ChemicaI Engineering Science, Vol. 41. No. 9, pp. 2419-2430, 1986. ooO9-2509/86 S3.00+ 0.

00
Printed in Great Britain. Pergamon Journals Ltd.

MODELLING AND SIMULATION OF A CONTINUOUS

FLUIDIZED-BED DRYER

F. S. LAIt and YIMING CHEN

U.S. Grain Marketing Research Laboratory, College Avenue, Manhattan, KS 66506, U.S.A.

and

L. T. FAN
Department of Chemical Engineering, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506, U.S.A.

(Received 28 May 1985)

Abstract-A fairly rigorous mechanistic model of a continuous fluidized-bed dryer has been developed. It
depicts the dynamic interactions between gaseous and solid phases in detail. The performance of the dryer has
been simulated numerically based on the model. The effects of the operating parameters on the performance
characteristics of the dryer have been investigated. These parameters include the superficial gas velocity, the
inlet temperature of the drying gas, the mean residence time of solids and the dryer-wall temperature. The
results of simulation based on the present model are compared with those based on an existing model. This
comparison shows that the former is a substantial improvement over the latter.

INTROD%JCTION
The fluid&d-bed dryer possesses many significant
features over the conventional packed-bed or moving-
bed dryer [see, for example, Vlnecbk et al. (1966),
Nonhebei and Moss (197 l)]. These include the follow-
ing: (i) drying gas is locally mixed intensively during its
passage through the bed; consequently the rate of mass
and heat transfer between the gas and solids are high,
(ii) the extremely rapid heat transfer enables a rela-
tively high inlet gas temperature to be used; (iii) the
time of drying is relatively short.
Because of its numerous advantages, fluidized-bed
drying has been increasingly applied in diverse indus-
tries in either the batch or continuous mode (VaniZccCk
et al., 1966, Viswanathan et al., 1982). In fact, several
moisture content of the outlet gas and also the average
moisture content and temperature-of the solids at the
exit. It will be amply demonstrated that the proposed
model represents a significant improvement over an
existing mechanistic model for the continuous
fluidized-bed dryer proposed by Palancz (1983).
MATHEMATICAL MODELLING
A schematic diagram of the model is shown in Fig. 1.
The present model is based on the two-phase theory of
fluidization (see, for example, Davidson and Harrison,
1963). The underlying assumptions of this theory are
OUTLET GAS

papers have been published on the subject of continu-

ous fluid&d-bed drying since the late 1950s. A com-
SOLIDS INPUT
T %*Tout
’Xout
prehensive account of these and other related publi-
cations is available (Viswanathan et al., 1982).
Conventional design procedures for a continuous
fluidized-bed dryer have been developed mainly under
the assumptions that the bed temperature is uniform,
the outlet streams are in thermal or concentration
equilibrium, and that fluid mechanistic behaviour of
the drying gas is homogeneous; in other words, the
drying gas is not partitioned into different phases of COMPLETE
the fluidized bed, such as the emulsion and bubble
phases [see, for example, Nonhebel and Moss (1971),
Palann and Parti (1973)]. Although these assump-
tions are valid in some circumstances, they may not
hold under certain actual situations. The aim of this
work is to develop a fairly rigorous and comprehensive
mechanistic model without imposing such assump-
tions. The model can predict the temperature and

INLET GAS

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of continuous drying in the

~To whom correspondence should be addressed. fluidized bed.

2419
2420 F. S. LAI et al.

that the bed is divided into two phases, a bubble phase 1. The bed fraction of the bubble phase, 6,:
and an emulsion phase (which remains in minimum
fluidization conditions), and that the excess flow of the a,= 1-9 (4)
fluidizing fluid above minimum fluidization conditions r
passes through the bed as bubbles. The fluid in the where H,/H,, is given by (Babu et al., 1978)
bubble and emulsion phases and the solid particles are
H 14.311 (U, - Umf)o~‘3sd~~oo6ppo.‘36
considered to be continua. Additional simplifying as- r= 1+
sumptions imposed in deriving the present model are H mf ~0.937
mf Pg
0.126

as follows: (5)

The bubble phase is solid-free and the size of the Alternatively,

(1)
bubbles is uniform and fixed at the so-called P (Ucl - U,,)
effective bubble size. 0 - (6)
b - f”O - u,,) + u,
(2) The movement of bubbles through the bed is of
plug flow. where U,, is given by (Davison and Harrison, 1963)
(3) The clouds surrounding the rising bubbles are U,, = 0.711 (gdb)“.5. (7)
very thin and, therefore, the bubble phase ex-
changes mass and energy only with the emulsion 2. The superficial gas velocity through the bubble
gas. phase, U,:
(4) The emulsion gas and solid particles are perfectly u, = u. - u,,. (8)
mixed.
Solid particles are added and removed at a 3. The minimum fluidization velocity, Umf (Wen
(5)
constant rate. and Yu, 1966):
(6) The inlet temperature and moisture content of dp UnlfP, d;ps(p,, - p,)g O.5
solids are assumed to be uniform. ____ = (33.7)’ + 0.0408 2
PLB p’s >
(7) The internal resistance of solids to mass and heat
transfer is negligible. - 33.7. (9)
(8) Particles are considered to be uniform in size,
4. The gas interchange coefficient based on the
shape and physical properties.
volume of bubbles, (KbeX, (Kunii and Levenspiel,
(9) The temperature and moisture content of each
1969):
particle depend on its age, t,, that is, the length of
1
its stay in the dryer. As a consequence of assump- tKbe)b = (10)
tions (4) and (5), the residence time distribution 1/tK,), + l/(K&,
function for solids under a steady-state condition where
is ~,“2~1’4
1 (Kbc)b = 4.5 2 + 5.85 d5,4 (11)
f(t,) = Eexp -= t, . (1)
s ( 4>
(Kce)b = 6.78~em$=;- f’2 (12)
(IO) Viscous dissipation is negligible.
(11) The changes in the physical properties of both
solids and drying gas due to the change of with
temperature are negligible. D,fT = %nPs- (13)
These assumptions give rise to the mass and energy &mf in the above expression can be approximated by
conservation equations for each phase of the fluidized- (Broadhurst and Becker, 1975)
bed dryer.
~~r=0.586&-~.‘~
Mass conservation equations
Pg(Pws
(A) Bubble phase. A steady-state moisture balance (14)
around the controlled volume depicted in Fig. 1 gives
(B) Emulsion gas. From a moisture balance around
=‘, dx, the entire emulsion gas, illustrated in Fig. 2, we obtain
-6, ~dz = (&Jb(X, -xb) Pa)
uf
with the boundary condition 0 = (U*A)Pg(xo -XJ + h,Pg(&.&,(x,--x,)dz
s0
xb = x0 at z = 0. (2b)
Integration of eq. @a), subject to eq. (2b), gives +(H,A,)(l -a,)(1
; --E,~)
a(%;-~,). (15)
0 P
If we define the average moisture content of gas
xb = xe - (xc - x0) exp bubbles, Xbb,as

The parameters in this expression are evaluated from 1 Hf

Xb = - x,dz, (161
the following relationships: H f s0
 2422 F. S. LAI et al.
where
x(l--E,r)~(~(~pC--X),C~,,(~~-*rT)f~ol
u P
(If,), = 4.5 + 5.85 W*~*~‘”
d5’4 9 “4 (35)
b -hp(q-Tp)) +&&,(K,X,(xb-xx,)

(Hce)b= 6.78 (~scsks)“’ x c%v(T, - T,,)-Yol+ %&CT, - T,)- (45)

(36)
Eliminating the term (&Qb(Xb - x,) from the above
expression by resorting to eq. (17), eq. (45) can be
(B) Emulsion gas. Referring to Fig. 2, a steady-state rewritten as
energy balance around the entire emulsion gas gives P,Uln,
H (c,+cc,xo)(T,-To)
0 = Prld,b, (io - i,) + (H,A,)( 1 - 6,) f

x (1 _E,[) f ,(5$ -x&,, =a,(H,)b(~b-T.)+(l--6b).(l-E,,,$(~p-Te)

P
P
4 x [c,o(X,* - 4 + hpl + a,.,&(*, - *,I. (46)
+ A,Wbek(Tb- T,)dz+S,h,(T,- T,)
I0 The heat-transfer coefficient between air and the dryer
Hf wal1, h,, is correlated as (Li and Finlayson, 1977)
-
PgAb@k-)b(-% - Xb)i,“e dz
s0 k-#dp
- = 0.16 Re0.93. (47)
kg
- (H,A,)(1 - &,)(I - &,f) $ hP(Te - TP) (37)
P
(C) Single particle. Referring to Fig. 3, an unsteady-
where state energy balance around a particle yields
iws = c,, ( Tp - Tref) + Yo (38)

*o =c,(T,-~T,,,)+xocc,,(T,--T,,)+y,l (39) (48)

i, = cs (T, - T,,) + xe Cc,, ( *, - *ref) + YO1 (9 where

Tp = iz ;exp(--t) T,dt,.
ip =~~(~~-Trer)+x~cw(*~-*r~~) (49)
(41)
i,, = YO + c, CT, - *,,) . (50)
c
We define the average temperature of gas bubbles, Tb,
The energy balance around the stagnant film sur-
as
rounding the particle yields (see Fig. 3)

Tb dz (42) 4, + fJ(xp* - xe )i,, = hp(T,-Tp)+O(xp*--x,)i,,

(51)
and the specific heat-transfer surface of the dryer wall
or
as
4. -0(x; - xe )i,, = hp(T,-- T,)---a(~,* -x,)i,,.
S
a,=W. (43) (52)
Vtot
Insertion of eqs (49), (52) and (31) into eq. (48) and
Insertion of eqs (38b(43) into eq. (37) yields

o= 9 f
{c*co- T,‘) + x0 cc,,(j-0 - T,,)

+ YOI-cgCTe - Tre,-)
-x,~c,“(T,-~T,,,)+~ol}+6,(H,),(~b--T,)

+(1--6,)(~--s,,)~(~~-Xx,)[C,(~p-TT,,)+g,,
P
STAGNANT FILM

EMULSION
+awhw(*w-_T,)-_(l --6b)(i -C,,,,)$$,(q-q)
P

-P,Sb(K,)b(x,--b)[c,(r,-*,f)+yo] (9

or

~(C.(r,-r,)+(x,-x,)yo+c~~(r,--T,,)x,
r
Fig. 3. Energy balance around the stagnant film surrounding
-(*o - ~ef)Xol} = &,(&),(T-- T,)+ (I -6,) a solid particle.
 Continuous fluidized-bed dryer 2423

rearrangement of the resultant equation yield Rearrangement gives

(62)

and
1
(53) T,",= (U,,Ccs T, + x, (c, T, + ro)l
Uo(c, +%"I=,,)
or

- ~OX,“,YOI- (63)

Equations (3), (17), (33a), (46), (27a) and (58a) with

the appropriate initial and boundary conditions con-
stitute the governing equations of the present model.
To determine the drying characteristics, these equa-
tions need be solved simultaneously. Because of the
Eliminating dx,/dt, from eq. (54) by resorting to eq. coupling and non-linearity among them, it is necessary
(27a), we obtain to employ numerical solutions.

y0 in eq. (54) is to be evaluated at T,,. It can be related
to the heat of vaporization at any arbitrary tempera-
ture, T, as follows:
NUMERICALSIMULATION
The solution of the model equations is obtained
through a two-dimensional trial-and-errorprocedure.
For simplification, first we seek to reduce the integro-
differential equations to a set of first-order differential
equations. This is achieved by introducing three new
intermediate variables.

cWTrer--CwvT,r+yolr~cl = cwT--c,T+~olr. (56)

For convenience, we choose T = 0°C. Then, or

c,T,,f--c,T,r+YolTnf= Yolr=o~c* (57) dX,* Xp* (@b)

dt, = t, exp
Thus, eq. (55) becomes
with the boundary condition
Xp* = 0 at t, = 0;

Or
(SW
with the boundary condition
dr,” TP (65b)
dt, = TS-exp
Tp = Tpo at t,=O (58b) with the boundary condition
and y. to be evaluated at T = 0°C. The average Tp” =0 at t, = 0; (65~)
temperature of particles, T, can be evaluated from
and

Tb dr (66a)

The moisture content and temperature of the outlet or

gas, x,,, and T,,, , can be evaluated from the moisture
dT,* Tb
and energy balances, respectively: (66b)
dz = E,
uox,,, = u,,x,+ U,x,(%) (60) with the boundary condition
and Tb* = 0 at z = 0. (66c)
uo ccs r,,, + xout(c, T,,, + Yo )I Now X;, T,, and rt, can be expressed, respectively, as
= u,, Cc, T +x, (c,, T + ~011
X*P = lim Xp* (67)
f*--cc
+U,Cc,T,(H,)+x,(H,)(c,,Tb(Hc)+yo)l. (61)
2424 F. S. LAI er al.

(68) (3) Choose t;, which depends on the speed of conver-

gence and usually is in the range of l/3< to 26.
(69) (4) Evaluate

When t. exceeds a certain value, e.g. tf , xz and T in eqs X:lr,_r,Ur T;lcI=fz and Tb*lrcHr
(64a) and (65a), respectively, remain constant; &en, we through eqs (64b), (65b) and (66b) with the cor-
have responding boundary conditions by using the
Runge-Kutta method.
%;=ilmx;exp(-t)dc Calculate $, L$ and Tb using eqs (70), (71) and
(5)
(69), respectively.
Evaluate x, and T, from eqs (17) and (46),
=i l’x;exp( -~)d~~+~~“x;e~~(-5>d~~ (@
respectively.
(7) Compare x, and T, calculated in step (6) with the
= Xp* I,.=t; + xp*It,= tz exp . (70) initially guessed values XL and TL. If they are not
identical, determine a new pair of initial values of
xe and T, and repeat steps (1 j(7).
Similarly,
(8) Stop when XL, TL and xc, T, are identical.
^.
The stopping criteria used in the present study are
TP = T~(r,=r,O+TpIt,=r~exp -5 . (71)
( s> 1x:-x,/ < 10-4 and IT:-Tel < lo-‘.
Thus, the solution of the governing equations, eqs (3),
For illustration, the following data are considered
(17), (33a), (46), (27a) and (58a), can be obtained by (Palancz
1983): UO= lms-I, To = 25O”C, x0
solving only a set of first-order differential equations
= 0.015,’ ps = 1 kgmP3, ps = 2500 kgm-j, pw
along with several algebraic equations. The calculation
= 1000kgm-3, p(B= 2 x 10e5 kgm-‘s-‘, k, = 2.93
procedure is described below.
x 10-z Jm-‘s-‘“C-‘, cs= 1.06kJkg-‘“C-I, cP
(1) Input data. = 1.26kJkg-‘“C-‘, c,, = 1.93kJkg-‘“C-l, cw
(2) Assume the initial values XL for xc and TL for T,. = 4.19 kJkg- 1 “C- I, y,, = 2.5 x lo3 kJkg- l, xPO

100 150 200 250 300

Inlet-gas temperature, To [*Cl

Fig. 4. Effect of the inlet-gas temperature. T,,, T 105”C, Tpo = 2O”C, U. = 1 m/s, xpo = 0.35, x,, = 0.015,
t, = 300s.
 Continuous fluid&d-bed dryer 2425

=0.35, <=3OOs, H,=0.5m, D,=O.l5m, d,=2
x lo-‘m, Ds = 2 x lo-’ m2s-i, Tpo = 2O”C, T,
=105”C,x,=0.2,n=3,K=lx10-2.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The average moisture content and temperature of
particles at the exit are related to the inlet-gas
temperature in Fig. 4. Figures 5-7 show the effects of
various operating parameters on variations of the
temperature and moisture content of a single particle
as functions of time. In Fig. 8, the temperature and
moisture content of a particle based on Palann’s
model are compared with those based on the present
model. The three stages of drying can be clearly
identified in the x,(f,) and T,(t,) curves in Figs 5-8.
The rather short initial stage of the T,(Q) curves, each
with a steep positive slope, involves the preheating of a
particle, resulting in a sharp rise in its temperature
from the inlet value. The subsequent horizontal section
represents the constant-rate drying period with the
temperature of the particle equal to the wet-bulb
temperature. The corresponding portion of the xp (t,)
curve is a linearly declining section. The remaining
portion of each of the two curves represents the falling-
rate drying period in which the temperature and
moisture content of the particle approach gradually
their respective equilibrium values.
Eflectsof the operating parameters
The performance characteristics of the dryer under
various To are revealed in Fig. 4. The higher the
temperature of the inlet gas, the higher the temperature
of the gas in the bubble and emulsion phases, thus
enhancing the rate of evaporation. This, in turn, results
in an increase in the average temperature and a
decrease in the moisture content of particles at the exit.
Note that the Tr curve in Fig. 4 with To less than a
certain value (250°C in this example) has a relatively
small gradient with respect to To_ This implies that the
dryer is not highly sensitive to the change in To. TO
prevent burning or cracking of particles, the drying
operation needs to be conducted within this range,
where moderate fluctuations in To will not cause
overdrying.

80 0.4

70

60 0.3

50

40 a2

1.0
i -\, ---_-_--__---.
\
30 - \
1.2
\ ---____--- ---

20 0.1

Parameter: U, [m/we]
IO

0 0.0
0 100 200 300 400

time, ts [sec.]

Fig. 5. Effect of the superficial gas velocity. To = 25O”C, TM = 2O”C, T, = 5O”C, x,,,, = 0.35, x0 = 0.015,
t, = 300s.
2426 F. S. LAI et al.
The influence of the superficial gas velocity on the
performance characteristics of the dryer can be dis-
cerned in Fig. 5. When U,, increases, the average
temperature of particles at the exit increases ap-
preciably while their average moisture content reduces
sharply. This can be attributed to the intensified mass
and heat transfer among bubbles, emulsion gas and
solids. Figure 5 shows that the gradients of the T,(t,)
and xp(t,) curves are substantially increased in the
constant-rate drying period. It is worth noting that
these gradients are not affected as significantly by the
change in UO in the falling-rate period as they are in the
constant-rate drying period. This phenomenon sug-
gests that the fluidized-bed dryer is effective in enhanc-
ing the drying rate mainly in the constant-rate drying
period. The relationship between the superficial gas
velocity and the length of the constant-rate drying
period can be roughly approximated by the expression
rs = 4 .8 x lo4 e--6.*“0
which should be of practical use in the design of the
fluid&d-bed dryer.
The effect of the dryer-wall temperature on the
variations of the moisture content and temperature of
an individual particle as functions of time can be
observed in Fig. 6. Naturally, a rise of wall temperature
increases the rate of heat transfer to the emulsion gas.
This leads to an increase in temperature of the
emulsion gas, thereby enlarging the driving force for
evaporation of moisture from the particle.
Consequently, the average temperature of particles at
the exit increases while their average moisture content
decreases.
The effect of the mean residence time of particles on
the dryer performance is illustrated in Fig. 7. With the
bed height fixed, the smaller the mean residence time,
the larger the feed flow rate of solids and the shorter
the contact time between the particles and drying gas.
This results in a relatively low average temperature and
a high moisture content for the particles at the exit.
Comparison with an existing mechanistic model
A mechanistic model proposed by Palancz (1983)
gives a comprehensive description of the heat and mass

9c

8C

7c

60

50

40
-1 -_------ 105 ___-

30

Curve
-
I Vorioble
iT, (t-1 1
20

IO
50 100 150
time, ts bl
Fig. 6. Effect of’the dryer-wall temperature. To = 25O”C, TM = 2O”C, U0 = 1 m/s, xpo = 0.35, x0 = 0.015,
r, = 300 s.
 Continuous fluid&d-bed dryer 2427

80

0.3

60

50

40

30

20
-, , , ,Eij
IO
0 50 100 150 zoo0

time, 1, [WC]

Fig. 7. Effect of the mean residence time of particles. T, = 25o”C, T, = lOS’C, TFo = 2O”C, U0 = 1 m/s,
xpo = 0.35, xg = 0.015.

transfer among gaseous and solid phases in a continu-
ous fluid&d-bed dryer. It is free of the assumptions
that the drying gas is homogeneous and that exit
streams are in equilibrium. Palancz’s model appears to
be the only existing model comparable to the present
one. In fact, the present model is an exhaustive
amendment and a substantial extension of Palancz’s
model. The major differences between the two models
are as follows:
1. To simplify the governing equations of his model
and to facilitate its solution, Palancz has imposed an
assumption that the specific heat of the drying gas
remains constant throughout the entire drying process.
In other words,
cg = X,C, = constant
and
cg = xbc,, = constant.
drying gas from solids, an appreciable amount of
moisture migrates from the emulsion gas to the
bubbles; it is not plausible that its accompanying
thermal energy can be neglected. A consequence of this
assumption is that in Palancz’s model, the energy
conservation equation for the bubble phase, which
corresponds to eq. (33a), is linear and only contains the
first term on the right-hand side of the equation.
Subsequently, in his energy conservation equation for
the emulsion gas, the term designating the energy
transfer accompanied by the evaporation of moisture
contains only T, instead of Tp - T,. This means that the
energy conservation equation depends on the choice of
reference temperature, which is impossible.
2. To evaluate the equilibrium moisture content of
the drying gas on the surface of a particle, Palancz’s
model resorts to the approximate expression

The second expression implies that the moisture x*P = 4,(7&%(x,)

content of gas bubbles, xb, remains constant, which is with
contradictory to the plug flow postulate for the bubble
phase. Moreover, when moisture evaporates into the
41 (T,) = O-622 7mpJ
p w
2428 F. S. LA1 et al.

and CONCLUSION

1 if xp > x, A fairly rigorous mechanistic model is presented for

Qz(xp) = x;,
if xp < x,.
x;cx;: + K)
i
Note that a discontinuity occurs at xp = xpc in the
expression for & (x,,); this is illogical. In contrast, the
corresponding expression of the present model, eq.
(23), does not contain such a discontinuity.
The xp ( ts) and Tp (ts) curves of the present model are
compared with those of Palancz’s model in Fig. 8. The
values of T,(r,) and x,(t,) of the latter obviously are
much higher than those of the former. As mentioned
earlier, the latter neglects the net outflow of moisture
from the emulsion phase to the bubble phase and its
accompanying thermal energy transfer. This is tan-
tamount to including extra mass and thermal energy in
the emulsion gas in establishing mass and energy
balances around it. As a result, relatively high values of
xe and Te are expected, which in turn lead to an
overestimation of the values of z?~ and Tp.
a continuous fluidized-bed dryer. The influences of the
various operating parameters have been investigated.
The results of numerical simulation indicate that the
performance characteristics of the dryer are affected
significantly by the superficial gas velocity, the inlet
temperature of the drying gas, the mean residence time
of solids and the dryer-wall temperature. These results
also indicate that the fluidized-bed dryer is effective in
enhancing the drying rate mainly in the constant
drying period. Thus, it appears advisable that a
fluid&d-bed dryer be used in series with a conven-
tional moving-bed or packed-bed dryer; the latter
serves to dry particles with bound moisture content.
In drying, the moisture content of the drying gas is
appreciably increased by evaporation of moisture from
solids. As a result, there is a substantial energy transfer
to the drying gas accompanied by moisture migration.
The present model incorporates the change in the
specific heat of the drying gas due to this moisture
migration. This is in contrast to the model proposed by

SO 0.4

70

60

I Curve I Variable

0 50 100 150
time, ts [set]
Fig. 8. Comparison of the present model with Palann’s model. To = 25O”C, T, = 5O”C, T* = 2O”C,
U0 = 1 m/s, xpo = 0.35, x0 = 0.015, t, = 300s.
 Continuous fluid&d-bed dryer 2429

Palancz, which assumes a constant specific heat for the bubble and cloud-wake regions based on the
drying gas. The results of simulation have proved that volume of bubbles, s-l
this assumption leads to an overestimation of the (Kbc)b coefficient of gas interchange between the
temperature and moisture content of particles. bubble and emulsion phases based on the
It is unlikely that the moisture content of the drying volume of bubbles, s- 1
gas on the surface of a particle can undergo a &e)b coefficient of gas interchange between the
discontinuity as suggested in Palancz’s model. The cloud-wake region and the emulsion phase
present model does not contain such a discontinuity, based on the volume of bubbles, s-l
and thus should be more rational in expressing heat k, thermal conductivity of the drying gas,
and mass-transfer relationships between the drying gas
Jm--'"C--'

and solids. L.e Lewis number, dimensionless

Nu Nusselt number, dimensionless
NOTATION Pr Pranetl number, dimensionless
cross-sectional area of the bed, mz PW pressure of saturated water vapour, mm Hg
cross-sectional area of the bubble phase, m2 4, conductive heat flux inside a particle,
specific heat-transfer surface of the dryer Js-‘m-2
wall, m- 1 Rep particle Reynolds number, dimensionless
specific heat of drying gas, kJ kg-’ ‘C-l SW kyt-transfer surface area of the dryer wall,
specific heat of particles (dry basis),
kJkg-‘“C-r To temperature of the inlet gas, “C
-
specific heat of water (liquid state), 2 temperature of gas bubbles, “C
kJ kg 1 “C r b bed-height average temperature of gas bub-
specific heat of water vapour, kJ kg- 1 OC-’ bles, “C
diameter of the bed column, m T, temperature of the emulsion gas, “C
molecular diffusion coefficient of the drying TO”t temperature of the outlet gas
gas, m* s-l temperature of a particle, “C
effective diffusion coefficient of the drying average temperature of particles, “C
gas, m2 s-l temperature of inlet particles, “C
effective bubble diameter, m reference-state temperature, “C
particle diameter, m dryer-wall temperature, “C
gravitational acceleration, m s- 2 time, s
expanded bed height, m mean residence time of particles in the
bed height at mininum fluidizing conditions, dryer, s
m UO superficial gas velocity (measured on an
volumetric heat-transfer coefficient between empty bed basis) through a bed of solids,
the bubble and cloud-wake regions based on ms-’
the volume of bubbles, J s- ’ m- 3 “C- ’ ub superficial gas velocity in the bubble phase,
volumetric heat-transfer coefficient between based on totalcross-sectional area of the bed,
the bubble and emulsion phases based on the ms- ’
volume of bubbles, J s- ’ m- 3 “C- 1 ubr linear velocity of a single bubble, ms-’
volumetric heat-transfer coefficient between u mf superticial gas velocity at minimum fluidizing
the cloud-wake region and the emulsion conditions, m s- 1
phase based on the volume of bubbles, v, volume of the bed, m3
Js-lm-30C-l
X0 moisture content of inlet gas (dry basis),
heat-transfer coefficient between the drying dimensionless
gas and solids, Js-1m-2”C-1 xb moisture content of gas bubbles (dry basis),
heat-transfer coefficient between the drying dimensionless
gas and the dryer wall, Js-’ m-* “C-’ %b bed-height average moisture content of gas
enthalpy of inlet gas (dry basis), kJ kg- ’ bubbles (dry basis), dimensionless
enthalpy of gas bubbles (dry basis), kJ kg- ’ X, moisture content of the emulsion gas (dry
enthalpy of the emulsion gas (dry basis), basis), dimensionless
kJkg-’ moisture content of outlet gas (dry basis),
enthalpy of water vapour on the surface of a dimensionless
particle, kJ kg- ’ moisture content of a particle (dry basis),
average enthalpy of water vapour on the dimensionless
surface of particles, kJ kg- ’ average moisture content of particles (dry
enthalpy of water vapour contained in the basis), dimensionless
emulsion gas, kJ kg-’ moisture content of the drying gas on the
enthalpy of a particle (wet basis), kJ kg-’ surface of a particle (dry basis),
Colburn factor dimensionless
coefficient of gas interchange between the average moisture content of the drying gas
2430 F. S. LAI et al.

on the surface of a particle (dry basis), fluidization velocity and fluid&d bed expansion ratio.
dimensionless A.I.Ch.E. Symp. Ser. 74. 176-186.
moisture content of inlet particles (dry basis), Broadhurst. T. E and Becker, H. A., 1975. Onset of’ Auidiz-
%a ation and slugging in beds of uniform particles. A.1.Ch.E. J.
dimensionless 21, 238-247.
5 critical moisture content of a particle (dry Davison, J. F. and Harrison, D., 1963, Fluidized Particles,
basis), dimensionless Chap. 1, pp. 1%20. Cambridge University Press,
z elevation, m Cambridge.
Kato, K., Omura, S., Taneda, D., Onozania, I. and Iijima, A.,
198 1, Drying characteristics in a packed fluidized bed dryer.
Greek letters J. them. Engng Jap. 14, 365371.
YO heat of vaporization, kJ kg-’ Kunii, D. and Levenspiel, O., 1969, Fluidization Engineering,
fraction of the fluidized bed consisting of Chap. 7, Wiley, New York.
6,
bubbles, dimensionless Li, C. H. and Finlayson, B. A., 1977, Heat transfer in
packed beds-a reevaluation. Chem. Engng Sci. 38,
% void fraction in the emulsion phase, 147-l 53.
dimensionless Nonhebel, G. and Moss, A. A. H., 1971, Drying of Solids in the
Emf void fraction at minimum fluidizing con- Chemical Industry, Chap. 11. Butterworth, London.
ditions, dimensionless Palancz, B., 1983, A mathematical model for continuous
fluidized bed drying. Chem. Engng Sci. 38, 1045-1059.
PI5 viscosity of gas, kgm- ’ s- r Palancz, B. and Parti, M., 1973, Examination of the heat-and-
&3 density of gas, kg m- 3 moisture-content variations in granular bed types. Acta
PS density of dry solids, kg m- 3 Tech. Acad. Sci. Hung. 74, 441461.
density of water, kg m- 3 Van&c&k,V., Markvart, M. and Drbohiav, R., 1966, Fluidized
PW
Bed Drying (Translated by Landau, J.). Leonard Hill,
PWS density of wet solids, kg m- 3
London.
CJ evaporation coefficient, kg m- 2 s- l Viswanathan, K., Subba Rao, D. and Raychaudhury, B. C.,
4, sphericity of a particle, dimensionless 1982, Coherent representation of the drying of gas and
solids in fluidized beds. Ind. them. Engq- 14, 12-23.
Wen, C. Y. and Yu, Y. H., 1966, A generalized method for
REFERENCES
predicting the minimum guidrzation velocity. A.1.Ch.E. J.
Babu, S. P., Shah, B. and TalwaJkar, A., 1978, Fluidization 12, 610-612.
correlation for coal gasification materials-minimum