pubs.acs.

org/IECR Article

Experimental Study of Bubble Behavior in a Two-Dimensional Gas−

Solid Tapered Fluidized Bed
Lipak Kumar Sahoo and Sabita Sarkar*
Cite This: Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2021, 60, 12740−12751 Read Online

ACCESS Metrics & More Article Recommendations *

sı Supporting Information

ABSTRACT: The hydrodynamics of tapered fluidized beds is

See https://pubs.acs.org/sharingguidelines for options on how to legitimately share published articles.

significantly different from the columnar beds due to the variation of

the cross-sectional area along the height. The hydrodynamic behavior in
Downloaded via CHULALONGKORN UNIV on October 7, 2023 at 06:47:27 (UTC).

tapered beds was studied experimentally using an image analysis

method. The peripheral unfluidized region was quantified through the
overlapping of binary images. Further, the effect of the taper angle and
air velocity on the bubble size, shape, fraction, and rise velocity, along
with the bed expansion ratio and the unfluidized region, was
investigated. A new method is proposed to obtain expanded bed height
from an image. The time-averaged bed expansion ratio and bubble
fraction increase with the air velocity and decrease with the taper angle,
while a reverse trend is observed for the mean unfluidized area fraction.
Correlations are proposed for predicting the bubble fraction, bed expansion ratio, and unfluidized area fraction. An operating regime
map is also proposed based on the unfluidized region.

1. INTRODUCTION
There has been extensive utilization of gas−solid fluidized beds
in petrochemical, energy, chemical, and metallurgical industries
as they provide fast heat and mass transfer rates along with
good mixing behavior.1−3 The conventional fluidized beds
used in such applications are columnar, that is, they are either
cylindrical or rectangular. Typically, these beds lead to the
elutriation of fines from the bed when particles of wide size
distribution are charged. The need to avoid fine particle
elutriation limits the operating gas velocity range. Even if
uniformly sized particles are charged into the bed, they
undergo size reduction and generate fines due to mechanical,
thermal, and chemical degradation. For such kinds of particles,
tapered or conical fluidized beds are better suited as they have
an axial velocity gradient.4 The cross-sectional area expansion
with bed height causes this velocity gradient. This feature
allows the coarse particles to stay near the bed’s lower portion
and the fine particles near the bed’s upper portion during
fluidization. These advantages have led tapered fluidized beds
to be employed in various operations such as mineral
processing,4 bioreaction,5 food processing,6,7 wastewater treat-
ment,8 and chemical reactions.9,10
The hydrodynamics of tapered fluidized beds controls the
heat and mass transfer and reaction kinetics. The crucial
parameters governing their hydrodynamics are maximum bed
pressure drop, ΔPmax, minimum fluidization velocity, Umf, the
minimum velocity of full fluidization, Umff, along with the ratio
of bed expansion, R.11−17 It was found that the former three
parameters increase with the rise in the mean particle diameter,
initial bed height, and taper angle.17 It was observed that the
rise in gas velocity and the fall in the taper angle, particle size,
particle density, and initial bed height causes the ratio of bed
expansion to increase.15 The empirical correlations are also
developed to predict these main hydrodynamic parame-
ters.11−17 The first three hydrodynamic parameters are
obtained from the bed pressure drop versus fluid velocity
profiles.
The pressure drop versus fluid velocity profile shows
hysteresis between fluidizing and defluidizing curves. It was
observed that this hysteresis is more for tapered beds
compared to columnar beds.12,14 With the increase in the
opening fraction of the distributor, the Umf value increases.14
Further, this curve has been utilized for determining the flow
regimes. The flow regimes change from fixed beds to partially,
fully, transition, and turbulently fluidized beds with an increase
in the fluid velocity.12 In some other studies, the first three
regimes were also observed.16,18 In the case of the partial
fluidization regime, a central fully fluidized region coexists with
a peripheral unfluidized region.7,19−21 The fraction of this
unfluidized region decreases with the gas velocity at a given
taper angle.7,19,20 The reason for this core−peripheral flow
structure is the motion of bubbles. The bubbles prefer to pass
Received: April 20, 2021
Revised: August 4, 2021
Accepted: August 6, 2021
Published: August 18, 2021

© 2021 American Chemical Society https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.1c01496

12740 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2021, 60, 12740−12751
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research
Figure 1. (a) Experimental setup and (b) schematic of a tapered column.
through the bed center rather than the bed periphery. The
core−peripheral flow structure influences the solid motion
inside the bed.
The solid flow in the radial direction is stronger in tapered
beds than columnar ones.22 The particles move upward in the
bed center due to bubbles while moving downward in the bed
periphery.7,22 The solid rise velocity is higher than its descent
velocity. Therefore, the solid residence time is more near the
bed periphery than at the center. The solid velocity is higher
near the bed’s top and bottom than the middle part, which
leads to shorter residence times in the bed’s top and bottom
portions. The increase in the bed height increases particle rise
velocity significantly due to the formation of larger bubbles due
to coalescence. However, the change in the bed height shows a
minimal influence on descent velocity.7
Typically, the bubbles are characterized by their size, shape,
rise velocity, and fraction. Several studies exist on the columnar
fluidized beds related to their bubble dynamics.23−34 Both
intrusive35−39 and nonintrusive techniques,24,26−34,40−42 were
employed for this purpose. The rise in gas velocity, particle
size, and elevation causes the bubble size to increase.28 The
smaller bubbles are more adjacent to the distributor, while the
larger bubbles are more away from the distributor.30 The
bubble size distribution changes its shape from the unimodal
to bimodal type with the increase in height.29 The increase in
the bubble size, concentration, and position above the
distributor causes its rise velocity to increase.23,28 The rise in
gas velocity enhances the bubble fraction.31 Most of these
studies25−31 on bubble behavior are based on pseudo-2D beds.
In pseudo-2D beds, the flow is suppressed in the thickness
direction, and friction is caused by front and rear walls.
Moreover, the extrapolation of findings to 3D beds is difficult.
Despite these limitations, these beds provide access to interior
bubbles and give the means to validate the mathematical
models.43,44 The bubble behavior was also studied for a conical
fluidized bed. The bubble frequency versus gas velocity profile
was obtained and employed to identify fixed, partially, and fully
fluidized regimes for a fixed cone angle.14
In addition to experimental studies, computational fluid
dynamics (CFD)-based mathematical modeling has also been
used to understand the hydrodynamics of tapered fluidized
12741
pubs.acs.org/IECR Article
beds.45−51 The multifluid Eulerian approach was used to
simulate the solid volume fraction using different drag laws.
The solid phase was divided into three phases to account for
wide particle size distribution and compared with single solid-
phase results. It was found that the four-phase Eulerian model
performed better than the two-phase model.45 The bed
pressure drop and bed expansion ratio were also predicted
with the two-fluid model for spherical and nonspherical
particles.48 The hydrodynamics of taper-in (increasing bed
diameter with height) and taper-out (decreasing bed diameter
with height) beds were compared with that of cylindrical beds
using homogeneous and heterogeneous drag laws. It was found
that solid vertical velocity increases with height for taper-out
bed, while it decreases with elevation for taper-in bed.51 Better
particle mixing was achieved in taper-out beds than the
columnar bed. The uniformity of gas and solid velocity and
particle concentration along the lateral direction increased with
the taper angle.46 In recent work, the tapered fluidized bed’s
bubble dynamics have been reported based on simulation,47
which was validated against the published experimental results
for a columnar bed. The effect of particle density and size and
the taper angle on the bubble size and rise velocity were
considered in their work.
From the above discussions, it is evident that bubble
dynamics is very important as it controls the solid motion and
heat and mass transfer. However, most of the work in the
literature on the tapered fluidized beds is related to flow
parameters and regimes and solid flow patterns. In an earlier
study, the bubble behavior in a conical fluidized bed was
reported, where the obtained bubble frequency versus gas
velocity profile was employed to identify flow regimes.14 In a
separate study based on simulation work, the effects of particle
density and size and the taper angle on the bubble size and rise
velocity were investigated.47 However, the fraction and shape
of bubbles and the gas velocity’s influence on bubble dynamics
were not considered. The bubble fraction is crucial in knowing
how much gas passes through the bed unutilized as bubbles
carry a very less volume fraction of particles. The bubble
motion influences the formation of the unfluidized region in a
tapered bed, which is not explored yet. An increase in the taper
angle may influence the bed’s unfluidized region, which is not
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.1c01496
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2021, 60, 12740−12751
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research pubs.acs.org/IECR Article

reported in the literature. Moreover, there is no correlation 0.30, and 0.35 m/s which were 3−7 times the Umf value of the
reported in the literature to predict the unfluidized region. columnar bed. The air velocities were selected for maintaining
The current work concentrates on studying the bubble the bed in the bubbling fluidization regime. The pressure
dynamics in laboratory-scale 2D gas−solid tapered fluidized transducer was calibrated with a water-filled U-tube
beds using the digital imaging method. The effects of the taper manometer. The pressure data were recorded at 10 Hz for 1
angle and the gas velocity on the bubble size, shape, fraction, min and stored in a Yokogawa MW100 data acquisition
and rise velocity, along with the bed expansion ratio and the system.
unfluidized area fraction, have been explored. A comparative Two light-emitting diode (LED) lamps having 150 and 18
study has been done between tapered and rectangular beds. W capacities illuminated the bed from the backside. The back
Empirical correlations are developed to predict the bubble illumination was used instead of front illumination because the
fraction, bed expansion ratio, and unfluidized area fraction as a former helps in better contrast between emulsion and bubble
function of geometric and operational parameters. An phases. A white diffuser sheet was used at the backside of the
operating regime map based on the unfluidized area fraction bed column to make the light uniform. The images were
has also been proposed. captured at 50 frames per second by a FASTCAM SA4 CCD
high-speed color camera and transferred to a personal
2. METHODOLOGY computer to do offline processing. The camera’s shutter
2.1. Experimental Section. Figure 1a presents the speed was fixed at 1 ms. The maximum resolution of the
experimental setup, and a tapered column schematic is camera was 1024 × 1024 pixels. A total of 1500 frames were
shown in Figure 1b. The setup consists of four fluidized bed captured, giving a total flow time of 30 s. For preventing
columns constructed using transparent plexiglass sheets and reflections from the surroundings, the whole setup was placed
having varying taper angles. The dimensions of the columns inside a dark room. The bottom 1 cm of the bed’s flow
are given in Table 1. The dimensions of the columnar bed are behavior could not be captured because of the flange. All the
experiments were repeated thrice to check the results’
Table 1. Dimensions of Fluidized Bed Columns repeatability. The distance between the fluidizing column
taper lower upper column upper base of and camera was maintained constant for all experiments to
angle, base,
−2
base, height, thickness, the initial bed, ensure a constant pixel length of 0.8 mm in lateral and vertical
θ Lo × 10 L2 × 10−2 H × 10−2 T × 10−2 L1|t=0 × 10−2 directions. The captured images were further analyzed using
(deg) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m)
the method of digital imaging.
0 18 18.0 80 1.7 18.00
2.2. Image Processing and Analysis. The method of
5 18 32.0 80 1.7 24.30
digital imaging is economical, simple to use, and can capture
10 18 46.2 80 1.7 30.70
the flow behavior in a detailed manner without flow field
15 18 60.9 80 1.7 37.29
disturbance. An in-house digital image processing code was
developed in MATLAB using its image processing toolbox.
taken from Busciglio et al. 2008,52 and then, the dimensions of The 16-bit RGB (red, green, blue) color image captured from
tapered columns are obtained by applying taper angles on the the high-speed camera was cropped to get the desired region of
columnar bed. A plexiglass plate of 1 cm thickness acts as an air interest and was transformed into a grayscale image.53 The
distributor with 17 orifices, each having a 2 mm diameter. The
adaptive thresholding technique54 was employed to change the
orifices are located along a single row with a gap of 1 cm
grayscale image into a binary image, as depicted in Figure 2a.
between their centers. The distributor’s fractional open area is
This step was done to differentiate the bubble phase (white
equal to 1.7%. The distributor plate is covered with 40 μm hole
pixels) from the emulsion phase (black pixels).55,56 In the
size stainless-steel mesh to prevent leakage of the bed material
into the wind box. The wind box has a rectangular geometry adaptive thresholding technique, a localized mean intensity is
with dimensions of 36 cm (height) × 18 cm (width) × 1.7 cm calculated based on a certain number of neighborhood pixels.
(thickness) filled with glass beads of 5 mm diameter each. The If the intensity of a pixel under consideration is less than the
primary purpose of the wind box is to give a uniform local mean, then it is assigned as a black pixel or vice versa.
distribution of airflow. The glass beads with particle density This technique was employed because of nonuniform
and size range of 2500 kg/m3 and 212−250 μm, respectively, illumination.
act as the bed material. The particles fall into the category of The bubbles were identified based on eight-pixel con-
the Geldart B group. The air rotameters have ranges of 1−10 nectivity. This connectivity means that a group of pixels is
and 10−100 L/min, each having 2% of full scale as the least considered a bubble when a central pixel is connected to other
count and measurement error. The ABB pressure transducer eight neighborhood pixels in vertical, lateral, and diagonal
model number 266HSH with a range of 0−40 kPa has the least directions, forming a 3 × 3 matrix.27 The bubbles were labeled,
count of 24 Pa. The pressure measurement point for all the and their properties such as centroids, projected area, and
fluidized bed columns is located at 4.5 cm above the air perimeter were obtained and stored for further analysis.52 The
distributor. tiny bubbles were filtered from each binary image, with areas
The bed was initially filled to a height of 36 cm denoted as smaller than 50 pixels as they had a poor spatial resolution.
Ho. The bed had an initial solid volume fraction of 0.65, which The bubble properties were converted from pixel values to real
was indirectly obtained through the solid bulk density space values using pixel length. During image processing, the
measurement. The compressed air was used as a fluidization bubbles bursting at the top bed surface were not considered.
medium under ambient conditions after passing through the Such bubbles were considered to be merged with the freeboard
air filter for dust removal and the silica-gel beads for moisture region. The methodology used to obtain various bubble
removal. The airflow rate was measured with well-calibrated air properties from the digital imaging technique has been
rotameters. The inlet air velocities, Uo, were 0.15, 0.20, 0.25, presented in the paragraphs below.
12742 https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.1c01496
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2021, 60, 12740−12751
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research
Figure 2. (a) Digital image processing: gray image (left), binary image
(center), and overlapped image of all binary images (right) and (b)
determination of the expanded bed height from the instantaneous
binary image (left) by converting to its equivalent trapeziums (right)
at θ = 10° and Uo = 0.25 m/s.
The equivalent diameter, Db, was used for bubble size
description. It was obtained by equating the bubble’s projected
area, Ab, with that of a circle. It is calculated as57
4Ab
Db =
π (1)
The bubble shape was characterized in terms of the aspect
ratio. The bubble aspect ratio, ARb, was obtained by dividing
the vertical extrema, dv, with horizontal extrema, dh, of the
bubble. It is calculated as26,57−59
dv
AR b =
dh
The fraction of the bed volume that the bubbles occupy
defines the bubble fraction, δb. For 2D beds, it is obtained as52
total bubble area
δb =
total bed area
In a particular binary frame, the sum of bubble-phase pixels
was divided by the sum of the total bed pixels to get the bubble
fraction.31
All the instantaneous binary images were overlapped to
obtain the overall airflow pattern, as shown in Figure 2a. The
completely black pixels having no bubbles situated at the bed
periphery were counted to obtain the unfluidized region area,
Auf. The unfluidized area fraction, Fua, was obtained by dividing
unfluidized area, Auf, with the time-averaged bed area, A1,ta, as
given in eq 4. The time-averaged bed area, A1,ta, is the product
of the initial bed area, A1|t=0, and time-averaged bed expansion
ratio, Rta. The bed expansion ratio, R, is defined as the ratio of
expanded height, h1, and initial height, Ho.
A A uf
Fua = uf =
A1,ta A1|t = 0 × R ta (4)
The determination of the expanded bed height for a given
image is challenging due to the bed surface’s wavy nature
pubs.acs.org/IECR Article
caused by bubble motions and bursting. The current work
proposes a new method to obtain the expanded bed height for
a given binary image based on trapeziums, as presented in
Figure 2b. The bed region area, A1, and the freeboard region
area, A2, were equated with the area of their equivalent
trapeziums. The bed trapezium has a lower base, upper base,
and height equal to Lo, L1, and h1, respectively. The freeboard
trapezium has a lower base, upper base, and height equal to L1,
L2, and h2, respectively (Figure 1b). The unknown base L1
common to both trapeziums was eliminated using eqs 5 and 6.
The sum of both trapezium heights is equal to the total column
height, H (eq 7). The relations, which are given in eqs 5−7, led
to a quadratic equation in terms of bed trapezium height, h1
(eq 8). The expanded bed height, h1, was calculated for every
frame by solving eq 8.
For 2D tapered beds
1
A1 = (Lo + L1)h1
2 (5)
1
A2 = (L1 + L 2)h2
2 (6)
H = h1 + h2 (7)
(L 2 − Lo)h12 + [2(A1 + A 2 ) + H(Lo − L 2)]h1 − 2A1H
=0 (8)
For 2D rectangular beds, Lo = L2, and the above quadratic
equation reduces to
A1
h1 = H
A1 + A 2 (9)
2.3. Bubble Tracking and Velocity. The bubble
velocities were obtained using the Lagrangian velocimetry
technique (LVT). Figure 3 shows the tracking of bubbles with
(2)
(3)
Figure 3. Bubble tracking.
flow time. The bubble tracking algorithm was adapted and
modified from the work of Asegehegn et al. 2011.57 The
bubbles were tracked in three steps: link creation, false link
deletion, and filtration of bubbles undergoing coalescence or
breakup. The first-frame bubbles were considered as parents
(index 1) and those in the second frame as daughters (index
2).
12743 https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.1c01496
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2021, 60, 12740−12751
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research
According to the first step, the bubbles in the consecutive
frames were matched and initial links were created based on
the displacements of their lateral, xb, and vertical, yb, centroids,
as given below
(i) |xb,2 − xb,1| ≤ Db,2: both leftward and rightward
displacements allowed in the lateral direction
(ii) |yb,2 − yb,1| ≤ Db,2: displacement allowed in both upward
and downward directions
A temporary net bubble velocity, Ub, was calculated based
on initial links in the second step. Sometimes, wrong links
between two or more bubbles were formed that are unrelated
to each other when they are of comparable size and very close
to each other in a frame. The wrong links were then deleted
based on the criteria that |Ub| ≤ Ub,max for net upward and
downward bubble motion. The maximum expected net bubble
velocity, Ub,max, is considered equal to 5Uo based on
observation of experimental data.
In the third step, the following five cases were considered
based on final links. Those bubbles that undergo coalescence
or breakup were filtered out. The constant factors, k1 and k2,
were taken into account for shrinkage and expansion,
respectively, in the bubble area. The factor, k1, can vary within
0.2−0.5 and the factor, k2, can change within 1.5−2.0
depending on the inlet air velocity, Uo. The number of parent
and daughter bubbles is represented by np and nd, respectively.
Case 1: single parent and single daughter: no coalescence or
breakup.
k1Ab,1 ≤ Ab,2 ≤ k 2Ab,1
Case 2: multiple parents and single daughter: bubble
coalescence.
np np
k1∑ Ab,1i ≤ Ab,2 ≤ k 2∑ Ab,1i
i=1 i=1
Case 3: single parent and multiple daughters: bubble
breakup.
nd nd
k1∑ Ab,2i ≤ Ab,1 ≤ k 2∑ Ab,2i
i=1 i=1
Case 4: a daughter bubble has no parent bubble: the
appearance of a new bubble.
Case 5: a parent bubble has no daughter bubble: the
disappearance of a bubble.
Only those bubbles were considered for calculating the
velocity, which did not undergo coalescence or breakup, that is,
case 1. The bubble rise, Ub,y, and lateral, Ub,x, velocities were
obtained through the division of the change in its vertical, yb,
and lateral, xb, centroids with the time difference between the
two consecutive frames, Δt, as given below
yb,2 − yb,1
Ub, y =
Δt (10)
xb,2 − xb,1
Ub, x =
Δt (11)
2.4. Averaging of Bubble Properties and Data. This
section describes the averaging of pressure data and bubble
properties. The pressure data were time-averaged because the
instantaneous values fluctuate due to dynamic bubble
motion.60 The mean was calculated from three repeats of
bed pressure drop measurements at each air velocity. The
12744
pubs.acs.org/IECR Article
standard deviation of pressure drop measurement is within
±0.07−12.5%.
The data points obtained for bubble size and shape were
more than 8000, while greater than 5000 data points were
collected for the rise velocity. Figure 4a presents the scatter
Figure 4. Illustration of methods for obtaining (a) mean bubble size
and (b) time-averaged bed expansion ratio at θ = 10° and Uo = 0.25
m/s.
plot of bubble size along the elevation. The presence of smaller
bubbles along with larger bubbles suggests that bubble
coalescence and breakup happen at all heights. For exploring
the effect of elevation on local bubble properties such as its
size, rise velocity, and aspect ratio, the whole column was split
into horizontal sections, each having a height of 1 cm. The
bubble property was allocated to each section based on its
vertical centroid. Then, the arithmetic averaging was done to
obtain the mean bubble property at a specific elevation (see
Figure 4a). The fluctuations in the instantaneous bed
expansion ratio (Figure 4b) are due to the bed’s dynamic
bubble behavior, such as coalescence, breakup, appearance,
and disappearance of bubbles. The time-averaged bubble
fraction and bed expansion ratio were obtained by time
averaging over 1500 frames, as displayed in Figure 4b. The
standard deviation in the measured values of bubble size,
fraction, aspect ratio, rise velocity, and bed expansion ratio are
within ±2.5%.
3. DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS
The dimensional analysis of various parameters using the
Buckingham Π theorem has been discussed in this section. The
lower base, Lo, gas density, ρg, and acceleration due to gravity,
g, representing the physical quantities of length [L], mass [M],
and time [T], respectively, were used as repeating variables.
The taper angle, θ, can be represented in terms of the lower
base, Lo, upper base at an initial time, L1|t=0, and initial height,
Ho, of the tapered bed using simple trigonometry, as given
below
L1|t = 0 2Ho
=1+ tan(θ)
Lo Lo (12)
Based on the above relation, the taper angle, θ, can be shown
in a nondimensional form as
L1|t = 0
θ* =
Lo (13)
The bubble size, Db, and the height above distributor, h, are
nondimensionalized as
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.1c01496
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2021, 60, 12740−12751
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research pubs.acs.org/IECR Article

ij Uo − Umf yz 3 ij L | yzb3
Fua,m = c3jjjj zz × jj 1 t = 0 zz
zz jj L zz
Db a
D b* =
k { k o {
Lo (14) gLo (26)
h
h* = Fua,m = c3(Uo*)a3 × (θ*)b3 (27)
Lo (15)
The following equations give the dimensionless forms of the The multiple linear least-squares regression analysis can be
inlet air velocity, Uo, and the bubble rise velocity, Ub,y done on experimental data to calculate constants c1, a1, b1, c2,
a2, b2, and c3, a3, b3.
Uo − Umf
Uo* = 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
gLo (16)
Initially, the minimum fluidization velocity, Umf, a crucial
Ub, y parameter, was obtained from bed pressure drop experiments.
U b,*y = The mean bed pressure drop against the air velocity curve for
gLo (17)
the same initial bed height, Ho, is presented in Figure 5. As the
The time, t, has been nondimensionalized as
g
t* = t
Lo (18)
The lower base, Lo, has been used for nondimensionalization
of various parameters because it represents the size or scale of
the system, and it was same for all the fluidizing columns. The
time-averaged bubble fraction, δb,ta, depends on the excess air
velocity and taper angle and can be expressed in a functional
form, as shown below
δ b,ta = f (Uo − Umf , Lo , L1|t = 0 , g ) (19)
The above equation can be further represented in the form Figure 5. Mean bed pressure drop against the air velocity curve.
of dimensionless groups, as given in eq 20 and in a
nondimensional form, as shown in eq 21. The first and second
Π groups represent the effect of the air velocity and taper cross-sectional area increases with the taper angle, the mean
angle, respectively. pressure drop decreases due to a decrease in resistance to gas

ij U − U yz 1 ij L | yzb1
flow with the taper angle. Each curve’s peak represents the Umf
= c1jjjj o mf z
zz × jjj 1 t = 0 zzz
z
a

j Lo z
value for a given taper angle. The Umf value is not significantly

k o { k {
δ b,ta influenced by the rise in the taper angle as the particles are
gL (20) small in size. Therefore, a single Umf value of 0.049 m/s of the
rectangular bed was employed in further study.
δ b,ta = c1(Uo*)a1 × (θ*)b1 (21) Various parameters, such as the size, shape, rise velocity, and
fraction of bubbles and the bed expansion ratio, along with the
The excess air velocity and taper angle influence the time-
unfluidized area fraction, were quantified using an image
averaged ratio of bed expansion, Rta. It can be expressed in a
analysis technique. The bubble fraction was studied as a bulk
functional form, as given below
property. The effects of the taper angle and air velocity on
R ta = 1 + f (Uo − Umf , Lo , L1|t = 0 , g ) (22) these parameters are presented in a nondimensional form.
Figure 6 illustrates the influence of the air velocity and taper
The constant 1 has been added because the ratio of bed angle on instantaneous bubble behavior at t* = 221.47,
expansion, R, is always more than or equal to 1. The expanded corresponding to a flow time of 30 s. It can be observed
height, h1, is greater than or equal to the initial height, Ho, of qualitatively that the bubbles get larger with an increase in the
the bed. Equation 22 can be further represented in the form of dimensionless air velocity for rectangular and tapered beds.
dimensionless groups, as given in eq 23 and in a nondimen- 4.1. Local Properties. 4.1.1. Effect of the Taper Angle.
sional form, as shown in eq 24.

jij Uo − Umf zyz ij L1|t = 0 yz 2

This section discusses how the taper angle influences the local

R ta = 1 + c 2jjj zz × jjj z
z
gLo z{ j Lo zz
2a b bubble characteristics such as its size, shape, and rise velocity.

k k {
The nondimensional mean bubble size grows with elevation
(23) because of bubble coalescence, as illustrated in Figure 7a. The
tapered beds show slightly larger mean bubble sizes than the
R ta = 1 + c 2(Uo*)a2 × (θ*)b2 (24) rectangular bed at higher elevations. The maximum difference
is 26.79%, with an increase in the dimensionless taper angle
Similar to the bubble fraction, the functional representation from 1.00 to 2.07 at Uo* = 0.15. This observation’s possible
of the unfluidized region area fraction, Fua,m, is given below explanation lies in the difference in gas flow patterns between
Fua,m = f (Uo − Umf , Lo , L1|t = 0 , g ) the rectangular and the tapered beds. In contrast to a
(25)
rectangular bed, a tapered bed consists of a central fluidized
The above equation is further expressed in terms of region and a peripheral or side unfluidized region.19,20 The
dimensionless groups, as presented in eq 26 and in a bubbles mostly pass through the central region as it offers less
nondimensional form, as given in eq 27. gas flow resistance than the side region. As the taper angle
12745 https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.1c01496
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2021, 60, 12740−12751
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research
Figure 6. Effect of the air velocity and taper angle on instantaneous
bubble behavior at t* = 221.47.
Figure 7. Taper angle’s influence on mean bubble (a) size, (b) rise
velocity, and (c) aspect ratio as a function of elevation at Uo* = 0.15.
increases, the unfluidized region’s fraction increases, causing
more gas to flow through the central region, leading to a slight
expansion of bubbles at a given elevation and air velocity.
The dimensionless mean bubble rise velocity can be seen to
increase to a certain elevation and then decrease after that, as
presented in Figure 7b. The increase is because of mean bubble
size growth with elevation. The larger bubbles have higher rise
velocities than the smaller ones due to an increase in buoyancy
force with bubble size. The decrease happens because the bed
surface acts as a barrier to bubble motion, leading to different
12746
pubs.acs.org/IECR Article
phenomena observed in Figure 8. The large bubbles,
approaching the bed surface, become slower (Figure 8a) and
Figure 8. Instantaneous bubble velocity vectors at θ* = 1.71 and Uo*
= 0.15 for bubble flow behavior near the bed surface showing bubble
(a) slowdown, (b) breakup, (c) slant motion, and (d) shrinkage.
burst to release their kinetic energy to break the bed surface.
Moreover, the larger bubbles break into smaller ones near the
bed surface, which also decreases the rise velocity (Figure 8b).
Some bubbles do not slow down but move at an angle in the
vertical direction, causing the rise velocity to drop (Figure 8c).
Few bubbles shrink on reaching near the bed surface and have
a smaller rise velocity (Figure 8d). The tapered bed has a
slightly larger mean rise velocity than the rectangular bed at
higher elevations, as illustrated in Figure 7b. The maximum
difference is 29.53%, with the increase in nondimensional taper
angle from 1.00 to 2.07 at Uo* = 0.15. This trend is so because
the mean bubble size increases slightly with the taper angle at
higher elevations.
Figure 7c illustrates how the taper angle influences the mean
aspect ratio variation along the elevation. The mean value first
increases and then decreases slightly near the bed surface. The
increase is due to the mean bubble size growth with height
caused by coalescence in the vertical direction. The vertical
coalescence causes larger bubbles to have a higher aspect ratio,
as illustrated in Figures 3 and 6. The reason for the decrease is
that when the bubbles reach near the bed surface, they shrink
vertically, leaking their stored air into the freeboard region, as
presented in Figure 8d. The mean aspect ratio slightly
increases with the taper angle at higher elevations, and the
maximum increase is 9.69% as the dimensionless taper angle
changes from 1.00 to 2.07 at Uo* = 0.15. This variation is
caused by the rise in the mean bubble size with the taper angle
at higher vertical positions.
4.1.2. Effect of the Air Velocity. This section presents how
the local bubble properties such as size, shape, and rise velocity
of bubbles are influenced by air velocity change. The rise in the
air velocity causes the dimensionless mean bubble size to
increase significantly at a given elevation, as illustrated in
Figure 9a. The rise in the air velocity increases the excess gas
velocity, Uo − Umf, further increasing the bubble size. The
bubble size increases by a maximum amount of 84.38% at θ* =
1.71 with the rise in the nondimensional air velocity from 0.08
to 0.23.
Figure 9b shows that the nondimensional mean rise velocity
initially increases and then slightly falls with elevation. The
increase in the dimensionless air velocity from 0.08 to 0.23
causes the mean bubble rise velocity to increase significantly at
a given elevation by a maximum value of 113.90% at θ* = 1.71.
The increase of the mean bubble size with the air velocity at a
given height could explain such observation.
The mean aspect ratio first increases and then decreases
along the elevation, as illustrated in Figure 9c. The mean value
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.1c01496
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2021, 60, 12740−12751
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research pubs.acs.org/IECR Article

Figure 9. Influence of the air velocity on variation of mean bubble (a)

size, (b) rise velocity, and (c) aspect ratio with elevation at θ* = 1.71.

significantly increases by a maximum amount of 46.20% with

the nondimensional air velocity changing from 0.08 to 0.23 at Figure 10. Effect of the taper angle and air velocity on the unfluidized
θ* = 1.71 because of growth in the mean bubble size with air region.
velocity.
4.2. Bulk Properties. 4.2.1. Effects of the Taper Angle
and Air Velocity. The influence of the taper angle and air
velocity on bulk properties such as the bubble fraction,
unfluidized area fraction, and bed expansion ratio are discussed
in this section. The variation of the marked unfluidized region
with the taper angle and air velocity is shown in Figure 10.
The time-averaged bubble fraction is observed to increase
with the air velocity and decrease with the taper angle, as
presented in Figure 11a. The bubble fraction decreases from
0.19 to 0.13, with an increase in the dimensionless taper angle
from 1.00 to 2.07 at Uo* = 0.15. With the variation in the taper
angle from 1.00 to 2.07, the bubble fraction uniformly drops by
an average value of 31.61% at all air velocities. This drop is
caused due to an increase in the bed’s projected area with the
taper angle, while the total bubble area remains unchanged at a
given air velocity. The bubble fraction increases from 0.09 to
0.18 with change in the nondimensional air velocity from 0.08
to 0.23 at θ* = 1.71. The bubble fraction grows almost
uniformly with the air velocity for all taper angles. It increases
by an average amount of 117.61% as the air velocity changes
from 0.08 to 0.23. This increase happens because of the bubble
volume growth in the bed with the air velocity.
Figure 11b illustrates that the rise in the air velocity and the
fall in taper angle cause the time-averaged bed expansion ratio
to increase. The ratio decreases from 1.29 to 1.09 with the
change in nondimensional taper angle from 1.00 to 2.07 at Uo* Figure 11. Influence of the taper angle and air velocity on (a) time-
averaged bubble fraction, (b) time-averaged bed expansion ratio, and
= 0.15. The ratio falls by 8.61, 11.64, 14.90, 16.56, and 18.43% (c) mean unfluidized area fraction.
at Uo* = 0.08, 0.11, 0.15, 0.19, and 0.23, respectively, when the
taper angle changes from 1.00 to 2.07. The fall in the ratio is
due to the drop in the bubble fraction, which is responsible for = 1.71. When the air velocity changes from 0.08 to 0.23, it
bed expansion. The ratio increases from 1.05 to 1.16 with a causes the expansion ratio to rise by 22.91, 15.15, 10.78, and
change in the dimensionless air velocity from 0.08 to 0.23 at θ* 9.70% at θ* = 1.00, 1.35, 1.71, and 2.07, respectively.
12747 https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.1c01496
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2021, 60, 12740−12751
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research
The mean unfluidized area fraction increases with the taper
angle and decreases with the air velocity, as presented in Figure
11c. The mean fraction increases from 0.0057 to 0.29 with
increase in the dimensionless taper angle from 1.00 to 2.07 at
Uo* = 0.15. The area fraction decreases from 0.28 to 0.14 with
change in the nondimensional air velocity from 0.08 to 0.23 at
θ* = 1.71. The area fraction drops by 95.88, 69.02, 45.57, and
37.29% for θ* = 1.00, 1.35, 1.71, and 2.07, respectively, with
change in Uo* from 0.08 to 0.23. The unfluidized area fraction
has a standard deviation within ±2.5−11% for its measured
values.
5. DEVELOPMENT OF EMPIRICAL CORRELATIONS
This section presents the proposed empirical correlations for
bulk properties such as the bubble fraction, bed expansion
ratio, and unfluidized area fraction. The correlations are
obtained using dimensional analysis and regression analysis of
the present work’s experimental data. A correlation for
predicting the time-averaged bubble fraction is given in eq
28. Figure 12a compares the predicted and the experimental
Figure 12. Comparison of developed correlations with experimental
values for (a) time-averaged bubble fraction, (b) time-averaged bed
expansion ratio, and (c) mean unfluidized area fraction.
data for the bubble fraction, and the corresponding coefficient
of determination value (r2 = 0.9747) is also given.
δ b,ta = 0.7383(Uo*)0.7218 × (θ*)−0.5332 (28)
The correlation for predicting the time-averaged bed
expansion ratio is given below
R ta = 1 + 2.1379(Uo*)1.0815 × (θ*)−1.6063
(29)
Figure 12b shows the bed expansion ratio’s predicted and
experimental values along with the coefficient of determination
value (r2 = 0.9826).
Equation 30 presents a correlation to predict the mean
unfluidized area fraction. The comparison between the
12748
pubs.acs.org/IECR Article
predicted and experimental values for unfluidized area fraction
along with the coefficient of determination value (r2 = 0.9609)
is depicted in Figure 12c.
Fua,m = 0.0118(Uo*)−0.5986 × (θ*)2.8710 (30)
The correlations given in eqs 28−30 are valid for 0.08 ≤
Uo*≤ 0.23 and 1.00 ≤ θ* ≤ 2.07 Geldart B spherical particles
with the initial bed height equal to twice the bottom base
width.
Figure 13 presents an operating regime map based on the
fraction of unfluidized area, Fua,m. The regime map consists of
Figure 13. Operating regime map based on the fraction of the
unfluidized region: zone A: most favorable (Fua,m ≤ 0.15), zone B:
medium favorable (0.15 < Fua,m ≤ 0.30), and zone C: least favorable
(Fua,m > 0.30) regime (solid triangles: experimental conditions).
three zones: A, B, and C. Zone A represents the most favorable
operating regime, where Fua,m ≤ 0.15, zone B depicts the
medium favorable operating regime having 0.15 < Fua,m ≤ 0.30,
and zone C corresponds to the least favorable operating regime
with Fua,m > 0.30. The unfluidized region is detrimental to
chemical reactions and heat transfer processes. Figure 13 acts
as a guide map for selecting the gas velocity and taper angle to
minimize the fraction of the unfluidized region in the bed and
obtain better process efficiency.
6. CONCLUSIONS
The influence of the taper angle and air velocity on the bubble
behavior in 2D gas−solid tapered fluidized beds was
investigated experimentally by the digital imaging method,
and the following can be concluded.
• The mean bubble size increases significantly with the air
velocity. The tapered bed shows a slightly larger bubble
size than the columnar bed at higher elevations, with a
maximum difference of 26.79% between the two beds at
a dimensionless air velocity of 0.15.
• The mean bubble rise velocity increases with the air
velocity. The tapered bed’s bubble rise velocity is slightly
more compared to the columnar bed at higher
elevations. At a given air velocity of 0.15, the maximum
difference between the two beds is 29.53%.
• The mean bubble aspect ratio increases with the air
velocity. The tapered bed shows a slightly larger aspect
ratio than the columnar bed at higher elevations with a
maximum rise of 9.69% at an air velocity of 0.15.
• The time-averaged bubble fraction and bed expansion
ratio increase with the air velocity and decrease with the
taper angle. For a fixed air velocity of 0.15, the bubble
fraction and bed expansion ratio decrease from 0.19 to
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.1c01496
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2021, 60, 12740−12751
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research pubs.acs.org/IECR Article

0.13 and 1.29 to 1.09, respectively, with the increase in Ho initial static bed height (m)
nondimensional taper angle from 1.00 to 2.07. i summation index for bubbles (−)
• The mean unfluidized area fraction increases with the k1, k2 constant factors (−)
taper angle and decreases with the air velocity. The area L1 common base length of bed and freeboard regions of
fraction rises from 0.0057 to 0.29 as the dimensionless the tapered column (m)
taper angle changes from 1.00 to 2.07 at an air velocity L1|t=0 upper base length of the tapered bed at initial time (m)
of 0.15. L2 upper base length of the tapered column (m)
• New correlations are proposed for predicting the bubble Lo lower base length of the tapered column (m)
fraction, bed expansion ratio, and unfluidized area n p, n d number of parent and daughter bubbles (−)
fraction in the tapered fluidized bed. R bed expansion ratio (−)
• A regime map is proposed based on the unfluidized area r2 coefficient of determination (−)
fraction for identifying the most favorable operating t time (s)
conditions. T bed thickness (m)

■
Ub,max maximum expected net bubble velocity (m/s)
ASSOCIATED CONTENT Ub,x bubble lateral velocity (m/s)
Ub,y bubble rise velocity (m/s)
*
sı Supporting Information
Ub
The Supporting Information is available free of charge at net bubble velocity = Ub, x 2 + Ub, y 2 (m/s)
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.iecr.1c01496. Umff minimum velocity of full fluidization (m/s)
Effect of the taper angle on the variation of mean bubble Umf minimum fluidization velocity (m/s)
size, rise velocity, and aspect ratio with height in the Uo superficial gas velocity (m/s)
nondimensional form at Uo* = 0.08 (0.15 m/s) and air xb lateral centroid of the bubble (m)
velocity’s influence on the mean bubble size, rise yb vertical centroid of the bubble (m)
velocity, and aspect ratio as a function of elevation in
the dimensionless form at θ* = 2.07 (15°) (PDF) ■ GREEK LETTERS

■ AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
δb bubble fraction (−)
ρg density of fluidizing gas (kg/m3)
θ taper angle of the bed (◦)
Sabita Sarkar − Department of Metallurgical and Materials
Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai
600036, India; Phone: +91 44 2257 4755;
■ SUBSCRIPTS
b bubble
Email: sabita.sarkar@iitm.ac.in m mean
ta time-averaged

■
Author
Lipak Kumar Sahoo − Department of Metallurgical and
Materials Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology SUPERSCIPTS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Madras, Chennai 600036, India; orcid.org/0000-0001- * dimensionless value of a variable
6852-1564 CCD charged-coupled device
Complete contact information is available at: CFD computational fluid dynamics
https://pubs.acs.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.1c01496 LED light-emitting diode
LVT Lagrangian velocimetry technique
RGB red, green, blue

■
Notes
The authors declare no competing financial interest.

■
REFERENCES
ABBREVIATIONS (1) Kunii, D.; Levenspiel, O. Fluidization Engineering, 2nd ed.;
ΔPmax maximum bed pressure drop (Pa) Butterworth-Heinemann: Boston, 1991; pp 14−59.
Δt time difference between two consecutive frames (s) (2) Kopyscinski, J.; Schildhauer, T. J.; Biollaz, S. M. A. Fluidized-bed
methanation: Interaction between kinetics and mass transfer. Ind. Eng.
A1 area of the bed region (m2) Chem. Res. 2011, 50, 2781−2790.
A2 area of the freeboard region (m2) (3) Wang, C.; Wang, G.; Li, C.; Barghi, S.; Zhu, J. Catalytic ozone
A1|t=0 inital bed area (m2) decomposition in a high density circulating fluidized bed riser. Ind.
Ab projected area of bubble (m2) Eng. Chem. Res. 2014, 53, 6613−6623.
Auf unfluidized region area (m2) (4) Kim, H. G.; Lee, I. O.; Chung, U. C.; Kim, Y. H. Fluidization
ARb bubble aspect ratio (−) characteristics of iron ore fines of wide size distribution in a cold
dh maximum bubble length in the horizontal direction tapered gas-solid fluidized bed. ISIJ Int. 2000, 40, 16−22.
(m) (5) Wu, C.-S.; Huang, J.-S. Bioparticle characteristics of tapered
dv maximum bubble length in the vertical direction (m) anaerobic fluidized-bed bioreactors. Water Res. 1996, 30, 233−241.
Db equivalent bubble diameter (m) (6) Depypere, F.; Pieters, J. G.; Dewettinck, K. Expanded bed height
determination in a tapered fluidised bed reactor. J. Food Eng. 2005,
Fua fraction of the unfluidized area (−)
67, 353−359.
g acceleration due to gravity = 9.81 (m/s2) (7) Schaafsma, S. H.; Marx, T.; Hoffmann, A. C. Investigation of the
H total column height (m) particle flowpattern and segregation in tapered fluidized bed
h height above the air distributor (m) granulators. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2006, 61, 4467−4475.
h1 equivalent bed height (m) (8) Parthiban, R.; Iyer, P. V. R.; Sekaran, G. Anaerobic tapered
h2 equivalent freeboard height (m) fluidized bed reactor for starch wastewater treatment and modeling

12749 https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.1c01496
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2021, 60, 12740−12751
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research
using multilayer perceptron neural network. J. Environ. Sci. 2007, 19,
1416−1423.
(9) Dehkordi, A. M.; Savari, C.; Ghasemi, M. Steam reforming of
methane in a tapered membrane - assisted fluidized - bed reactor:
Modeling and simulation. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2011, 36, 490−504.
(10) Bai, W.; Chu, D.; Wang, F.; He, Y. Research on fluidization
performance of different tapered fluidized bed reactors for fluidizing
carbon nanotubes. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2020, 59, 11893−11904.
(11) Biswal, K. C.; Bhowmik, T.; Roy, G. K. Prediction of minimum
fluidization velocity for gas-solid fluidization of regular particles in
conical vessels. Chem. Eng. J. 1985, 30, 57−62.
(12) Peng, Y.; Fan, L. T. Hydrodynamic characteristics of
fluidization in liquid-solid tapered beds. Chem. Eng. Sci. 1997, 52,
2277−2290.
(13) Sau, D. C.; Mohanty, S.; Biswal, K. C. Minimum fluidization
velocities and maximum bed pressure drops for gas−solid tapered
fluidized beds. Chem. Eng. J. 2007, 132, 151−157.
(14) Son, S.-Y.; Lee, D. H.; Han, G. Y.; Kim, D. J.; Sim, S. J.; Kim, S.
D. Effect of air distributor on the fluidization characteristics in conical
gas fluidized beds. Korean J. Chem. Eng. 2005, 22, 315−320.
(15) Sau, D. C.; Mohanty, S.; Biswal, K. C. Experimental studies and
empirical models for the prediction of bed expansion in gas−solid
tapered fluidized beds. Chem. Eng. Process. 2010, 49, 418−424.
(16) Khani, M. H. Models for prediction of hydrodynamic
characteristics of gas-solid tapered and mini-tapered fluidized beds.
Powder Technol. 2011, 205, 224−230.
(17) Rasteh, M.; Farhadi, F.; Bahramian, A. Hydrodynamic
characteristics of gas-solid tapered fluidized beds: Experimental
studies and empirical models. Powder Technol. 2015, 283, 355−367.
(18) Jing, S.; Hu, Q.; Wang, J.; Jin, Y. Fluidization of coarse particles
in gas − solid conical beds. Chem. Eng. Process. 2000, 39, 379−387.
(19) Gernon, T. M.; Gilbertson, M. A.; Sparks, R. S. J.; Field, M.
Gas-fluidisation in an experimental tapered bed: Insights into
processes in diverging volcanic conduits. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res.
2008, 174, 49−56.
(20) Gernon, T. M.; Gilbertson, M. A. Segregation of particles in a
tapered fluidized bed. Powder Technol. 2012, 231, 88−101.
(21) Wormsbecker, M.; van Ommen, R.; Nijenhuis, J.; Tanfara, H.;
Pugsley, T. The influence of vessel geometry on fluidized bed dryer
hydrodynamics. Powder Technol. 2009, 194, 115−125.
(22) Depypere, F.; Pieters, J. G.; Dewettinck, K. PEPT visualisation
of particle motion in a tapered fluidised bed coater. J. Food Eng. 2009,
93, 324−336.
(23) Grace, J. R.; Harrison, D. The behaviour of freely bubbling
fluidised beds. Chem. Eng. Sci. 1969, 24, 497−508.
(24) Agrawal, V.; Shinde, Y. H.; Shah, M. T.; Utikar, R. P.; Pareek,
V. K.; Joshi, J. B. Estimation of bubble properties in bubbling fluidized
bed using ECVT measurements. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2018, 57, 8319−
8333.
(25) Müller, C. R.; Davidson, J. F.; Dennis, J. S.; Hayhurst, A. N. A
study of the motion and eruption of a bubble at the surface of a two-
dimensional fluidized bed using particle image velocimetry (PIV). Ind.
Eng. Chem. Res. 2007, 46, 1642−1652.
(26) Lim, K. S.; Agarwal, P. K.; O’neill, B. K. Measurement and
modelling of bubble parameters in a two-dimensional gas-fluidized
bed using image analysis. Powder Technol. 1990, 60, 159−171.
(27) Mudde, R. F.; Schulte, H. B. M.; van den Akker, H. E. A.
Analysis of a bubbling 2-D gas-fluidized bed using image processing.
Powder Technol. 1994, 81, 149−159.
(28) Shen, L.; Johnsson, F.; Leckner, B. Digital image analysis of
hydrodynamics two-dimensional bubbling fluidized beds. Chem. Eng.
Sci. 2004, 59, 2607−2617.
(29) Busciglio, A.; Vella, G.; Micale, G.; Rizzuti, L. Experimental
analysis of bubble size distributions in 2D gas fluidized beds. Chem.
Eng. Sci. 2010, 65, 4782−4791.
(30) Movahedirad, S.; Dehkordi, A. M.; Banaei, M.; Deen, N. G.;
Van Sint Annaland, M.; Kuipers, J. A. M. Bubble size distribution in
two-dimensional gas-solid fluidized beds. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2012,
51, 6571−6579.
12750
pubs.acs.org/IECR Article
(31) Medrano, J. A.; Tasdemir, M.; Gallucci, F.; van Sint Annaland,
M. On the internal solids circulation rates in freely-bubbling gas-solid
fluidized beds. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2017, 172, 395−406.
(32) Xi, K.; Guo, Q.; Boyce, C. M. Comparison of two-fluid model
simulations of freely bubbling three-dimensional gas-fluidized beds
with magnetic resonance imaging results. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2021,
60, 7429−7442.
(33) Xi, K.; Kovar, T.; Fullmer, W. D.; Penn, A.; Musser, J.; Boyce,
C. M. CFD-DEM study of bubble properties in a cylindrical fluidized
bed of Geldart Group D particles and comparison with prior MRI
data. Powder Technol. 2021, 389, 75−84.
(34) Xi, K.; Guo, Q.; Boyce, C. M. Comparison of CFD-DEM and
TFM simulations of single bubble injection in 3D gas-fluidized beds
with MRI results. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2021, 243, 116738.
(35) Wytrwat, T.; Yazdanpanah, M.; Heinrich, S. Bubble properties
in bubbling and turbulent fluidized beds for particles of Geldart’s
group B. Processes 2020, 8, 1098.
(36) Rüdisüli, M.; Schildhauer, T. J.; Biollaz, S. M. A.; Ruud van
Ommen, J. Bubble characterization in a fluidized bed by means of
optical probes. Int. J. Multiphase Flow 2012, 41, 56−67.
(37) Č árský, M.; Hartman, M.; Ilyenko, B. K.; Makhorin, K. E. The
bubble frequency in a fluidized bed at elevated pressure. Powder
Technol. 1990, 61, 251−254.
(38) Matsuura, A.; Fan, L.-S. Distribution of bubble properties in a
gas-liquid-solid fluidized bed. AIChE J. 1984, 30, 894−903.
(39) Atkinson, C. M.; Clark, N. N. Gas sampling from fluidized
beds: A novel probe system. Powder Technol. 1988, 54, 59−70.
(40) Rowe, P. N.; Yacono, C. X. R. The bubbling behaviour of fine
powders when fluidised. Chem. Eng. Sci. 1976, 31, 1179−1192.
(41) Sung, J. S.; Burgess, J. M. A laser-based method for bubble
parameter measurement in two-dimensional fluidised beds. Powder
Technol. 1987, 49, 165−175.
(42) Weber, J. M.; Mei, J. S. Bubbling fluidized bed characterization
using electrical capacitance volume tomography (ECVT). Powder
Technol. 2013, 242, 40−50.
(43) Hulme, I.; Clavelle, E.; van der Lee, L.; Kantzas, A. CFD
modeling and validation of bubble properties for a bubbling fluidized
bed. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2005, 44, 4254−4266.
(44) Busciglio, A.; Vella, G.; Micale, G.; Rizzuti, L. Analysis of the
bubbling behaviour of 2D gas solid fluidized beds. Part II.
Comparison between experiments and numerical simulations via
digital image analysis technique. Chem. Eng. J. 2009, 148, 145−163.
(45) Duangkhamchan, W.; Ronsse, F.; Depypere, F.; Dewettinck, K.;
Pieters, J. G. Comparison and evaluation of interphase momentum
exchange models for simulation of the solids volume fraction in
tapered fluidised beds. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2010, 65, 3100−3112.
(46) Huilin, L.; Yunhua, Z.; Zhiheng, S.; Ding, J.; Jiying, J.
Numerical simulations of gas − solid flow in tapered risers. Powder
Technol. 2006, 169, 89−98.
(47) Khodabandehlou, R.; Askaripour, H.; Dehkordi, A. M.
Numerical investigation of gas bubble behavior in tapered fluidized
beds. Particuology 2018, 38, 152−164.
(48) Sau, D. C.; Biswal, K. C. Computational fluid dynamics and
experimental study of the hydrodynamics of a gas-solid tapered
fluidized bed. Appl. Math. Model. 2011, 35, 2265−2278.
(49) Liyan, S.; Weiguo, X.; Guodong, L.; Dan, S.; Huilin, L.; Yanjia,
T.; Dan, L. Prediction of flow behavior of particles in a tapered
bubbling fluidized bed using a second-order moment-frictional
stresses model. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2012, 84, 170−181.
(50) Koerich, D. M.; Lopes, G. C.; Rosa, L. M. Numerical study on
the hydrodynamics of a fluidized-bed of bioparticles in tapered
bioreactors with square shape cross-section. Braz. J. Chem. Eng. 2020,
37, 101−115.
(51) Liu, X.; Zhao, M.; Hu, S.; Ge, W. Three-dimensional CFD
simulation of tapered gas-solid risers by coupling the improved
EMMS drag. Powder Technol. 2019, 352, 305−313.
(52) Busciglio, A.; Vella, G.; Micale, G.; Rizzuti, L. Analysis of the
bubbling behaviour of 2D gas solid fluidized beds. Part I. Digital
image analysis technique. Chem. Eng. J. 2008, 140, 398−413.
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.1c01496
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2021, 60, 12740−12751
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research pubs.acs.org/IECR Article

(53) Solomon, C.; Breckon, T. Fundamentals of Digital Image

Processing: A Practical Approach with Examples in Matlab, 1st ed.; John
Wiley & Sons: Oxford, 2011.
(54) Bradley, D.; Roth, G. Adaptive thresholding using the integral
image. J. Graph. Tool. 2007, 12, 13−21.
(55) Lim, K. S.; Gururajan, V. S.; Agarwal, P. K. Mixing of
homogeneous solids in bubbling fluidized beds: Theoretical modeling
and experimental investigation using digital image analysis. Chem. Eng.
Sci. 1993, 48, 2251−2265.
(56) Yang, J.; Breault, R. W.; Rowan, S. L. Applying image
processing methods to study hydrodynamic characteristics in a
rectangular spouted bed. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2018, 188, 238−251.
(57) Asegehegn, T. W.; Schreiber, M.; Krautz, H. J. Investigation of
bubble behavior in fluidized beds with and without immersed
horizontal tubes using a digital image analysis technique. Powder
Technol. 2011, 210, 248−260.
(58) Caicedo, G. R.; Marqués, J. J. P.; Ruíz, M. G.; Soler, J. G. A
study on the behaviour of bubbles of a 2D gas-solid fluidized bed
using digital image analysis. Chem. Eng. Process. 2003, 42, 9−14.
(59) Zou, Z.; Li, H.-Z.; Zhu, Q.-S. The bubbling behavior of
cohesive particles in the 2D fluidized beds. Powder Technol. 2011, 212,
258−266.
(60) Escudero, D.; Heindel, T. J. Bed height and material density
effects on fluidized bed hydrodynamics. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2011, 66,
3648−3655.

12751 https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.1c01496
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2021, 60, 12740−12751