
from the particle and gas mixing, the most important
process contributing to the intensity of the physical
and chemical processes. In fact, several different
processes can be distinguished: particle-gas heat
transfer, heat transfer between different points in the
bed, heat transfer between the fluidized bed particles
and the larger particles floating in the bed and the
heat transfer to the submerged surfaces in contact
with the bed. All of these heat transfer processes are
very intensive in circulating fluidized beds.
These processes depend on the intensity of heat
transfer between the bed as a whole and these
particles. When chemical reactions between gas and
particles begin (combustion of the char), particle
temperature is higher and the reverse process of heat
exchange between active particles and fluidized bed
takes place. Heat transfer between the active particle
and the fluidized bed is controlled by three
mechanisms: gas convection, particle convection and
radiation. The heat transfer between the furnace wall
and the suspension includes contributions from
radiation, particle convection, gas conduction and gas
convection. Though doubts have been expressed about
the additive nature of these components, many authors
approximate the overall heat transfer coefficient by
writing.
In the literature, numerous relationships can be
found for calculating the heat transfer to immersed
surfaces of different shape: vessel walls, single
horizontal or vertical pipe, tube bundles with smooth
and finned tubes in corridor or staggered
arrangement.
A number of mechanistic models have been proposed to
describe the particle convective heat transfer component
and to explain the nature of heat transfer at the walls
of a CFB boiler. These models can be classified broadly
as single-particle models, cluster renewal models,
continuous film models.
Keywords
heat transfer coefficient; circulating fluidized bed;
radiation; convection; conduction; gas; particle
Introduction
The importance of fluidized bed combustion in
utilizing the energy of especially low quality coals is
widely accepted. Among various fluidized bed
combustion technologies, circulating fluidized beds
(CFB) are preferred as a result of the efforts to get
higher combustion efficiencies.
The importances of circulating fluidized beds in
industry have increased with time. Since the heat from
fuel combustion can be removed with external or
internal heat exchangers. Heat transfers take place
between particles and gas, between particles and other
particles and between the gas-solid suspension and
heat transfer surfaces. Expressions of heat transfer are
obtained mostly empirically [1] and in the literature, a
few heat transfer studies have been described. Even
though most of the studies relate to time-averaged
local heat transfer in circulating fluidized beds [2], [3],
[4], [5] reported instantaneous heat transfer
coefficients.
1. Background
A bed of particles blown through from bottom to top
by gas at a velocity exceeding the velocity of free
floating of them is designated the circulating bed. This
bed cannot exist without constant loading because
particles will be rapidly carried out away from it.
However, if carried particles are trapped (for example,
by cyclones) or returned to the lower part of the bed,
then they are closed in the system and will circulate in
it for a long time determined by abrasion of them, no
ideal efficiency, etc.
Heat transfer in furnaces with CFB is characterized by
the following specific features:
- necessity of account for both radiative and
convective (heat transfer by particles) components
of the coefficient of heat transfer;
- use of gas-dense membrane screens, a geometric
surface of which is larger than the area of the
projection of a screen to the wall closed by it;
- a small range of variation of temperature of the
furnace volume. A mean temperature of about
850°C is considered to be optimum (from the view
167
 point of sulfur fixation). Depending on the mode
and other factors, it is usually maintained within a
range 850 - 950°C. Thanks to intense inner and
outer circulation of particles, a temperature in the
furnace is virtually constant (at least under nominal
load) over its height and section;
- a small range of sizes of inert particles circulating
in CFB (0,15 - 0,30 mm), these particles make up
95 – 99 % of the layer (the remainder is fuel
particles);
- particles descending along the screen form a
specific boundary layer which absorbs radiation of
the core of the furnace volume. Therefore, a
decreases downward the screen which somewhat
equilibrates an increase of convective heat transfer.
In order to explain heat transfer in CFB and predict heat
transfer coefficients, several models have been proposed.
The heat transfer between the furnace wall and the bed
includes contributions from radiation, particle and gas
convection, as well as gas conduction. In almost all of
literature, the furnace-side conduction, convection and
radiation processes and the conduction within the wall
have been treated as entirely separate phenomena. In
reality, these processes are highly coupled and interrelated.
2. Heat transfer process
The heat transfer between the furnace wall and the
suspension includes contributions from radiation, par-
ticle convection, gas conduction and gas convection.
Though doubts have been expressed about the additive
nature of these components [6], many authors approxi-
mate the overall heat transfer coefficient by writing.
Since the particle convection coefficient, is much greater
than the gas convection coefficient, for the range of
particle sizes used in almost all CFB applications, most
models pay little or no attention to the dilute phase heat
transfer coefficient.
Intensity of heat transfer to screen surfaces in the
furnaces with a circulating fluidized bed is determined
by both radiation and convection of particles. Due to
the formation of a thermal boundary layer near the
screens the role of radiation decreases and that of
convection increases with an increase in concentration
of particles in the furnace. Radiation is a major
contributor to heat transfer in CFB boilers and other high
temperature CFB reactors, especially for the low
suspension densities found under turndown
conditions. The relative contribution of radiation
depends primarily on the wall and furnace tem-
peratures. Several models have been proposed for the
radiation component, for example the steady-state
model of Chen [7], the network model of Fang [8],
the array model of Werdermann and Werther [9], the
two-flux model of Glatzer and Linzer [10] and the
non-uniform emulsion model of Luan [11]. The last
168
three of these require prior estimation of the
temperature profile in the emulsion layer.
A major feature of the overall flow structure in most
CFB units is a core-annulus flow pattern,
confirmed using various experimental techniques.
The cross-section of a CFB riser is commonly
divided into two regions, with particles transported
upwards in a dilute core, while a dense layer of solids
in an outer annulus is assumed to descend along the
wall. Particles, after staying in the wall layer for an
average residence length, are re-entrained into the
core and replaced by fresh particles that have the
same temperature as the bulk. The wall layer may
become denser while it descends due to an increased
cross-section average suspension density at lower
levels. This also brings more fresh particles from the
core to the wall layer. Experiments in CFB
combustors [12] reveal that vertical water-wall
surfaces experience very little wear. This suggests
either that few particles actually touch the wall or
that the particle velocity adjacent to the wall is not
very high. Thus, it is common to assume a stagnant
gas gap between the dense layer and the wall.
Another notable feature of CFB reactors is
temperature uniformity in the core region:
suspension temperatures only change appreciably in
the wall layer. Hence, it is reasonable to limit con-
sideration of furnace-side heat transfer to the wall
layer.
Coolant Wall Gas gap Wall layer
Particles Particle
exchange
Gas
Conduction Convection Radiation
Figure 1. Schematic of heat transfer process
Based on these considerations, a coupled two-
dimensional heat transfer process is considered as
illustrated schematically in Fig. 1. Descending
particles are assumed to enter the heat transfer zone
at the temperature of the core suspension. As the
wall layer descends, it loses heat to the gas by
convection and gains heat from fresh particles due
to core-wall layer particle exchange. Temperature
gradients within each particle are neglected since
for particulates typically used in CFB reactors, the
Biot number is much smaller than 0,1. Particles
also participate in radiation from the core to the
wall through the wall layer, enhancing the radiation
flux by emission and attenuating the flux by
absorption, while the gas is assumed to be optically
transparent. To simplify the radiation analysis, the
particles are assumed to constitute a continuous
absorbing, emitting and scattering medium.
For the particle size and concentration ranges
typical of the wall layer of a CFB, independent
scattering theory applies [13] and the two-flux model
can be employed for radiative heat transfer [14]. Gas
enters the heat transfer zone dragged downwards by
the rapidly-descending annular particles. The gas
receives heat from the immersed particles by
particle-to-gas convection and from the core by
conduction. Heat is then conducted to the wall
through the stagnant gas gap, and hence through
the furnace wall to the coolant (typically water).
The inside heat transfer coefficient between the
coolant-side wall and the coolant can be evaluated
from standard correlations. The liquid coolant is
assumed to flow vertically upwards without boiling.
3. Heat transfer coefficient
Heat transfer in the fluidized bed is, apart from the
particle and gas mixing, the most important process
contributing to the intensity of the physical and
chemical processes. In fact, several different processes
can be distinguished: particle-gas heat transfer, heat
transfer between different points in the bed, heat
transfer between the fluidized bed particles and the
larger particles floating in the bed and the heat transfer
to the submerged surfaces in contact with the bed. All
of these heat transfer processes are very intensive in
fluidized beds.
In the case of uniform fluidization, the temperature
difference between points in the bed does not exceed
2-5°C, with mean bed temperatures of several hundred,
even 1000°C. Gas temperature, when leaving the bed,
is practically the same as the particle temperature.
These facts tell us of the great capability of the solid
particles to exchange heat with the fluidizing gas.
Intensive heat transfer is, first of all, a consequence of
the large specific heat transfer surface (3 000 to 45 000
m2/m3), although heat transfer coefficients to the
particles in the bed are relatively small, 6-25 W/m2 oC.
The large heat capacity of the solid particles also
makes the temperature difference between gas and
particles small. Gas temperature follows the particle
temperature.
Gas to particle heat transfer coefficients can be
calculated from the Gelperin and Einstein [15]
relation:
Nu p &1,6 % 10 $0, 2 !Re p / # "1,3Pr 0,33 for Re p / # <200 (1)
and
Nu p & 0,4!Re p / # " 2 / 3Pr 0,33 for Re / # >200
p (2)
Despite the small values of the gas-to-particle heat
transfer coefficient, even at a short distance from the
distribution plate, the gas and particles temperature are
practically equal. Five to ten particle diameters from
the distribution plate, the temperature difference
between gas and particles has decreased around 100
times. The temperature of gas in the bubbles also very
quickly becomes equal to the particle temperature. If,
in an inert fluidized bed, there are active particles
(usually larger ones) which chemically react with the
fluidizing gas, releasing heat (as in the solid fuel
combustion), very complex processes of heat and mass
transfer between these particles and the bed take place.
At the beginning, these larger particles heat up in the
contact with the inert bed material. Simultaneously,
evaporation and devolatilization take place. These
processes depend on the intensity of heat transfer
between the bed as a whole and these particles. When
chemical reactions between gas and particles begin
(combustion of the char), particle temperature is
higher and the reverse process of heat exchange
between active particles and fluidized bed takes place.
The combustion process is limited by the mass transfer
process, i.e. the diffusion of the reacting gas to the
surface of the active particle. The mechanisms of mass
transfer towards the active particles are molecular
diffusion and the convective transport, while inert bed
material disrupt these processes merely by being there.
Because larger active particles mainly inhabit the
emulsion phase, mass transfer intensity increases with
the increase of the size of inert bed material (i.e. with
vmf) and decreases with increase of the active particle
diameter.
One of the most recent relations for calculating mass
transfer coefficient ' is that of La Nauze and Jang
[15], who proposed two mass transfer mechanisms:
"packets" (clusters) of particles carry fresh gas from
the bulk bed towards the active particle, the movement
of these packets is controlled by the bubble flow; the
' dp
& 2# mf ( 0,69!Re/ # " Sc 0,33
0,5
Sh & (3)
DG
other mechanism is convective mass transfer by gas
which percolates through the emulsion phase with a
velocity equal to vmf.
Heat transfer between the active particle and the
fluidized bed is controlled by three mechanisms: gas
convection, particle convection and radiation.
Depending on the active particle size and temperature,
the mechanisms mentioned above do not have the
same, contribution to the overall heat transfer. These
processes are also involved in the heat transfer
between the bed and the immersed surfaces. Heat
transfer by radiation becomes significant only
temperature differences exceed 400-500°C. For active
particle size less or equal to the inert material particle
size, the main process is convective heat transfer; for
larger particles, heat ! due to the collision and contact
with the fluidized bed may be important. Heat transfer
coefficients !p for active particles or immersed
surfaces have a maximum for optimal velocity. For
active particle size close to the inert material particle
169
size relations (1) and (2) can be used. For larger active
parties Agarwall's [15] relation is suggested:
* pd p
Nu p & & 2,0 ( 1,8 Re 0p,5 Pr 0,33 (4)
)g
When the fluidization velocity increases from vmf to
the value, heat transfer coefficients for the surfaces in
contact fluidized bed also increase, due to the increase
of heat by particle contacts. For velocities greater than
the optimal, the main contribution to the heat transfer
is the gas convection because of the decrease of
particle concentration, i.e. the increase of the bed
porosity. Optimum velocity can be calculated from the
Todes [15] relation:
Ar
Re opt & (5)
18 ( 5,22 Ar0,5
The factor with the greatest influence on the heat
transfer, apart from the fluidization velocity, is the
particle size. Particle size influences the change of the
relative contribution of various mechanism in the
overall heat transfer. In the fluidized bed with small (<
0,1 mm) particles, convection by particles account for
90 % of the overall heat transfer, while in the beds of
large particles (>1,0 mm) only 20 % of the heat
transfer is done by particle convection. Particle heat
capacity is also important for the amount of heat
transferred by particle convection. The maximum heat
transfer coefficient is often calculated from the
Zabrodski [15] relation:
* max & 35,8 + 0p, 2 ) g0,6 d p$ 0,36 (6)
In the literature, numerous relationships can be found
for calculating the heat transfer to immersed surfaces
of different shape: vessel walls, single horizontal or
vertical pipe, tube bundles with smooth and finned
tubes in corridor or staggered arrangement. Parameters
that influence the heat transfer to these surfaces are:
height and dimensions of the bed, bubble size, tube
diameter, arrangement and position of tubes, tube
distance, quality and shape of the surface. Existing
relationships for calculating the heat transfer
coefficient do not include all these parameters and for
that reason, experimental data is greatly scattered and
the accuracy of the formulae proposed is in the range
up to ± 50 % [15].
4. Development of heat transfer model
A number of mechanistic models have been proposed to
describe the particle convective heat transfer com-
ponent and to explain the nature of heat transfer at the
walls of a CFB riser. These models can be classified
broadly as single-particle models, cluster renewal models,
continuous film models and have been summarized by
Basu and Nag [2].
Heat transfer between the boiler surface and the gas
solid suspension is critical in the design and operation
170
of CFB combustors. The energy, released in a CFB
boiler furnace, is typically absorbed by water carrying
tubes that comprise the walls of the riser. The
mechanism of heat transfer is defined by the
interactions between the bed material, the gas and the
wall. The flow of bed material near the wall is
predominantly downward. The bed materials flow in
agglomerations of particles known as clusters in a
core-annular flow regime (Fig. 2) [16]. Recent results
[17] show that the radiative constituent of the heat
transfer depends on the optical thickness of the particle
boundary layer near the wall. It also shows that the
convective constituent can be related to the average
cross sectional suspension density of the riser.
Exit region
Lean phase
Dilute region Cluster
phase
Dense region
Bottom zone
Distributor
Gas
Figure 2 Core annulus structure of CFB
(adapted from Horio, [16])
Several researchers proposed empirical correlations for
relating average heat transfer coefficients on enclosing
walls to the cross-section average suspension density
and the combustor (bed) temperature.
5. Heat transfer model mechanism
The process of heat transfer in a CFB boiler involves
three mechanisms: Gas convection, particle convection
and radiation. Contributions of individual mechanisms
are not strictly additive, but for most practical
applications they can be treated separately and added.
Research on the hydrodynamics of CFB risers [18]
show that the walls of a riser (boiler-furnace) are not
covered by a continuous stream of solids. Instead it is
intermittently washed by particle clusters. This is
especially true in the case of CFB boilers where the
suspension density is much lower than that in many
CFB reactors. Thus at a given time one part of the wall
is in contact with cluster and while the rest is in
contact with the gas or the dilute gas-solid stream.
So the overall heat transfer coefficient, htot may be
expressed as a function of f, which is the time average
fraction of the wall covered by clusters.
htot & f !hcon ( hrad "cluster ( !1 $ f "!hcon ( hrad "dilute ( 7 )
6. Cluster phase heat transfer
Mickley and Fairbanks [19] proposed the packet
theory for bubbling fluidized beds. Subbarao and Basu
[20] extended this concept of Mickley and Fairbanks
[19] to develop the particle renewal model of heat
transfer for CFB risers. Then they used this model
along with other relevant information to predict bed to
wall heat transfer in a circulating fluidized bed.
Agglomeration of solid particles into clusters or
strands is a major characteristic feature of a CFB riser.
The heat transfer model is based on the transient heat
conduction in strands or clusters traveling downwards
along the heat transfer surface. The clusters are
assumed to travel a certain distance, move away from
the wall, disintegrate and reform periodically in the
riser. The down-flowing cluster has a dominant
influence on the heat transfer on the wall surface.
When the clusters slide over the wall, an unsteady
state heat conduction takes place between the clusters
and the wall surface. The time averaged cluster-wall
heat transfer coefficient is given in the following
equation [18]
1 4k !+c "c .
0,5
hcluster & / c , (8)
0 2t c -
The Biot number of particles is much higher than that
of the gas. Therefore, the particles are major heat
carriers between the core and the wall of a CFB riser.
Consequently, a higher concentration of particles
results in a higher heat transfer. However, the contact
time and the contact area between the particles and the
wall are small. Therefore, the direct heat transfer from
the particles to the wall through the point of contact is
negligible. Majority of the heat is transferred through
conduction across the gas-gap that resides between the
clusters and the wall. Thus, the thermal conductivity of
the gas greatly influences the heat transfer between the
gas-particle suspension and the wall. The gas gap is
often modeled as a particle-free gap, the thickness of
which decreases with an increase in the local
suspension density at the wall. Since the particle
volume fraction at the wall is proportional to that in
the core, the cross section average suspension density
represents the condition at the wall, which in turn
affects the heat transfer through the particle coverage
of the wall.
The thermal conductivity of the cluster is calculated
from the equation provided by Gelperin and Einstein
[21] for packet heat transfer.
kc M assume the characteristic length is as 1,2 m.
&1 (
kg N
where M and N are as below.
8 kg 5 8k 5
0 , 6366
M & !1 $ # c "661 $
33 N &6 s 3 ( 0,28# c 7 ks 4
7 ks 4 6k 3 the cluster from the wall will introduce another
7 g 4
This expression was developed for particle diameter
less than 0,5 mm and ks/kg < 5 000.
The specific heat of cluster is represented by a lumped
property (heat capacity) as below (7).
!+c "c & !1 $ + c "+ p c p ( # c + g cg ( 10 )
where "c is cluster voidage and is calculated from the
equation provided by Lints and Glicksman [22]. The
effect of cross sectional average volumetric solid
concentration on the cluster solid fraction (1- "c) is
accounted for as below.
The relation between cluster solid fraction Csf and
cross section average volumetric solid concentration
(1- "avg) in an atmospheric CFB is given by Lints and
Glicksman [22] as below. Cluster solid fraction:
ccf & 1,23 !1 $ # avg "
0 , 54
( 11 )
The cluster voidage !c is related to cluster solid
fraction ccf as # c &1 $ ccf
After a strand or cluster is formed it travels upwards in
the core. Sometimes velocity fluctuations or other
factors sway it towards the wall.
As the gas velocity in the vicinity of the wall is lower
than that at the core, the cluster decelerates in its
upward motion and starts moving downwards.
Therefore, while swept on the wall, the cluster
decelerates in the vertical direction then accelerates
downwards to a steady velocity. Finally, it moves
away from the wall. If we assume it to travel
downwards along the wall surface with an average
velocity Ucl for a characteristic length Lc before
disintegrating, the residence time for each cluster (tc)
at the wall surface would be given by
Lc
tc & ( 12 )
U cl
The cluster velocity can be estimated by the following
correlation proposed by Noymer and Glicksmann [23].
+p
U cl & 0,75 gd ( 13 )
+g p
The characteristic length (Lc) which is given in
equation 14 [24], underestimates the experimental
results for very lean beds. In those cases one can
(9)
Lc & 0,0178 !+ s "
0 , 596
( 14 )
0 ,18 In addition to the resistance due to the transient heat
8k 5
g
3
conduction in the cluster, the thin gas layer separating
3
resistance to heat transfer from the cluster. The
expression for heat transfer coefficient due to
conduction through a gas layer is given as:
171
 hw & k g / 9d p 7. Dilute phase heat transfer
( 15 )
It was shown in equation (7) the heat to the walls of a
where " is non-dimensional gas layer thickness CFB furnace comprises contributions of dense clusters
between the wall and the cluster. The " could be and up flowing dispersed medium. The convective
calculated by the expression given by Lints and heat transfer for the dispersed medium is calculated by
Glicksman [22]. Basu and Fraser [18] using the modified equation of
Wen and Miller [28] as
9 & 0,0282 c $ 0,59 ( 16 )
!hcon "dilute = 86 k
0,3 0 , 21 0, 2
where c is cross section average volumetric solid 58 c p
36
58 + dis
36
5
3
8 U t2
6
5
3
8 +g 5
Pr6 3
g
6 d 36 c 36 + 3 6 gd 3 6+ 3 ( 21 )
concentration. 7 p 47 g 47 p 4 7 p 4 7 go 4
The thermal resistance for transient conduction from a
semi-infinite body to a surface with a series resistance where #dis is the density of the dispersed phase. It is
is complicated. However, experimental measurements given by
[25] suggest that a close approximation to the actual + dis & + pY ( + g !1 $ Y " ( 22 )
heat transfer coefficient from a cluster (hcon)cluster may
be obtained by adding the contact resistance and the where Y is the volumetric concentration of particles in
transient conduction resistance to a cluster of particles the dispersed phase and recommended as 0.001% [18].
calculated independently. The combination of cluster However when applying equation (21) to cluster
convection and gas-gap conduction heat transfer renewal model, it over-predicts the experimental
coefficients is given below: results. A number of researchers, for example Golriz
$1 and Grace [29] have instead used Dittus Boelter [30]
1 .
!hcon "cluster = / 1 ( 1 , ( 17 ) equation !
hd & 0,023 k g / Deg Re 0D,8 Pr 0,3 to "
0 hcluster hw - estimate the convection from the dispersed medium.
The dispersed phase contains a small concentration of
The thermal resistance due to transient conduction
particles, which would naturally enhance the heat
through a semi-infinite cluster was derived by Mickley
transfer. Thus the above equation may under-predict
and Fairbanks as in equation (8). Substituting the value
the contribution of dispersed phase. This situation is
of hcluster and hw from equation (8) and equation (15),
very similar to flow of dust laden gas over vertical
we get
wall in the back pass of boilers. Therefore, we can use
1 the heat transfer coefficient for longitudinal sweeping
!hcon "cluster & 0,5 vertical wall proposed by Basu [31] after multiplying
1 2t c . 9d p ( 18 ) it with a correction factor for particle presence (C) in
/ , (
0 4k c !+cc "- kg the dilute phase as:

kg
The radiation heat transfer from the cluster to the wall !hcon "dilute & 0,023CC l Ct Re 0,8 Pr 0, 4 ( 23 )
is similar to that between two parallel plates. So the Deq
cluster radiation component of the heat transfer where Ct is the correction factor for the temperature
coefficient is calculated from the equation for parallel difference between wall and medium, which can be
plates [26].
calculated as [31] C t & !Tb / Tw "
0,5
The correction of

!hrad "cluster =
:< !Ts$T
4
w
4
";
!Ts $ Tw " $1 tube length, Cl = 1 when L / Deg >50. When entrance
81 1 5 ( 19 ) effect is predominant, the entrance effect is considered
66 ( $ 133
7 ec ew 4 by the following equation [32] C l & 1 ( F Deg / L ! "
Some selected values of F are noted as follows: Flow
where ec and ew are the emissivities of the cluster and
condition F: - fully developed velocity profile 1.4; -
wall, respectively. The cluster emissivity, ec can be
abrupt contraction entrance 6; - 900 right-angel bend 7;
calculated using the following relation [27] which
- 1800 round bend 6.
takes account of inter particle radiation.

ec & 0,5 ! 1 ( e p "

A number of experiments, carried out in cold beds [33],
( 20 ) estimate the contribution of solids in the dilute phase
between 1-1,2. In this case, correction factor (C) for
the presence of particle in the dilute phase is taken as:
C =1,1 Radiation between the suspension (dilute) and
bare wall is estimated from the expression for parallel
surfaces, i.e.

172
 !hrad "dilute = :< !T b
4
$ Tw4 "; !T $ T "
b w
$1
81 1 5
66 ( $133
7 eb ew 4
where ew and eb are the emissivities of the wall and
dilute phase at Tw and Tb, respectively. For a large
boiler, the particle scattering affects the radiation from
the dispersed phase. So for these cases, eb is estimated
from the correlation of Brewster [34]
0,5
1 1,5e p #= 1,5e p =. 1,5e p
eb & / " ( 2?, $ ( 25 )
/0 !1 $ e " =! !1 $ e p " =>,- !1 $ e "
p 3123, 1990.
Experimental data on the wall coverage, plotted by
Glicksman [35], shows a strong influence of the
column diameter; and he proposed a correlation for a
20 cm experimental unit. However, the correlation
omits the dependence of the wall coverage on the
column diameter, and is therefore unsuitable for use in
a large unit. Golriz and Grace [35] proposed a
correlation which accounts for the size effect of the
boiler.
Conclusion
In order to explain heat transfer in CFB and predict heat
transfer coefficients, several models have been proposed.
The heat transfer between the furnace wall and the bed
includes contributions from radiation, particle and gas
convection, as well as gas conduction. In almost all of
literature, the furnace-side conduction, convection and
radiation processes and the conduction within the wall
have been treated as entirely separate phenomena. In
reality, these processes are highly coupled and interrelated.
In the literature, numerous relationships can be found
for calculating the heat transfer to immersed surfaces
of different shape. Parameters that influence the heat
transfer to these surfaces are: height and dimensions of
the bed, bubble size, tube diameter, arrangement and
position of tubes, tube distance, quality and shape of
the surface. Existing relationships for calculating the
heat transfer coefficient does not include all these
parameters and for that reason, experimental data is
greatly scattered and the accuracy of the formulae.
Having derived an expression for wall coverage one
can now predict heat transfer coefficients for a wide
range of CFB boilers using the cluster renewal model.
The average heat transfer coefficient for the water wall
of several units, has been estimated by equation (7).
Now considering above heat transfer model is
modifying using the new equation , other improved
relations and existing equations (1-25).
References
( 24 ) 1. Grace J.R., «Heat Transfer in Circulating
Fluidized Bed», in Circulating Fluidized Bed
Technology, Ed.by P.Basu, 63, Pergamon
Press, Toronto,1986.
2. Basu P. and Nag P.K., «An Investigation into
Heat Transfer in Circulating Fluidized Bed»,
Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 30, 2399, 1987.
3. Basu P., «Heat Transfer in High Temperature
Fast Fluidized Bed», Chem. Eng.Sci., 45,
4. Kobro H. and Brereton C., «Control Fuel
Flexibility of Circulating Fluidized Bed», in
Circulating Fluidized Bed Technology II,
Ed.by P.Basu and J.F. Large, 165, Pergamon
Press, Oxford, 1988.
5. Wu R.L., Grace J.R. and Lim, C.J., «A
Model for Heat Transfer in a Circulating
Fluidized Bed», Chem. Eng.Sci., 45, 3389,
1990.
6. Botterill J.S.M., Y.Teoman, K.R. Yuregir,
«Factors affecting heat transfer between gas-
fluidized beds and surfaces», Powder Technol,
39, 177-198, 1984.
7. Chen J.C., Cimini R.J. Dou S., «A theoretical
model for simultaneous convective and
radiative heat transfer in circulating fluidized
bed», in Circulating Fluidized Bed
Technology II, Ed.by P.Basu and J.F. Large,
255-261, Pergamon Press, NewYork, 1988.
8. Fang Z.H., Grace J.R., Lim C.J., «Radiative
heat transfer in circulating fluidized beds», J.
Heat Transfer, 117, 963-968, 1995.
9. Werdermann C., Werther J., «Heat transfer in
large-scale circulating fluidized bed
combustors of different sizes», in Circulating
Fluidized Bed Technology IV, Ed.by
A.A.Avidan, AIChE, 428-435, NewYork,
1994.
10. Glatzer A., Linzer W., «Radiative heat
transfer in circulating fluidized beds», in
Fluidization VIII, Ed.by Large J.F. Laguerie
C., 311-318, Engineering Foundation,
NewYork, 1995.
11. Luan W., Lim C.J., Brereton C.M.H., Bowen
B.D., Grace J.R., «Experimental and
theoretical study of total and radiative heat
transfer in circulating fluidized beds», Chem.
Eng.Sci., 54, 3749-3764, 1999.
12. Taler J., «A method of determining local heat
flux in boiler furnaces», Int. J. Heat Mass
Transfer, 35, 1625-1634, 1992.
173
 13. Brewster M.Q., Tien C.L., «Radiative heat
transfer in paced fluidized beds», J. Heat
Transfer, 104, 573-579, 1982.
14. Brewster M.Q., Tien C.L., «Examination of
the two-flux model for radiative transfer in
particular systems», Int. J. Heat Mass
Transfer, 25, 1905-1907, 1982.
15. Hewitt G.L., Shires G.L., Polezhaev Y.V.,
«International encyclopedia of heat and mass
transfer», 1312, CRC Press, New York, 1997.
16. Horio M. , «Hydrodynamics», in Circulating
Fluidized Beds, Ed.by J.R. Grace, A.A.
Avidan, T.M. Knowlton, Chapman & Hall,
London, 21-85, 1997.
17. Breitholtz, «Heat transfer in circulating
fluidized bed boilers», PhD thesis, Chalmers
University of Technology, Goteborg, Sweden,
2000.
18. Basu P. and Fraser S. A., «Circulating
Fluidized Bed Boilers-Design and
Operation», Butterworths-Heinemann,
Stoneham, 1991.
19. Mickley H.S. and Fairbanks D.F.,
«Mechanism of heat transfer to fluidized
beds», AIChE Journal, 1, 374-384, 1955.
20. Subbarao D. and Basu P., «A model for heat
transfer in circulating fluidized beds», Int. J.
Heat and Mass Transfer , 29, 487-489, 1986.
21. Gelperin N. I., and Einstein V. G., «Heat
transfer in fluidized beds», in Fluidization,
Ed.by J.F. Davidson and D. Harrison, Chapter
10, Academic press, New York, 1971.
22. Lints Michael. C, and Glicksman L. R.,
«Parameters governing particle to wall heat
transfer in a circulating fluidized bed», in
Circulating Fluidized Bed Technology IV, Ed.by
A. A. Avidan, 297-304, 1994.
23. Noymer P.D., and Glicksman L.R., «Descent
velocities of particle clusters at the wall of a
circulating fluidized bed», Chem. Eng. Sci., 55,
5283-5289, 2000.
24. Wu R.L., Grace J.R, Lim C.J., and Brereton
C.M.H., «Suspension to surface heat transfer
in a circulating fluidized bed combustor»,
AIChE Journal, 35 (10), 1685-1691, 1989.
25. Gloski D., Glicksman .L.R. and Decker, N.,
«Thermal resistance at a surface in contact
with fluidized bed particles», in International
Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 27, 599-
610, 1984.
174
26. Basu P., «Heat transfer in fast fluidized bed
combustors», Chem. Eng. Sci., 45, 3123-3136,
1990.
27. Grace J. R., «Fluidized Bed Heat Transfer»,
in Handbook of Multiphase Flow, Ed.by G.
Hestroni, 9-70, McGraw-Hill, Hemisphere,
Washington, 1982.
28. Wen C. Y. and Miller E., «Heat transfer in
solid-gas transport lines», in Journal of
Industrial Engineering Chemistry,
53, 51-53, 1961.
29. Golriz MR. and Grace JR., «Predicting heat
transfer in large-scale CFB boilers», in
Circulating fluidized bed technology VII,
Ed.by Grace J.R., Zhu J. and Lasa, H.D.,
Niagara Falls, Canada, 121-128, 2002.
30. Dittus F. W and Boelter L. M. K., «Heat
transfer in automobile radiators of the tubular
type», Univ. Calif. Pub. Eng., 13, 443, 1930.
31. Basu P., Kefa G. and Jestin L., «Boilers and
Burners Design and Theory», Springer &
Verlag, New York, 2000.
32. Perry R.H., Green D.W. and Maloney J.O.,
«Heat Transmission», in Perry's chemical
engineering hand book, sixth edition, 10-17,
1984.
33. Dutta A., «Heat transfer in circulating
fluidized bed boilers», PhD thesis, Dalhousie
University, 2002.
34. Brewster M.Q., «Effective absorptivity and
emissivity of particulate medium with
application to a fluidized bed», Trans. Of
ASME, New York, 108, August, 710-713,
1986.
35. Glicksman L.R., «Heat transfer in circulating
fluidized beds, in Circulating Fluidized Beds,
Ed.by J.R. Grace, A.A. Avidan, T.M.
Knowlton, Chapman & Hall, London, 261-
310, 1997.