ERGUN 6.2: User's Manual

ERGUN 6.
2
User's Manual
Revised November 2006
ERGUN 6.............................................................................................................................. 1
User's Manual ........................................................................................................................ 1
Chapter 1 - Presentation......................................................................................................... 3
1.1. Introduction .................................................................................................................... 3
1.2. Installation of the program.............................................................................................. 3
Chapter 2 - Environment ....................................................................................................... 5
2.1. Program Structure........................................................................................................... 5
2.2. Using Menus.................................................................................................................. 6
2.3. Data File Management................................................................................................... 6
2.3.1. Manual and automatic data transfer during Item by Item Design .............................. 9
2.3.2. Importing data from Database ................................................................................... 10
2.4. Running the program ................................................................................................... 10
2.4.1. Typical application .................................................................................................... 11
2.4.2. Building a Global Model .......................................................................................... 12
2.5. Results Files................................................................................................................. 12
2.6. Operator's privilege...................................................................................................... 13
2.7. Gas/Solid Database...................................................................................................... 14
2.7.1. Preparing data with pure gases ................................................................................. 14
2.7.2. Preparing data with gases mixtures............................................................................ 15
2.8. Cut & Paste possibility, printing diagrams .................................................................. 15
2.9. Tutorials........................................................................................................................ 16
2.10. About ERGUN 6......................................................................................................... 16
Chapter 3- Hydrodynamics of Fluidized Systems ............................................................... 17
3.1. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 17
3.2 Geldart's classification ................................................................................................... 17
3.3 Terminal Velocity.......................................................................................................... 18
3.4. Fluidization Grids ......................................................................................................... 19
3.4.1 Perforated plate distributors:....................................................................................... 20
3.4.2 Tuyere type distributors:............................................................................................. 21
3.5. Expansion properties in fluidized beds ......................................................................... 22
3.5.1 Calculation of Umf ..................................................................................................... 23
3.5.2. Calculation of .......................................................................................................... 23
3.5.3 Calculation of b ......................................................................................................... 24
3.5.4 Calculation of Db........................................................................................................ 24
3.5.5. Fluidized bed design .................................................................................................. 25
3.6. Werthers Bubbling and Bed Expansion Model ........................................................... 26
3.7. TDH and Entrainment................................................................................................... 27
3.7. Cyclones ....................................................................................................................... 29
Ergun Fluidization Software
3.7.1. Standard Cyclones .................................................................................................... 29

3.7.2. Users Defined Cyclones .......................................................................................... 30
3.7.3. Cyclone Time of Flight Model .............................................................................. 31
3.7.4. Cyclone Equilibrium Orbit Model......................................................................... 33
3.7.5. Cyclone Pressure drop calculation............................................................................ 34
3.9. References .................................................................................................................... 36
3.9.1. ref. Bed Expansion..................................................................................................... 36
3.9.2. ref. Grids.................................................................................................................... 37
3.9.3. ref. Cyclone ............................................................................................................... 37
3.9.4. ref. TDH..................................................................................................................... 37
Chapter 4- Fluidized Bed Reactors...................................................................................... 38
4.1. Classification of fluidized bed reactors: ....................................................................... 39
4.2. Werther's model............................................................................................................ 43
4.3. Kunii & Levenspiel's .................................................................................................... 45
4.4. Orcutt's model............................................................................................................... 47
4.5. Reactions with consumable solids: .............................................................................. 49
4.5.1. Solid phase mass balance........................................................................................... 49
4.5.1.1. NSC (No Size Change) ........................................................................................... 49
4.5.1.2. RWCS ( Reactions With Change in Size)............................................................... 50
4.6. Notation ....................................................................................................................... 54
4.7. References .................................................................................................................... 55
Chapter 5 -Heat transfer in Fluidized Beds.......................................................................... 56
5.1. Presentation of the phenomenon................................................................................... 56
5.2.Variation with the fluidization velocity ......................................................................... 57
5.3. Variation with particle diameter ................................................................................... 58
5.4. Influence of the gas properties...................................................................................... 58
5.5. Influence of the solid properties ................................................................................... 58
5.6. Heat transfer mechanisms............................................................................................. 59
5.7. Heat transfer by conduction.......................................................................................... 59
5.8. Heat transfer by convection. ......................................................................................... 62
5.9. Transfer by radiation..................................................................................................... 63
5.10. Transfer of heat at the walls of the fluid bed. ............................................................. 64
5.11. Transfer of heat between bed and immersed tubes ..................................................... 65
5.12. Martin's model ............................................................................................................ 68
5.13. Bock's model............................................................................................................... 70
5.14. Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 71
5.15. Notation ...................................................................................................................... 72
5.16. References .................................................................................................................. 74
Chapter 1 - Presentation
1.1. Introduction
The program ERGUN is the result of a collaboration among researchers in the field of
fluidization on one hand and computer scientists on the other. This resulted in the creation
of a user friendly software, particularly well adapted to the needs of engineers.
The ERGUN computer program is fully on-line documented; dialogue messages are present
at all levels, without slowing down the calculations.
This extensive self-documentation makes it possible to learn in a couple of hours the
different possibilities offered by the program environment and to start performing
calculations without any waste of time.
It is for this reason that the user's manual is highly condensed for the program
environment and ismainly focused on the scientific presentation of the program.
We recommend that you read carefully this set of instructions before starting your
calculations. In order to obtain additional information please contact us.
ERGUN 6 package is distributed by:
Divergent S.A.
R.P. Guy Denielou - 66, av. de Landshut
60200 - Compigne FRANCE
phone (33) 3. 44 23 46 28
Fax: (33) - 3.44.23.45.60
e-mail : ergun@utc.fr
1.2. Installation of the program

ERGUN 6 needs about 50 MB of disk space to be installed. To install the program, execute
the Setup program from the installation CD. ERGUN 6 is written in Windows
compatible Visual Basic language. Simply follow the set-up instructions and reply to
questions.
In some cases, the set-up may inform you about some files in use. This means that some
files already exist on your computer. Please choose Ignore option to complete
installation.
Ergun6 needs Acrobat Reader to display the tutorials and the users manual. If you
dont have this freeware please download and install this program from
http://www.adobe.com .
Note that ERGUN 6 is usually installed in an ERGUN6.2 directory. However this is
only optional ; you can change the name of this directory to any other you want.
If you have an ancient version of ERGUN program, please be careful when installing the
new version. You would better to install the new version in a new directory to avoid files
confusion. Note that some Data files created by older versions of Ergun Software are not
compatible with the new version. In the case of problem please contact us.
Chapter 2 - Environment
2.1. Program Structure

ERGUN 6 is a menu driven program. The user is supposed to know the very simple
operations, commonly used under Windows environment.
The graphical interface of ERGUN 6 is independent from the 'source code' of scientific
routines so that the user can modify a very simple program (optional). However, in this
case, a base knowledge in VISUAL BASIC is required.
The main screen of the program, contains different parts:
- Main menu
- Design Item
- FB Modeling and Analysis
- Database
- Ergun Video Show
- Ergun Slide Show
The Main Menu is a classical Windows type menu that contains general functions as
well as NOTATION, REFERENCES, TUTORIALS, HELP ...and so on.
Design Item concern the calculation of a single element like a GRID, a CYCLONE...
and other current elements in fluidized bed design. These elements are always calculated
separately, in some conditions near to those of the operating system. Please note that it is
always difficult to know what is the exact operating conditions, because of the interactive
characteristic of fluidized bed calculations. In the present version of ERGUN program, the
user needs to do some preliminary calculations to define the proper operating conditions.
On the other hand, he needs always to repeat his calculations after a first trial (to revise
some hypothesis or to change some initialised values. Please look to the Training
example in the main menu, if you are not familiar with these procedures.
FB Modeling and Expert Analysis is the latest feature of Ergun program. Once the
different items of a fluidized bed studied separately, this module helps the user to put all
items together and to make a global model of the fluid bed. Once the Data File prepared,
run the program and open results file. Expert comments are inserted into the result text.
Database is a twined program that lets the user to study and prepare physical data for
some 60 different gases and solids. Please refer to the Database section of this manual
to learn more about the use of the Database .
2.2. Using Menus

ERGUN 6 uses familiar Windows type menus. These menus can be activated either by the
keyboard or by the mouse. To activate any option press <Alt> + <underlined letter>. Then
use arrow keys to move to the desired position. For example the scientific <Nomenclature>
table can be consulted from <Show> menu. When the program is running, go to the main
menu and press <S> while pressing <Alt> key. This will activate the <Show> menu. Then
press <Downward direction key> to put the cursor to the <Notation> position. Press
<Enter> to activate this sub-menu.
2.3. Data File Management

Data files names should be composed of a maximum of 8 characters a <.dat> extension.
Special characters like *, + ... are not accepted.
A data file is composed of a set of all data necessary for all modules. It means that on data
file can be used for different modules without erasing any data. For example, if a user
<Kevin> saved a data file under the name <KEVIN.DAT> then he can calculate a GRID, a
CYCLONE
... and make a personal project within the same data file <KEVIN.DAT>. Usually any user
has one data file / project.
Structure of data file for the above example:
Kevin.dat :
Data for Particle Module

Solid density ..
Gas density
Gas Viscosity
..
..
Data for Grid Module
Solid density ..
Gas density
Gas Viscosity
..
..
Data for Bubbling Module
Solid density ..
Gas density
Gas Viscosity
..
..
Data for module .
Data for FB Design and Expert Analysis Module
The reason why the user needs to enter the data for each module independently is to make
possible each module to be executed independently. This also help the user to avoid some
common confusions. For example, the gas properties are always not the same in the windbox, in the bubbling suspension or in the cyclone. This is why the data manager conserves
separately the data for each module. To avoid to retype the data, one can use the
Automatic Data Transfer procedure (see the corresponding section 2.3.1 below).
Once the name of a data file is loaded in any module, the program will automatically open
this data file for any new module to avoid retyping the same name. Meanwhile, the user can
operate to open any other data file if desired.
To make a new personal data file, use the <File / Preparing data file> menu. This sub-menu
lets to make a new copy of original ERGUN 6 data file to the user's given name. A new
copy of data file can also be prepared with the <Save As> option of file modification submenu. This option can only be used when the user if modifying an existing data file. In this
case, the program saves the current state of the file to the given name, while the original file
is not modified.
Note to OPERATORS ONLY:
You can modify the source data file ERWIN.$$$ using the text editor available in the
main menu. However, be sure that you keep a copy of original file if any thing goes wrong
with the new one. The interest of modifying this file may be to add some extra lines into the
dp( ), g( )... and any other array parameters (or simply cut some of them.
Choose the TextEditor from the main menu and load ERWIN.$$$ (type the ERWIN.$$$
to load this file). Note that this file contains a number of segments corresponding to each
module of the program. Each segment begins with the name of the corresponding module
and ends with an END statement. Its very important not to change these lines.
What can be changed in the data source Erwin.$$$ file?
Read this paragraph carefully if you want modify any line in this file. First, note that each
column of this file has a maximum number of characters. A data line is composed of for
columns:
Value
unit
name
comment
10 ch
7 ch
7ch
up to 40 characters
______________ Example of file portion: ___________
CYCLONE
0.1132
2600.
0.444
4.45E-5
0.25
m3/s
kg/m3
kg/m3
Ns/m2
m
38E-6
63E-6
88E-6
113E-6
150E-6
200E-6
250E-6
300E-6
400E-6
500E-6
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
gas flow rate per cyclone

density of solid
density of fluid
viscosity
cyclone diameter
<Size distribution section:>
dp(1) mean size cut 1
0.02
0.03
0.10
0.15
0.45
0.15
0.10
0.
0.
0.
g(1)
g(2)
g(3)
g(4)
g(5)
g(6)
g(7)
g(8)
g(9)
g(10)
Qg
Rop
Rof
Dcy
mass
mass
mass
mass
mass
mass
mass
mass
mass
mass
fraction
fraction
fraction
fraction
fraction
fraction
fraction
fraction
fraction
fraction
cut
cut
cut
cut
cut
cut
cut
cut
cut
cut
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
End_CYCLONE-----Do not remove this line-----------
For example, lines can be copied an added to the dp( ) and g ( ) arrays. To add two new cuts
to the size distribution of particles copy and paste two new lines at the end of each dp( ) and
g() sections, as below:
.
.
.
400E-6
500E-6
600E-6
700E-6
m
m
m
m
dp(9)
dp(10)
dp(11)
dp(12)
mean
mean
mean
mean
size
size
size
size
cut
cut
cut
cut
9
10
11
12
g(11)
g(12)
mass fraction cut 11

mass fraction cut 12
and
.
.
0.
0.
End_CYCLONE-----Do not remove this line-----------
Note that if the dp( ) array changes, all corresponding arrays should be changed as well, if
not this will generate an error.
The limitation of the array length depends upon the memory capacity.
Units, Names and Comments have no effect on the program execution and can be
changed if necessary. However, we advise not to change any species unless it is necessary.
Note that no tabulation character can be used in this file. Lines contain as much as
necessary, blank characters and are ended by <RETURN>. After any modification of data
source file, all new files from the Main menu / File item, will have the modified form.
2.3.1. Manual and automatic data transfer during Item by Item Design
An automatic Data Transfer Manager is available in the new version 6.1. Click on the
Auto.Data Transfer check box in the Item Design frame of the main menu before
beginning a series of calculations if you desire to transfer data from each step to another.
This option is also available (can be turn on or off) from Data sheet menu.
Note that all possible data is automatically transferred from one module to another. For
the exceptional case of particle size distribution, the latest size distribution in memory is
transferred. However, if the TDH & Entrainment module is executed just before going to
Cyclone design module, the program transfers the size distribution calculated from
carryover result (fine particles) into cyclone design data file section.
If the automatic data transfer option is not activated, the user can always import data at any
time by clicking on the menu Import Data / Bed Conditions or Import Data / Size
Distribution.
The Data Transfer System is based on the allocation of memory to resident data. In some
cases the user may need to clear the data in memory, i.e. when beginning a new case study.
Instead of closing the application and running again, you can just click File/ Clear
memory menu option of the main window.
2.3.2. Importing data from Database

Gas and solid properties can be imported from the Database and inserted directly into the
data file. To do this the data should prepared and saved in Database environment using one
of the save options : <Winbox conditions> , < Bed conditions> or <Inlet conditions>.
The User is advised to prepare each of the above data before beginning a project. Data
obtained are saved into seperate files and can be directly imported into the data sheet at any
time.
To import data from Database into the data sheet, click on the Import Data / GS properties
from Database while modifying a data file. Corresponding data are automatically inserted
into the data sheet. Please note that the program imports the latest data saved as Bed,
Windbox or Inlet conditions. If necessary, the Database can be called from data sheet menu
by clicking on Call Database submenu.
For more information about How to use the Database, please consult the following
section 2.7: Database.
2.4. Running the program

Before beginning a project, we advise the user to have a rapid look on the way ERGUN6
should be used.
The user needs always to verify step-by-step different items of his (her) project. Let us
imagine that the project is to design a catalytic fluidized bed including heat exchange. In
this case, the reactor may include : <Grid> , <Bubbling> , <Entertainment>, <Cyclones>
and
<Heat Exchanger>...
Any of these items should be studied before beginning to build the concerning project.
This step will help the program to converge. However, note that this step is not necessary
but only recommended, especially for training purposes.
A <Project> consists of a number of items combined together, in order to build a global

model of a reacting or heating fluidized bed. For the case of the above example, in addition
to the modules listed above, the <Project> will contain heat and mass balances. The
program can manage a project by the module Fluid Bed Modeling and Expert Analyse.
2.4.1. Typical application

A fluidized bed can be considered as a set up of several smaller elements. Each of these
elements has a particular behaviour that can be studied separately. However, the final
design requires the different components to work harmoniously, something like a
symphonic orchestra. The final step of design should verify that the elements are actually
working harmoniously, and if necessary make the required adjustments. Design of a
fluidized bed requires (usually) the following items to be considered:
Grid design.
Bubbling properties and bed expansion.
Entrainment of fines from the bed.
Cyclones and filters
Internal heat exchanger (if present).
Its very important to understand the way the program is supposed to be used. To get an idea
about this, please read carefully the case study of tutorial1: Reclamation Foundry Sand .
Note that, in almost all cases, the recommended scheme to study or to design a fluid bed is
to follow the gas / solid stream, that means: to begin with the study of the distributor (grid)
and to finish (if no heat exchanger and no reaction) with cyclones.
We always need to initialise the conversion rate, in the cases where the fluid bed is a
reactor. At the end of the calculation procedure, exposed above, we need to verify if the
initial conversion rate is estimated correctly. If not, some items have to be changed until the
conversion rate is satisfied.
Like conversion rate, heat exchangers are studied at the end of the design (or study)
procedure. We always search for the heat exchange surface (number of tubes to put inside
the bed) to remove or to give the necessary heat, in order to maintain the bed temperature.
If the volume of these tubes is important compared to the volume of the fluid bed, one
needs to revise the problem because, initially this volume is not taken into account...etc.
Once different items composing the fluidized system are studied individually, a GLOBAL
MODEL can be developed using the module Fluid Bed Modeling and Expert Analysis.
This step is especially useful because it helps to verify the compatibility of different items.
2.4.2. Building a Global Model

To build a GLOBAL MODEL activate the Fluid Bed Modeling and Expert Analysis
routine.
This module allows you to build a complete model of a fluidized bed and to check its
operating conditions. Grid pressure drop and configuration, bed expansion data and other
parameters are verified by a simple expert program and the results presented in a text box.
The user should choose a configuration by clicking on the corresponding boxes. The
program generates an ADAPTED DATA FILE, including data for any desired option.
Load the data by clicking on the corresponding button. Modify data if necessary and save
the file. Note that, unlike Item by Item design, where each item has its own data (gas and
solid properties, gas velocity), the data file corresponding to FBMEA module contains
the minimum necessary data to build the global model.
Once the data is checked and modified, click on RUN button. The program proceeds to
Modeling and expert analysis of all items.
To save or print the results click on the "Show results" button, then copy and paste the
desired data to any Windows(c) application.
2.5. Results Files

When you run the program, a part of results is exposed immediately, on the screen, while
all results are stored in a file that can be consulted from <Results / See results file> menu.
<Result File> is generally used to edit reports or to save results in a personal file. Lines of
the <Results File> can be cut and paste to any other WINDOWS application.
The user can also save the result file into a personal name. We advise you to use a <.TXT>
extension recognised by WINDOWS NOTEPAD.
Note that if the data file is saved before Run (the user can always load data without
saving) the portion of the data file used for the calculation is automatically inserted into the
results file.
Also, the Virtual Experts comment are automatically inserted into the results file.
Figure 2 Example of results file with Experts comments
2.6. Operator's privilege

Operator can change some parameters that common users cannot change (this option is only
used for universities to avoid any disorder in the program, especially when its used on a
server). For example, the file path, source code modifications and any other set-up
operations are generally under operator's privilege.
However, personal data file copy and window-type managing can be done by any user and
are not protected.
2.7. Gas/Solid Database

ERGUN 6 has a new powerful Database. This feature helps the user to prepare physical
data concerning some 60 gas and solid species. To use the Database, click on the
Database button on the main menu. Note that its always possible to accede to this menu
even if you are changing data file (a number of windows can be opened simultaneously.
2.7.1. Preparing data with pure gases

Once the Database Menu is activated, just click on the desired gas and solid species. Enter
Temperature and Pressure and activate Run from Database menu. All necessary
properties will be displayed on the active window. Save the resulted data file for the desired
options : Wind-box, Bed or Inlet. This will let you to recall the saved data and to insert it
directly into your data file as explained above (see Data File Management section).
Figure 1 Ergun Powerful but simple use Gas/Solid database.
2.7.2. Preparing data with gases mixtures

Ergun Database can manage gas compositions with up to 10 species. To get the properties
of a gas mixture activate the mode Mixture by checking the button. Then click on any of
gas species on the gas species column (this puts the name of that species into the clip
memory) and then click on the first cell of the gas composition grid. Repeat this operation
for all selected species (up to 10). Now, enter the mole fractions (values between 0 and
1 like 0.5) in the corresponding boxes (mole fraction column). PRESS ENTER after each
value is entered so that the sum of mole fractions appears at the lower part of the column.
Be sure that sum of all mole fractions equals 1 (or very near 1, without exceeding unity)
when finished. Complete for solid choice just by clicking on the desired Solid specie.
Enter the temperature and pressure values and Run the Database. To correct any mistake on
the worksheet, click Refresh in the main File menu. Again, dont forget to save results
for automatic data transfer into the Data File.
2.8. Cut & Paste possibility, printing diagrams

As in any other WINDOWS application, the user can cut and paste any TEXT from a data
file or result file into any other application. This option is always useful to write reports
when a part of data file or result file should be included to the report.
In the new version of Ergun Software, the Diagrams can be copied into the clipboard (or
simply printed) by clicking on the corresponding menu option. You can then paste the
content of the clipboard into some application like Microsoft Word .
Figure 3 Cut and Paste

results and diagrams into
any other Microsoft
Windows application
by simply clicking
Print/ Copy into
clipboard.
2.9. Tutorials
ERGUN 6 is especially useful for engineer training purposes. The program has been used
since many years in a number of universities. Some <Case Studies> are provided for this
purpose.
These examples are explained in the <Tutorial> menu. Note that the operator can add any
other examples. The solution of some of these examples is given within the same text. This
will help some users to learn the "Design Procedure" of a process including fluid beds.
2.10. About ERGUN 6

The program ERGUN 6 is the result of a long research in the field of fluidization and
fluidized beds Modeling.
This resulted in the creation of a user friendly software, particularly well adapted to the
needs of engineers. The ERGUN 6 computer program is fully on-line documented and don't
need any heavy manual to read. This extensive self-documentation makes it possible to
learn in a couple of hours the different possibilities offered by the program environment
and to start performing calculations without any waste of time.
ERGUN 6 program is designed and created by:
Pr. K. Shakourzadeh and his team:
Universit de Technologie de Compigne
Chem. Eng. Dept.
BP 20529 - Compigne - 60205 Cedex
e-mail: shakou@utc.fr
Fax: (33).3.44.23.19.80
Pone:(33).3.44.23.46.28
ERGUN 6 package is distributed by:
Divergent S.A.
R.P. Guy Denielou - 66, av. de Landshut
60200 - Compigne FRANCE
Fax: (33) - 3.44.23.45.60 email: ergun@utc.fr
Chapter 3- Hydrodynamics of Fluidized Systems
3.1. Introduction
This chapter serves to review a certain number of definitions and concepts in order to
emphasise the problems a process engineer may face during the design of an installation. At
the same time it presents the important role played by fluidization, even if the installation is
primarily designed as a reactor or a heat exchanger.
Even though fluidization phenomena have been the object of numerous scientific
investigations, the design of such installations is still highly dependent upon experiments
and industrial experience.
We highly recommend all users of the ERGUN program to be aware of the limits of
applicability of all correlations available in the chemical engineering literature. Actually,
many of these correlations have been obtained in laboratories, without the necessary
validation through industrial applications.
On the other hand, certain types of solids, in particular those belonging to the C group in
the Geldart diagram (see module H.1.1), are hard to fluidize, and do not follow the methods
usually applied to other types of solids.
3.2 Geldart's classification

Geldart's classification is used to define fluidization characteristics of solid
particles. In fluidization the type (B) solids are more common and the easiest to manipulate.
Producing, however, larger bubbles than type (A) solids.
Type (A) solids are usually finer and lighter. They form small bubbles with
excellent contacting properties in reactors ( ex. dp=~60 m and Rop=1600 for the cracking
catalyst).
Type (D) solids have peculiar behaviour and are seldom used. Care must be
exercised if one uses correlations to calculate their fluidization properties, since type D)
solids have been less studied than others.
As a consequence the validity of some results must be verified by comparing results
obtained from different correlations. Class (C) solids are hard to fluidize. Results produced
by the ERGUN program must be used with caution in industrial applications.
s-g
kg/m3
group B
sand-like
group
coarse
group A
aerable
1.0
group C
cohesive
0.1
10
100
1000
Figure 1 - Geldarts classification (after Geldart [5])
3.3 Terminal Velocity

There is a certain number of correlations to calculate the drag coefficient of an isolated
particle. ERGUN program uses Yousffi's correlation to calculate the drag coefficient
according to:
Cd = a + b/Rep + c/Rep2
(1)
The constants a, b et c are defined as function of Rep according to the following table:
Rep <= .1
.1 < Rep <= 1
1 < Rep <= 10
10 < Rep <= 100
100< Rep <= 1E3
1000 < Rep <=5E3
5000 < Rep <=1E4
10000 < Rep
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0
:
3.69 :
1.222:
.6167:
.3644:
.3571:
.4599:
.5191:
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
= 24
:
= 22.73:
= 29.17:
= 46.5 :
= 98.33:
=148.62:
=-490.5:
=-1663 :
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
= 0
=.0903
= -3.9
=-116.7
= -2278
=-47500
=-57.87
=5.42E6
The Reynolds number is defined by:

Rep=dp.Ut.Rof/
(3)
and the terminal velocity combining the variables from the equations above is given by:
CD
laminar
transient
10-2
1.0
turbulent
102
104
Rep
Figure 2 - Variation of the drag coefficient as a function of particle Reynolds number.
Ut =
4 ( p f ). g . d p
3. Cd . f
(4)
The calculation of the terminal velocity using equations (1) to (4) is interactive, since the
Reynolds number is a function of the velocity Ut and vice versa.
3.4. Fluidization Grids

A fluidization grid must perform a uniform gas distribution in the bed. To obtain this the
pressure drop trough the grid must be great enough to reduce fluctuations coming from the
bed weight.
The optimum pressure drop trough the grid is found to be about 0.3 to 0.4 times bed
weight, but some authors propose that any way it must be considered greater than 3400 Pa.
On the other hand, an important pressure drop has some inconvenience like: great utility
cost, difficult grid design, formation of long jets (this is disadvantageous because the grid
region is normally less active than bubbling region).
Many types of grids are used in industry, but most of them can be designed or studied as a
simple "Perforated Plate Distributor" or a "Tuyere Type Distributor". Note that the physical
properties of the fluidization gas, used for grid design proposes, is that of the "Wind Box"
(a common mistake is to use properties corresponding to fluidized bed conditions).
3.4.1 Perforated plate distributors

The important factors are:
1)- diameter of the orifices (to be given as data)
2)- pressure drop [P grid] should be about 0.3 times [P fluid bed] and in any case > or =
3400 Pa (see Clift in Gas Fluidization, edited by Geldart).
Writing Bernouilli's equation for both sides of the plate the following relation is obtained:
Pgrille= 1/2 . rof . { (Uor/CD)2 - Ubv 2}
(1)
where Uor is the velocity at the orifice and Ubv is the velocity in the wind box.
For a plate with a thickness "e" CD is given by the relation:
CD = 0.82 (e/)0.13
(2)
In this equation is the diameter of the orifices.

Considering the factor f, corresponding to the ratio Ubv/Uor, and knowing that Uor>>Ubv,
equations (1) and (2) give:
f=(Ubv/CD).(f Pgrille)0.5
(3)
Knowing the diameter of the orifices (chosen by the designer), we can calculate the spacing
between the orifices (L) :
L = .[3.14/(4f)]0.5 = .8862/(f 0.5)
(4)
Zenz's criterion:
Zenz observed that bubbles formed from grid jets have a mean diameter about two
times the jet penetration length. On the other hand, we know that the equivalent diameter of
a bubble with its cloud if about 1.5 time Db (equivalent spherical diameter). In this case, the
necessary condition to avoid the coalescence of bubbles is:
2 L > 1.5 Lj
(5)
where L is the distance between orifices and Lj the jet penetration length than can be
estimated from the following equations :
a. Zenz's correlation:
0.0144 Lj/ + 1.3 = log10 ( 1.93 g)
(6)
b. Yang & Keairns's correlation:

Lj = 15 dor.{ [(f/(p-f)][Uor2/g.dor]}0.187
(7)
c. Merry's correlation:
Lj = 5.2 dor(f.dor/p.dp).3 [1.3 (Uor2/g.dor).2 -1]
(8)
3.4.2 Tuyere type distributors

The important factors are:
1)- The geometry of the tuyere, the diameter of the base orifices () and the diameter of
the orifices at the jet level.
2)- pressure drop [Pgrid must be around 0.3 times (P fluidized bed) and in any case > ou
= to 3400 Pa [ref. 1]
To obtain the distance between two tuyeres, we write Bernouilli's equation between the
wind box and the jet exit from the tuyere, considering the pressure drop at the inlet
contraction. This way the pressure drop due to the grid can be calculated from the following
(Bernouilli's) equation:
P orifice = .5*f(Um2- Ubv2) + fUm2/4
dynamic loss
contraction loss
Um is the upstream speed Ubv is the speed in the wind box.
P jet = .5*f(Uj2- Um2) + fUj2/4
(1)
(2)
where Uj is the speed of the jet ( outside of the tuyere). Finally, the continuity equation
written between the wind box and the jet exit gives:
2. Um = j . Uj
(3)
where is he diameter of the inlet orifices and j is the diameter of the orifices at the jet
level.
On the other hand: P grille = P jet + P orifice
(4)
Knowing the pressure P grille, the solution equations 1 to 4 gives the unknowns Uj, Um,
P jet and Por.
Perforated plate
Tuyere
dor
e
Figure 3 - Examples of perforated plate and vertical tuyere
3.5. Expansion properties in fluidized beds

Generally, there are two different types of calculations to be carried out and the ERGUN
program considers separately these two possibilities.
In the first approach a study of the behaviour of the fluidized beds according the
different types of solids or operating conditions is performed. In this case, it is often
interesting to compare the results that can be obtained from the different correlations
presented in the literature. This method is limited by the range of applicability of the
proposed correlations (study modules).
In the module dedicated to design fluidized beds a set of coherent equations is
chosen to calculate a fluid bed according to classical methods. These equations are chosen,
as much as possible, among those derived from the continuity equation, but also from well
confirmed empirical correlations.
3.5.1 Calculation of Umf

Wen & Yu :
Remf=(33.7+.0408 Ar)0.5 - 33.7
(1)
Baeyens & Geldart :

1823 Remf1.07 +21.27 Remf2 = Ar
(2)
Babu, Shah & Talwalker:

Remf=(25.252+.0651 Ar)0.5- 25.25
(3)
Goroshko, Rozenbaum & Todes:

Remf=Ar / ( 1400+5.2 Ar )
(4)
Thonglimp, Hiquily & Laguerie:

Remf= (31.62 + .0425 Ar)0.5 - 31.6
(5)
3.5.2. Calculation of
Babu et al. :
H/Hmf=1+14.315(U-Umf)0.738 dp p0.376/(Umf0.937 f0.126)
(6)
(1-)=(1-mf) Hmf/H
(7)
Thonglimp, H. & Laguerie :

=1.57 Rep0..29 Ar(-.19)
(8)
Davidson & Harrison:

=1-(1-b)(1-mf) with b:
(9)
b=(U-Umf)/Ub ; Ub=0.71(g Db)0.5 + U-Umf
(10)
Goroshko :
=(18 Rep +.36 Rep)0.21 / Ar0.21
(11)
Wen & Yu :
=((18 Rep+ 2.7 Rep1.657) / Ar)(1 / 4.7)
(12)
3.5.3 Calculation of b
The Ergun program uses the following continuity equations:
1-b = (1-)/(1-mf)= Hmf/h
or
= (U-U )/U
b
mf b
(13)
(14)
The volumetric fraction of the bed occupied by bubbles is calculated from:

H
b= (1/H)
b.dh
(15)
3.5.4 Calculation of Db
This module is developed for perforated plates and tuyeres distributors. However, the
module can be used for grids made of porous plates using an arbitrary large number of
pores (i.e. n=10000).
Mori & Wen method:

Dbo = 1.38 (g-.2)(Ao * (U - Umf)) .4
Dbm = 1.49 (dt 2 * (U - Umf)) .4
Db = Dbm + (Dbo - Dbm) * EXP(-.3 * h / dt)
where "Ao" is the area of the grid per orifice (1/n).
(16)
(17)
(18)
(19)
Note that in Mori & Wen's equation Dbm is the maximum size of bubbles formed in a
vertical chain. Do not consider its value for maximum bubble size in industrial fluidized
beds. The calculation method for Dbmaxi in an industrial fluidized bed is controversial.
Geldart[ref. 1] thinks that Davidson's equation : Dbmaxi = 2Ut2/g is the safest way to
calculate it. Thus, he proposes the use of dp'=2.7dp for the calculation of Ut.
Darton & al.'s equation:

Db = (.54 (U - Umf).4)((h + 4 Ao.5).8)(g-.2)
where "Ao" is the area of the grid per orifice (1/n).
(20)
Rowe & al.'s equation:

Db = (U - Umf).5 (h + z).75 (g-.25)
where z0 is a constant, function of the grid type.
(21)
3.5.5. Fluidized bed design :

This module follows a "pragmatic" approach and uses continuity equations reducing the
system to two phases with flow rates U-Umf for the bubble phase and Umf for the emulsion
phase.
The other equations used to complete the calculation are the following:
-Wen & Yu's for the minimum fluidization velocity;
-Mori & Wen's for the calculation of mean Db;
-Davidson's to calculate the maximum diameter of bubbles;
The calculation procedure is based on the size of the bubbles in the bed given by the
average of those obtained from Darton's and Mori & Wen's equations.
The porosity of the bed is calculated from the following continuity equation:
U-Umf
b =
(21)
UB + (U-Umf)
where Umf and UB are determined by the equations of Wen & Yu and Davidson &
Harrison.
The integration of b along the height of the bed gives its average value:
= 1- (1-b)(1-mf)
(22)
h (1-) = Hmf (1-mf)
(23)
The calculation is interactive since the mean value of b is a function of 'h' .
-P/L (the normalised pressure drop): Ergun's equation

-a (interfacial area bubble/emulsion): a=6.b/Db
-tb (average "residence time" of gas in the bed):
tb = H/(Ub+U-Umf)
(24)
3.6. Werthers Bubbling and Bed Expansion Model

Werther & al. (Ref. 12 to 15) proposed a set f interesting correlations for the calculation of
bubble size and bed voidage. The method advantageously takes in account the Geldarts
classification of particles. Diverse correlations are proposed for beds with class D, B
and A (no correlation for the class C).
Note that Werthers model has some simplified versions (especially that published in for
chemical reactors) that may be a source of confusion. The basic equation proposed by
Werther in 1978 (and improved afterward) is :
dv = dv [1+0.272(U-Umf)]1/3[1+0.0684(h h)]1.21
(25)
Where dv is the base bubble size and h the height where bubbles appear. Note that the
equation (25) is written in cgs old units. In his further publications, Werther used this
base equation to drive his bubbling model with three parameters dv, and are functions
of particle class :
d v = d ov [1 + 27( U U mf )] (1 + 6.84h )1.2
(26)
U b = (U - U mf) + 0.71 g d v
(27)
U U mf
Ub
, and d ov Solid of Class A
(28)
1/ 3
b =
, and d ov Solid of Class B

, and d ov Solid of Class D
Note that the particles of class D generally make big bubbles with irregular form (see one
of the videos provided with Ergun Software). These big bubbles may be broken into smaller
ones when a heat exchanger bundle with horizontal tubes occupies the bed section (see
Heat Exchange options). This surely depends on the size of bubbles and the distance
between tubes (horizontal pitch). Werther proposed another method especially developed
to take in consideration the behaviour of these irregular bubbles and the effect of heat
exchanger bundle. Ergun Software provides features for both common Werther model
(equations given above) and that for the Heat Exchanger Effect.
For more information, please refer to the Werthers publication (ref. 12 to 15).
3.7. TDH and Entrainment

The entrainment of solids on top of fluidized beds is a phenomenon difficult to model. The
correlations proposed by different researchers do not generally agree and the proposed
models are usually based on assumptions that have not been validated in the operating
conditions of industrial fluidized beds.
Nevertheless, the study of elutriation allows us (even if it is inaccurate) to obtain a
certain number of information about the two important aspects of fluidized beds:
1)-TDH (Transport Disengagement Height) is the height above which the flow and size
distribution of the solids does not vary any more. This is the height for the placement of
cyclones.
2)-The placement of cyclones (TDH) and their sizing according to the size distribution of
the solids above the TDH.
The solid mass flow (and as consequence their size distribution) above the TDH can be
calculated from the equation below:
EiH= Ei + (Ei-Ei). exp(-Z/Z*)
(1)
the mass flux Ei (at the bed surface) is given later by Wen & Chen's equation. The Z*
coefficient must be such that at Z=TDH -> EiH=~Ei*
thus
Z*=~TDH/5
(2)
In practice, equations (1) and (2) are not useful. We only need to calculate the size
distribution of the solid phase above the TDH.
The Ei fluxes are proportional to the solid mass fraction of size "i" present in the bed:
Ei= Ki.xi ; Ki et Ei in kg/s.m2
(3)
The values of Ki are calculated by four methods:
1)- Geldart et al.
Ki/U.f = 23.7 exp(-5.4 Ut/U)
(4)
2)- Tanaka & al.

0.5
Ki= 4.6E-2 [(U-Ut)/g.dpi]
.( p /f -1)
0.725
Rep
1.15
[(U-Ut)/Ut]0.1
3)- Wen & Chen

Ki=Rop(1-i)(U-Ut)
i={1+(U-Ut)2)/2.g.Dt}(-1/4.7)
if Dt.f (U-Ut) d pi / = 2.38
(.p/dpi2)(/f)2.5 = 5.17 Dt2.[f (U-Ut)dpi]-1.5
if Dt.f(U-Ut) dpi / > 2.38
(.p/dpi2)(/f)2.5 = 12.3 Dt .[f (U-Ut)dpi]-2.5
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
Note that if U< Ut the particles will not be ejected from the fluidized bed and that in this
case Kiis equal zero.
Among the different methods for the calculation of TDH we use the following:
1)- Wen & Chen's
TDH(i)= (1/ai).Ln[(E-Ki)/.01 Ki], where ai 1/m
and
E= 3.07E-9 A.Dbs.[f3.5 g.5 (U-Umf)2.5]/2.5
(12)
(13)
A is the diameter of the bed and Dbs is the size of the bubbles at the surface of the bed.
Note: do not use this correlation for fluid beds with a diameter larger than 1 m (if
you do consider Dt=1 m).
2)- Horio & al.
TDH = 4.47 Dbs0.5
(14)
3)- Amitin & al.

TDH = 0.85 U1.2 (7.33 -1.2 logU)
(15)
Height of the SPLASH zone (TDH of the large particles):

4)- Soroko & al.
TDH = 1200 Hmf.Rep1.55 Ar-1.1
conditions : 15< Rep < 300
(16)
19.5< Ar < 6.5E5

(Developed for Hmf < 0.5 m only)
Note that many of these equations give always unreliable results! If the comparison
of results obtained by different equations is not satisfactory, we can always use a
simple (industrial pragmatic) method based on the Ut of particles. In this method,
one considers that all particles having their Ut less than the operating gas velocity,
will leave the bed. In this case, we only consider the size distribution of solids in bed
with Ut<U. Let us consider the example below for a operating velocity of U=0.3
m/s:
dp(i), m
20E-6
50E-6
100E-6
160E-6
Ut,m/s
0.20
0.25
0.5
1.2
gbed(i), %
10
20
50
20
gelut(i), %
33.3
66.6
-----------
In this example, only particles of size 50 microns or less can leave the bed. There is 10% of
fines and 20% of coarser particles. That mean 1/3 (33%) of size 1 and 2/3 (66%) of size 2.
Please note that this method is only a rough estimation of solid size distribution above
TDH. The real size distribution of particles is finer than what we get with this method.
3.7. Cyclones
3.7.1. Standard Cyclones
Cyclones are always an essential part of fluid beds. Among the diverse types of cyclones
used in the industry, standard cyclones are those used currently for common fluid beds. A
standard cyclone is designed from a given well known proportions as shown in the figure
below:
Dc/2
Dc/2
2 Dc
Dc
Dc/4
Dc/2
2 Dc
Side View
Top View
Figure 4 Standard cyclone proportions

We note for instance the area of the inlet opening window (Dc/8) is a direct function of the
diameter of the cyclone (Dc). The efficiency of a standard cyclone is a direct function of the
inlet gas velocity. Standard cyclones with about 15 m/s inlet velocity give always good
efficiencies. However, one can decide to reduce this velocity to avoid erosion or to increase
it (for smooth particles) to get better efficiencies. The inlet velocity of secondary cyclones
is always higher (about 25 m/s) because of its low loading.
3.7.2. Users Defined Cyclones

Users defined cyclones may have any desired proportions. If you are not familiar with
Cyclone Design problems, you would better not to choose this option. Actually, if the
cyclone is not well designed for the given task (for instance, highly loaded cyclones or
special type of particles), then the system would produce poor efficiency. To design a User
defined cyclone simply click on the corresponding option box of the Cyclones menu.
Figure 5 Users defined cyclones may have any desired proportions. They are mostly
used for highly loaded flows.
3.7.3. Cyclone Time of Flight Model

The Time of Flight concept is the old (but yet valuable) theory of cyclone efficiency
calculation. It was mainly worked by Zenz. To calculate the efficiency of a cyclone in terms
of particle size range, Zenz proposed that for a particle to be captured in the lower part of
the cyclone the time of flight from its initial position to the wall should be equal to that
from the top to the bottom.
The velocity component toward the wall is given by Stokes' law with the gravity
acceleration replaced by the centrifugal acceleration :
Up = (2U2/Dc).dp.(p-f)/(18.)
(1)
Considering that the gas circulation velocity in the cyclone is the same as the inlet velocity,
we can define the residence time of the gas (approximately equal to particle residence time)
and write that:
Tp= L/Up
(2)
Tg= .Dc.Ns/Up
(3)
where L represents the width of the inlet window (Dc/4 for Zenz's cyclone) and Ns
represents the number of turns performed by the particles before exiting the cyclone.
Entrance Velocity, m/s

Number of turns (Ns)
5
1.7
10
3
15
4.5
20
5.7
In this case the size of particles just touching the wall (at the bottom of the cyclone) can
be calculated from the next equations:
9..L
Ns .U.(p f )
dp50 =
(5)
Zenz considered that only half of the particles of size dp min are actually recovered. Thus
the efficiency of the cyclone for particles of size dp50 would be equal to 50%. For the other
cut sizes efficiencies are calculated from an efficiency diagram. This diagram gives the
efficiency as a function of the ratio dp/dp50. Note that the calculations performed here are
only valid for low charged flows only (generally less than 1%). The efficiencies calculated
must be corrected for cyclones loaded with particles.
Figure 6 In the Time of Flight theory, particles of size dp50 arriving at the left hand
side would have 50% chance of capture (efficiency for these particles would be 0.5)
Cyclone Efficiency
Std. Cyclones
1.00
Efficency, -
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
dp/dp50, -
Figure 7 Efficiency curve for standard cyclones
3.7.4. Cyclone Equilibrium Orbit Model
RX
VCS
V 2
mP CS
RX
Wall
region
Central
region
Control
Surface
(CS)
Equilibrium
Orbit
drag
3d P .VrCS
Equilibrium
Orbit
This model has been initially proposed by Barth (ref. 3) and then modified and improved
by Muschelknautz & al. (ref.4). The base idea of the model is that a imaginary cylinder
exists under the vortex finder (Rx) region where particles are in equilibrium between
centrifugal forces and the gas/solid drag forces. The centrifugal forces are expressed in
terms of a angular velocity (applying Stocks law). To define the drag forces, Barth
considers that the gas flow-rate is distributed uniformly over the lateral surface of the above
cylinder. This equality lets calculate the particle cut size dp50 in a quite similar equation
compared to the time of flight model :
(6)
Where the radial and angular velocities VrCS and VCS are obtained from a series of
equations, mainly the momentum balances of the entering and internal currents. Note that
Barths model is a kind of scientific approach to the cyclone understanding behaviour. It
has been tested over some laboratory smooth steel wall cyclones (with no back mixing)
and is probably an optimist model.
3.7.5. Cyclone Pressure drop calculation

The pressure drop is one of the important characteristics of a cyclone (any pressure drop
costs). The basic Bernoullis equation over the gas steam through the cyclone can be
written as follows:
Pin + Vin = Pout + Vout + Plost

2
2
Plost VLocal
(7)
(8)
The difference between Pin and Pout is the cyclone pressure drop. Among a number of
diverse methods for the estimation of the pressure drop, the equations of Barth (Core
Friction), Stairmand (Dissipative) and Shephered and Lappel (Empirical) are the most
reliable.
The pressure drop is always expressed in a simple equation based on the entrance Euler
number :
P =
1
f U in2 E in
2
(9)
Sherphered and Lappel expressed the Euler number as:

Euin = 16 (a.b)/(Dcy2)
(10)
Where a and b are the width and the height of the entrance window and Dcy the vortex
finder diameter. Barth proposed a much more complicated expression using the internal
velocities calculated from his model. Stairmand & al. proposed an equation similar to that
of Shephered and Lappel. They advantageously included the wall friction and exit effect
dissipations into their correlation.
For detailed information about these models we invite the user to consult the corresponding
references given at the end of this chapter.
3.8. List of symbols:

a
CD
D
Db
dp
dp(i)
dpm
dt
dt(i)
e
Eo
Ei
f(R)
G(R)
Go
G1
G2
Gb
Ge
Gh
H
H
Hi
Hmf
Ki
nm
n
Rep
TDHi
U
U
Ub
Uj
Umf
Uor
Upis
Ut
VrCS
VCS
interfacial area bubble-suspension m/m3

particle drag coefficient
diameter of cyclone
average bubble size m
average particle diameter m
particle diameter per size distribution band microns.
mean particle diameter m
bed diameter
sieving aperture m
plate thickness m
solid flux at the bed surface kg/m s.
Elutriation rate per cut of solid kg/m s
size distribution function 1/m
size distribution in % (100.f(R).dr) %
size distribution at the bed inlet %
size distribution of solids from bed %
size distribution of solids above the TDH ( %
size distribution of under-flow (for cyclones) %
size distribution of solids entered (for cyclones)%
size distribution of solids in exit (for cyclones)%
fluid bed operating height m
fluid bed height at onset of bubbling m
fluid bed initial height m
fluid bed height at minimum fluidization m
Elutriation constant for particles in size range i
number of solid phase cuts
number of orifices per sq. m of grid area
particle Reynolds number.
height above which Ei is constant m
operating speed m/s
velocity for incipient bubbling m/s
velocity of rising bubbles m/s
jet velocity in tuyere m/s
minimum fluidization velocity m/s
orifice velocity m/s
plug solid phase velocity m/s
free fall terminal velocity m/s
radial velocity of particles in cyclone m/s
angular velocity of particles in cyclone m/s
Ws0
Ws1
WS2
inlet solid mass flow kg/s

solid mass under-flow kg/s
solid mass top-flow kg/s
Pag
pressure drop due to gas acceleration Pa
Pas
Pgw
Psw
Pg
Ps
pressure drop due to the solid acceleration Pa

pressure drop due to friction gas/walls Pa
pressure drop due to friction solid/walls Pa
pressure drop due to the weight of gas Pa
pressure drop due to the weight of solids Pa
P/L
pressure drop per unit height of the bed Pa
P/L)mf pressure drop at min. fluidization velocity Pa
i
mf
p
f
p
bed operating porosity

porosity at the onset of bubbling
volumetric fraction occupied by the bubbles
initial porosity of the bed
porosity at minimum fluidization
porosity of plug flow
diameter of grid orifices m
diameter of the jets m
viscosity of the fluid Ns/m
fluid density kg/m3
solid density kg/m3
3.9. References
3.9.1. ref. Bed Expansion
1)- Davidson J.F., Harrison D., "Fluidized particles", Cambridge Univ. Press, 1969
2)- Wen C.Y., Yu Y.H., Chem. Eng. Prog. Sym. Ser., vol.62, p100, 1966
3) - Werther J., 2nd Eng. Foundation Conferance on Fluidization, p7-12, 1978
4) - Hilligardt K., Werther J., Chem. Eng. Technol. 10, p272-280, 1987
5) - Werther J., Bellgardt D., Groenewald H. and Hilligardt K., Int. Conf. Fluid Bed
Combustion, Boston, p515-522, 1987
6) - Hilligardt K., Werther J., Ger. Chem. Eng., 9, p215-221, 19861)- Babu S.P., Shah B.,
Talwalker A., AIChE Sym. Ser. vol.74, p176,1978
7)- Goroshko V.D.,Rozenbaum R.B., Todes O.M., in: " Hydrodynamics and heat transfer in
fluidized beds",
M.I.T. Press. Cambridge,MA/ p71, 1966
8)- Thonglimp V., Hiquily N., Laguerie C., Powder Tech.,no38, p233, 1984
9) - Doichev K., Akhmakof N.S., Chem.Eng.Sci., vol.34, 1979

10) - Baeyens J., Geldart D., Fluidization & its Applications, conf.,Toulouse, 1973
11) - Grewal N.S., Saxena S.C., Powder Tech. no26, p229, 1980
12)- Saxena S.C., Mathur A., Zhang Z.F., AIChE Journal, vol.33, no3, p500, 1987
3.9.2. ref. Grids

1)- Agarwal J.C., Davis W.L., King D.T., Chem.Eng.Prog., vol.58, p.85, Nov. 1962
2)- Geldart D.,/Fluidization Technology/ Ed. John Wiley & Sons, 1986
3)- Quershi A.E., Creasy D.E., Powder Tech., vol.22, p119, 1979
3.9.3. ref. Cyclone

1)- Zenz F.A., 'Cyclone separators' Manual Disposal of Refinery, Wastes, Edt. API 1975
2)- Calculo y Diseno de Ciclones, J. Casa, J.M. Martinez-Benet, Ingeniera Quimica, Feb.
1989
3) Barth W., Berechnung und Auslegung von Zyklonabscheidern auf Grund neuerer
Unterscuhngen, Brennstoff-Wrme-Kraft 8, Heft 1, 1956
4) - Muschelknautz E., Trefz M., Second World Congress on Particle, Technology, Kyoto,
Japan, p.52, Sep. 1990
3.9.4. ref. TDH

1)- Wen C.Y., Chen L.H., AIChE Journal vol.28, no1, p117, 1982
2)- Briens C.L., Bergougnou M.A.,Baron T., Powder Tech., no54, p 183, 1988
3)- Baron T., Briens C.L., Bergougnou M.A.,The Canadian Jounal of Chem. Eng., vol.66,
Oct.1988
4)- Cheremisinoff N.P. , Cheremisinoff P.N., Fluidization andIndustrial Applications
Chapter 32, p 1042, 1988
5)- Geldart D., Bayaens J., Pope D.J.,Van de Wijer P., PowderTech., vol.30, p195, 1981
6)- Tanaka L., Shinohara H., Int. Chem. Eng., vol.18, no2,
p276, 1978
7)- Zenz F.A., Weil N.A., AIChE , vol.4, p472, 1958
Chapter 4- Fluidized Bed Reactors

Fluidized bed reactors present a certain number of hydrodynamic and inter-phase
contact characteristics which make them potentially attractive in gas-solid reactions or
heterogeneous catalytic reactions.
Among the recognised advantages are the possibility of operating the system as
open or closed, the ability to handle large solids mass flows, the advantage of an excellent
mixing of solids and as a consequence radial and axial homogenisation and thus a good
temperature control. On the other hand the physical characteristics of catalyst whose
average size lies between 50 and 100 microns with large specific surfaces, are compatible
with fluidization and contacting conditions. Even though, the gasification of coal back in
1926 was the first industrial application of fluidization, it was only after 1940, with the
appearance of the first cracking catalytic reactors, that the application of this technology
soared. There are numerous techniques to take into account the specific characteristics of a
reaction and the constraints of different processes. Because of the large number of variables
the design, extrapolation or even unit operations, must be based on experience and as such
not without risk. Depending on the superficial gas velocity the flow of a gas through a layer
of solid particles gives origin to different regimes of fluidization (figure 1).
Homogeneous fluidization is rarely observed in gas-solid systems. After the gas reaches the
minimum fluidization velocity, Umf, the jets issuing from the distributor plate give origin
to bubbles. During their growing towards the free surface of the bed the bubbles not only
increase in size and coalesce but also are divided. The combination of these different
motions gives rise to a vigorous agitation, which in part is responsible for the peculiar
properties of fluidized beds.
As the bubbles burst at the surface some of the particles are entrained into the upper part of
the bed. As the velocity of fluidization is increased the size of the bubbles increases, as well
as the entrainment, giving origin to the operating regimes depicted in figure 1.
The different regimes can be distinguished through a number of experimental criteria given
in the literature. For example, the bubbling bed is characterised by a linear variation of
pressure as a function of height, with irregular fluctuations of a few Hz.
To model correctly and predict the performance of a reactor it is important to know in

which of the main regimes it will operate. Here our attention is limited to those bubbling
beds most commonly found in industrial applications.
4.1. Classification of fluidized bed reactors:

The chemical reactions found in fluidized beds are divided into two groups:
- catalytic reactions;
- reactions with consumable solids.
The reactions with consumable solids are naturally more complicated to model
because they present not only a change in the gas composition, but also in the size
distribution of the solid (in some cases) or of its density (in other cases).
Desengaging zone over

The bed surface
Bubble phase
Emulsion phase
Grid region
Figure 2 - Different region of a bubbling bed reactor
Figure 2 presents a scheme representative of most fluidized bed reactors. Several zones can
be observed:
1) - The jet region right on top of the distributor plate, with a complicated hydrodynamic
behaviour.
2)- The bed core zone has three phases: bubbles, clouds and emulsions, with a transfer of
reactive mass from bubbles -> clouds -> emulsions and a transfer of product mass in the
opposite sense.
3)- The disengagement zone on top of the bed surface where particles are thrown by the
eruption of the bubbles. Figure 3 presents the different models used for dimensioning
industrial reactors.
Due to the complexity of the hydrodynamic phenomena in the jet zone as well as
in the disengagement zone, models tend to be simple and few. On the other hand there is a
large number of models to calculate conversion rates in the bubbling zone of the bed.
Among the simpler models we can mention those by Orcutt & Davidson and Grace
et al. They consider only two phases constituted in part by bubbles and in part by the
suspension solid/gas. Another model was proposed by Kato & Wen, it assumes a chain of
bubbles to be similar to "n" reactors in series. So far this model has not been verified in
industrial applications.
Kunii & Levenspiel proposed a model relatively simple where they consider the
three phases: bubbles, clouds and emulsion and assume that all the fluid passes through the
"bubble phase". This model has been the object of controversy during certain time, but
investigations by Grace and other researchers demonstrated that, among existing models,
the one by Kunii & Levenspiel gives the best results, probably because it adapts better to
different situations.
Bubble
emulsion
U-Umf
Bubble
cloud
emulsio
n
Bubble
emulsion
U
Umf
Simple two phase

model
Three phase model
two phase + reactant

profile
Figure 3 Different types of model for Fluid Bed Reactors

Werther recently proposed a model based on studies of bed expansion and bubble
size distribution. By analogy with gas-liquid reactors the model uses known mass transfer
phenomena with concentration profiles around the bubbles. This seems to be a promising
model, however, it has the inconvenient of being complicated, particularly when the
reaction is not first order.
The comparison of these different models has been the object of many
investigations and publications. These comparisons allow general conclusions to be drawn
regarding the choice of models to be used according to the type of reaction and operating
conditions favourable to one or another phenomenon.
Generally speaking the conversion of a reactant in a fluidized bed can be limited by two
phenomena: on one hand the mass transfer between the bubble, cloud and emulsion phases,
and on the other hand the chemical conversion rate ( whose speed is proportional to the
amount of available catalyst). If we consider two dimensionless numbers, namely, Nr
(reaction number) and Nk (number of mass transfer units) fluidized bed chemical reactions
can be classified in three categories depending on the relative values of K' and Nk:
- Slow reactions (K'<<Nk): the mass transfer is not the dominant phenomenon and the
hydrodynamic model used does not have much importance, since it is the chemical kinetic
that controls the performance.
- Very fast reactions (K'>>Nk: most of the chemical reaction occurs at the bubble-emulsion
interface (the cloud region). The Werther model is the best suited for this case, since it
takes into account the concentration profile around the bubbles. Nevertheless, the jet region
just above the distributor plate has an important role in this type of reaction, it is thus
desirable to combine the model for the bubbling portion with a model that takes into
account the effect of the jets ( such a model is presente further down in this text).
- Intermediary reactions ( K' and Nk are comparable): the chemical reaction and the transfer
of mass together constitute the limiting steps for the conversion. The Kunii & Levenspiel
model can be applied in this case.
G a s s o lid r e a c tio n
P r e p a r a ti o n o f k i n e t i c s
S h r in k i n g c o r e
e a c tio n w ith n o
c h a n g e in p a r ti c l e
siz e
R ea c tio n s w ith
c h a n g e in
p a r tic le s iz e
R T D based m od el
P o p u la ti o n b a la n c e
typ e m o d e l
Figure 4 Decision diagram for gas /solid reaction models
Figure 4 presents a decision diagram for choosing the most suitable model as a first
approximation. It is evident that the simpler models (such as Orcutt's) produce large errors.
Nevertheless, they offer two essential advantages:
1)- their simplicity allows rough results to be obtained quickly and also to perform a simple
analysis.
2)- they do not require any specific development for reactions with order different from
one.
It is advised to use either Kunii and Levenspiel's or Werther's models. However,
these models require writing and solving a more complex set of equations (model and
kinetics are more complex).
We will present below the models of Orcutt, Kunii-Levenspiel and Werther.

Together they cover the different possible reaction systems and are complementary from
the simplifying assumptions point of view
4.2. Werther's model

The Werther model is based on a summation of results presented in his publications in the
field of fluidized beds. It is primarily concerned with the concentration profile ( of reactive
material ) around the bubbles and the role of the fluidization gas and distributor plate.
Werther assumes a height h*, below which the size of bubbles does not change. In the
absence of better data this important factor can be assumed to be around one metre as
recommended by Werther.
The assumptions considered by Werther are:
1)- U >> Umf so the flow of gas through the emulsion is negligible.
2)- The flow of gas in the bubbles is considered to be a plug flow.
3)- The coefficient of mass transfer and the interfacial area between bubble and emulsion
are considered independent of the height in the bed.
emulsion
Cb
Bubble
film
Ce
Figure 5 Werther's gas-liquid concept applied to Fluid Bed Reactors
Werther's model equations are based on the conservation of mass in the bubble,
cloud and emulsion phases. These equations are relatively complicated, but for a first order
reaction they can be simplified to give:
Mass balance on the gas phase:
-(U-Umf) A (dCAb/dz) +D(dCAn/dy y=0) a.A.dz=0
transfer by +
convection
(1)
transfer = consumption
by diffusion
Mass balance on the clouds:

This equation is based on an element of cloud volume around bubbles:
D.d CAn/dy a.dy - kr CAn a dy
transfer by + reaction in
diffusion
clouds
=0
(2)
=0
Mass balance on the suspension:

-D.(dCAn/dy y=d).a A dz - kr CAe A dz [1-b-ad]=0
(3)
Cloud-Suspension transfer - conversion = 0

Note that the chemical reaction constant used by Werther is defined per unit volume of
catalyst. To solve this set of equations, Werther uses the next boundary conditions :
constant Ce ;
z=0 -> CAb = CA
y=0 -> CAn = CAb
y=d -> CAn = CAe
(4)
(5)
(6)
The solution of above equations gives the concentration profile through the fluidized bed.
For a simple first order reaction the conversion rate can be obtained by the following
equation :
1 - XA = exp -
(1/ -1).Ha+tanh(Ha)
(1/ -1).Ha.tanh(Ha)+1
. Ha . Nk
(7)
The factor Ha is the Hatta number defined as for gas-liquid reactors by:
Ha=(Kr.D).5/K
(8)
The factor corresponds to the film-suspension volumetric ratio:

=a.(D/K)/(1-b)
(9)
The dimensionless number Nk represents the importance of the mass transfer in the whole
reactor:
Nk=K.a.H/(U-Umf).
(10)
Werther's model allows other variables of the system such as K, a, and b to be

estimated. This naturally is its strong point when compared with other models, such as
Kunii-Levenspiel's for example, where one must use correlations developed by other
researchers to calculate them.
4.3. Kunii & Levenspiel's

Kunii & Levenspiel's model is one of the simplest models based on the bubbling properties.
According to this model the rise velocity of an isolated bubble, Ub, is a function of its
dimension Db as given by the simple relations:
Ub' = c . (9.81 db) 0.5
(1)
c = .711 for free bubbles

Ub = Ub' + (U-Umf)
(2)
Ub' is the rise velocity of an isolated bubble and Ub is the velocity of a bubble in a
bubbling bed. The mass transfer constants between the "bubble", "cloud" and "emulsion"
phases ( these media are called "phases" by convention), are determined from an estimate
of the average size of the bubbles in the bed using Werther's method (see the
Hydrodynamics module H.3.1.4 for the calculation of the average db and b).
Figure 6 Kunii and Levenspiel's three phases concept
The Davidson & Harrison relation is used to determine the bubble-cloud constant:
Kbn = 4.5 (Umf/db)+5.85 (D.5) (g 0.25)(db-1.25)
(3)
The mass transfer constant cloud-emulsion is obtained from Higbie's relation:

Kne = 6.78 (mf D Ub/db3)
0.5
(4)
This is exactly the point for which frequently the Kunii & Levenspiel's model is criticised,
namely, the use in a more or less arbitrary fashion of correlations to define two of the most
important variables of the system.
Cloud
Kne
Bubble
Kbn
Emulsion
negligible
Figure 6 Kuniis model with Bubble, Cloud and Emulsion phases
The assumptions of the model are:

1)- U>>Umf ( the flow of gas through the emulsion phase is negligible).
2)- The solid and gas phases are perfectly mixed in the emulsion phase.
Finally, the mass conservation of the phases "bubble" and "cloud" gives:
1-XA = exp ( -KT . L/U1b)
with KT :
(5)
KT = b .Kr +
1
1 / K bn +
(6)
1
n .Kr +
1
1 / K ne + 1 / e . K r
The factors b , n et e correspond respectively to the volumetric ratios of catalyst in the

"bubble", "cloud" and "emulsion" phases:
b =~ 0.003
(7)
n = (1-mf)
3 Umf/mf
Ub - Umf/mf
b + n + e = (1-mf)/b
(8)
(9)
The value of depends of the type of catalyst and seems in general to vary between .1 and
.33.
4.4. Orcutt's model

Before beginning this part, please note that this model is no more used by
Ergun5.0 for catalytic reactions. However, as its concept is used in Gas-Solid Fluid Bed
Reactors, we present the catalytic reaction model here.
This model considers two phases, namely, bubbles and emulsion, with a piston flow in the
bubble phase and a homogeneous mixture within the emulsion phase. The gaseous flux that
moves through the bubbles corresponds to the fluid in excess of the minimum fluidization
requirements. This assumption is used in almost all models and it is justified by the fact that
the local porosity of the suspension fluid-solid does not change when the feeding flux is
increased. On the other hand we assume that the amount of catalyst contained in the bubble
phase is negligible and as a consequence there is no reaction in this phase.
The mass conservation of the bubble phase can thus be written as:
(U-Umf).dCAb = Kg.(CAe - CAb).ab.b.dZ
The total mass conservation for the emulsion phase gives:
(1)
(U-Umf).(CAo-CAe)+
Kg.(CAb-CAe).ab.b.dZ =
(1-)H.Kr.CAen
(2)
The simultaneous solution of equations (1) and (2) gives the concentration profiles of
reactant A, in both the bubble and emulsion phases, so the average concentration at the free
surface of the bed can be calculated from:
CAf = .CAb Z=H + (1-).CAe
(3)
with = (U-Umf)/U
For a first order reaction the concentration CAf is obtained from:
1 - .exp(-Nk) + .K'.exp(-Nk)
(4)
CAf/CA =
1 - .exp(-Nk) + K'
where the parameters Nk and K' represent respectively the numbers of 'mass transfer units'
and 'reaction number':
Nk = Kg.ab.b.H/(U)
K'= Kr.Hmf(1-mf).CA(n-1)/U
(5)
Kg = 0.75 Umf + 0.975 g0.25 D0.5/(Db0.25)
(7)
(6)
Well mixed emulsion

Plug flow
phase
Bubble
phase
Nowadays there are other more accurate correlation for the calculation of the mass transfer
constant, however this program uses the original equation proposed by Orcutt and
Davidson.
For Db (mean diameter of the bubbles) Werther's method or the average between
Umf Darton's
U-Umf
and Mori's correlations is used.
Figure 7 - Orcutt and Davidsons two phases model
The interest of this extremely simple model is found in Modeling reactions of order
different from one.
4.5. Reactions with consumable solids:

To design a system with consumable solids, it is necessary to establish two series
of mass balances: a mass balance of the gaseous phase and a mass balance for the solid
phase. These two sets of mass balance equations are interdependent and require the use of
iterative methods, since the conversion of solid particles depends on the concentration of
the reactive gas in the emulsion phase and vice versa.
Considering the simplest particles residence time distribution (uniformly
distributed), it is observed that Orcutt's model is the most convenient to use for calculating
the gas consumption. Actually, considering that the emulsion phase is perfectly mixed, all
particles are transformed under the same conditions of reactive gas concentration.
4.5.1. Solid phase mass balance

4.5.1.1. NSC (No Size Change)
Let us consider the case where all particles fed into the system have the same size
(or the mean size is considered). If the conversion rate of a single particle is defined by the
relation:
1-Xpi = f(dpi,t)
(1)
and if the particle residence time distribution principle is applied, the conversion rate of dpi
size particles is calculated as:
1- Xi
(1-Xpi). Ei(t) .dt
(2)
where Ei(t) represents the particle residence time distribution function in a stirred system,
and is defined by:
Ei(t) = (1/ti).exp(-t/ti)
(3)
"ti" represents the average residence time of dpi size particles. For fluidized beds with a
certain elutriation, the average particle residence time for particles with initial diameter dpi
can be obtained from:
ti = M/{W1+Ki.A}
(4)
where Ki* is the elutriation constant of particles of size 'i'.

For systems where the feed particles have a broad size distribution, the global
conversion rate can be defined by:
n
X =
(5)
Xi.Gi
i =1
4.5.1.2. RWCS ( Reactions With Change in Size)

Equations (1) to (5) cannot be applied to the case of consumable solids with
changing size, since the residence times depends on the size distribution.
In this case the calculations are more complicated and require long iterations. The
calculation procedure is based on a population mass balance (see Kunii & Levenspiel's
book). Usually, the resulting equations cannot be solved analytically. The mass balance can
be written as:
Wso.Fo(R).dR - Ws1.F1(R).dR - M. K(R).F1(R).dR M.d/dR [ Keff.F1(R)].dR + 3.M.keff.F1(R).dR/R = 0
(1)b
with:
Wso-Ws1-Ws2= 3.M. +
[ F1(R).Keff/R ].dR
(2)b
Equation (2)b represents the solid global mass balance. The function F1(R), calculated by
solving equation (1)b, must satisfy the following integral :
F1(R).dR = 1.0
(3)b
The elutriation flux is thus defined by :

Ws2(R)=K(R).F1(R).M
(4)b
Note that the elutriation constant in equations (1)b and (4)b refers to the whole bed and is
expressed in s-1.
Finally, the global solid conversion rate can be calculated as the difference between the
inlet and outlet flow rates:
X = (Wso - Ws1 - Ws2) / Wso
(5)b
E(t), s-1
Time, s
F( R), m-1
R, m
Figure 8 - Comparison of differential presentation of Resident Time Distribution and

Function of Size Distribution
2. Fluid mass balance :
According to Orcutt's (3) model the mass balance for the fluid phase is analogous
to those used in catalytic reaction models. For a first order reaction, according to Orcutt's
model we have :
1 - .exp(Nk)
CAe/CAo =
1 - .exp(-Nk) + K'
(6)
where
7)
Nk = Kg.a.b.H/(U)
Kg = 0.75 Umf + 0.975 g0.25 D0.5/(Db0.25) (8)
K': must be obtained by iteration from the stoechiometric equation for the
consumption of the solid and fluid phases (as we will see later).
The estimation of the concentration CAe (emulsion) is necessary for the calculation of the
solid conversion rate. On the other hand, for the fluid phase we have :
1 - .exp(-Nk) + .K'.exp(-Nk)
CA/CAo=
(9)
1 - .exp(-Nk) + K'
CA
XA = 1 -
CA
(10)
According to the catalytic reaction models, the application of the kinetics laws to
consumable solids, requires the use of a constant K, which takes into account both the
reaction kinetics and the diffusion resistances (see Orcutt model).
On the other hand the mass conservation equations for the fluid and solid phases
must satisfy the stochiometric relation between the two phases:
n.(CA.U.A).XA = (W/MB).X
(11)
During the solution of the system of equations (1) to (11) we notice that the
calculated conversion rate X depends on the concentration of reactive fluid in the
suspension (CAe). CAe depends on the mass transfer phenomenon on one hand and on the
fluid-solid stoechiometric conservation equation (11) on the other.
Thus the resolution of the system of equations (1) to (11) requires the use of an
interactive method to calculate K' (chemical reaction number).
Figure 9 - Size distribution of solid in the underflow and the entrainment from a fluidized
bed.
4.6. Notation
A
Ar
ab
CA
CAb
CAe
CAf
D
Db
Dbmax
dor
dp
dpi
H
Hj
Ha
h*
Kbn
Ki
Kne
KT
kg
K'
Lj
M
Nk
Nr
ti
U
Ub
Umf
Ut
W
W1
X
XA
Xpi
Z
: fluid bed cross section

: Archimed's number
: Interfacial area of a bubble based on unit volume
: reactant concentration at the inlet to the reactor
: reactant concentration in the bubble phase
: reactant concentration in the emulsion phase
: reactant final concentration
: reactant diffusion constant in the medium
: bubble diameter
: maximum size of the bubbles
: diameter of the orifices in the distributor plate
: particles average size
: size of class i particles
: bed operating height
: jet height
: Hatta's number ((Kr.D)/kg)
: bubble size stabilisation height
: bubble-cloud mass transfer constant
: elutriation constant
: cloud-emulsion mass transfer constant
: Kunii's model global conversion constant
: bubble-emulsion mass transfer constant
: chemical reaction number
: horizontal distance between jets (orifices in grid)
: total mass of the bed
: number of mass transfer units
: number of chemical reaction units
: Average residence time for particles with size i
: feeding velocity (flow/surface) m/s
: average bubble rising velocity
: minimum fluidization velocity
: terminal velocity of particles
: solid feed mass flow
: solid mass flow
: solid conversion rate
: fluid conversion rate
: conversion rate of particles of size i
: height co-ordinate
: fraction of gas flowing through the bubbles

: bed porosity
: voidage due to the presence of bubbles
f
mf
b
e
g
p
: porosity in the disengagement zone

: porosity at minimum fluidization
: fluid viscosity
: catalyst volume in bubble phase / unit bubble volume
: catalyst volume in emulsion phase / unit bubble volume
: catalyst volume in cloud phase / unit bubble volume
: gas density
: particle density
4.7. References
1- Wen C.Y., Yu Y.H., AIChE J., v.12, p.610, 1966
2- Darton R.C., La Nauze R.D., Davidson J.F., Harrison D., Trans. Inst. Chem. Engrs.,
v.55, p.274, 1977
3- Clift R./ed. by Geldart/ Gas Fluidization Tech./ pub. J. Wiley & Sons, 1986
4- May W.G., Chem. Eng. Prog., v.55, n.12, p.49, 1959
5- Van Deemter J.J., Chem. Eng. Sc., v.13, p.143, 1961
6- Orcutt J.C., Davidson J.F., Pigford R.L., Chem. Eng. Prog. Sym., v.58,n.38, p1, 1962
7- Grace J.R./ ed. by Geldart / Gas Fluidization Tech./ pub. J. Wiley & Sons, 1986
8- Kato K., Wen C.Y., Chem. Eng. SC., v.24, p.1351, 1969
9- Kunii D., Levenspiel O., /Fluidization Engineering/ pub. J.Wiley & Sons, 1969
10- Grace J.R., I & EC Fundamentals, v.14, parts I,II et III, p.75 91, 1975
11- Westerink E.J., Wersterterp K.R., Chem. Eng. Sc., v.45, n.1, p.333, 1990
12 - Werther J., 2nd Eng. Foundation Conferance on Fluidization, p7-12, 1978
13- Werther ., Chem. Eng. Sc., v35, p372, 1980
14 - Hilligardt K., Werther J., Chem. Eng. Technol. 10, p272-280, 1987
15 - Werther J., Bellgardt D., Groenewald H. and Hilligardt K., Int. Conf. Fluid Bed
Combustion, Boston, p515-522, 1987
16 - Hilligardt K., Werther J., Ger. Chem. Eng., 9, p215-221, 1986
17- Werther J., 7 th. International Chem. Reaction Eng. Conf., Boston ,p.1, 1982
18- Yates J. G., Fundamentals of Fluidized-bed Chemical Processes, ed. Butterworths, 1983
19- Grace J.R., NATO repport, june 1985
20- Yates J.G., Rowe P.N., Trans. Instn. Chem. Engrs., v.55, P.137, 1977
21-Grace J.R., deLasa H.I., AIChE, v.24, p.364, 1978
22- Baker H.A., Beer J.M., Gibbs B.M., Inst. Fuel Sym. ser., n1, pA1-1, 1975
Chapter 5 -Heat transfer in Fluidized Beds
5.1. Presentation of the phenomenon

The heat transfer coefficient between a fluidized bed and the tubes or the outside wall
varies generally between 300 and 600 W/m2K. These values are by far higher than those
obtained in a fixed bed or by circulating the same amount of gas in an empty column. It is
important to understand that the heat transfer between the solids and the wall is governed
by the motion of solids near the wall. The excellent heat transfer properties of fluidized
beds are associated with the good mixing of the solid phase. This motion of solids is a
result of the motion of bubbles in the bed. That is, during their upward motion the bubbles
entrain the solids into their wakes (figur
Figure 1 Solid entrained by the wake

bubble
wake
Entrained solid
Furthermore, the bubbles coalesce and break assuring an additional motion of the solids.
All these phenomena generally assure sufficient mixing to consider the fluidized bed as
isothermal. The presence of obstacles in the bed, such as a bundle of heat exchanger tubes,
in certain cases reduces sufficiently the mixing so as to produce vertical and lateral
temperature gradients in the bed (for example compact bundles in pressurised fluidized
beds).
The transfer of heat between solids and a wall cannot be calculated without a good
idea of the hydrodynamics of a fluidized bed, mainly of the bubble distribution in the bed.
The motion of bubbles that induces the motion of solids is usually governed by the design
of the gas distributor and the elements immersed in the bed. When using correlations
available in the literature it is necessary to verify whether they have been obtained under
similar hydrodynamic conditions. Frequently, in small diameter fluidized beds (<1 m) the
bubbles have a tendency to gather in the centre, creating an ascendant motion of the solids
in the centre and a descendant one along the walls. The contact between the solids and a
wall will depend on whether the wall is the external envelope or a tube immersed in the
bed. The values of the transport coefficients, as well as the correlations used for their
determination, will as a consequence also be different. Thus, the heat transfer coefficient
will vary with the position of the exchanger wall in the section, as well as with its elevation.
The most important parameter is the time average porosity of the bed at the exchange
surfaces. Fortunately, for most calculations, an average value for the whole bed is sufficient
and the average hydrodynamic parameters for the whole volume of the bed can be used.
After having reviewed all parameters capable of influencing the heat transfer coefficient,
we present the different heat exchange mechanisms in a fluidized bed. The variation of the
heat transfer coefficient with the particle diameter indicates clearly that we cannot hope to
find a correlation for h valid in all cases. Those models that present a correlation that takes
into account the different mechanisms have a better chance of giving good results than
strictly empirical correlations. After having mentioned the different correlations applicable
to horizontal and vertical tube banks, we present Bock's (1983) and Martin's (1984) models.
5.2.Variation with the fluidization velocity

Figure 2 presents a typical variation of the heat transfer coefficient with the
fluidization velocity for fine particles. In the first region, from 0 to minimum fluidization
velocity Umf, the particles remain at rest, the heat transfer coefficient, h, is low and slowly
increases with the gas velocity. When Umf is reached the particles start to move around the
transfer surfaces and the heat transfer coefficient increases very rapidly, it passes through a
maximum for a velocity called Uopt. After this point, h decreases for increasing gas
velocity. For large solid particles Uopt corresponds to Umf. In this zone two phenomena
are opposed: the more the gas velocity is increased the more the solids become mobile,
favouring the transfer; but on the other hand, the porosity increases decreasing the transfer.
The heat transfer coefficient hmax for the fluidization velocity Uopt has been the object of
many correlations.
hw
hmax
Umf
Uopt
Ut
Figure 2. Typical hw diagram
For the larger diameter particles, the dominant term for the heat transfer is the gas
convection coefficient ( hgc later to be introduced in the presentation of the heat transfer
mechanisms) and we do not see the same sudden increase in its value when the bed passes
form fixed to fluidized.
5.3. Variation with particle diameter

For the small particles (<80 m) it seems that h increases with the diameter of the
particles. For particle sizes between 100 m and 1 mm, hmax is proportional to dp to the
power -0.5. For large particles hmax increases again with dp.
5.4. Influence of the gas properties

The main property is the thermal conductivity of the gas. Most of the heat is
transferred by conduction through a film of gas and thus the higher the gas conductivity the
better the heat transfer will be. The variation of h with temperatures in the moderate
temperature range ( up to 800 C) illustrates well this influence. We would expect an
increase of h when the product g.Cpg increases and that is exactly what we observe for
gases under pressure.
5.5. Influence of the solid properties

We have already mentioned the influence of particle diameter. The heat transfer
coefficient, h, increases proportionally to ( RHO Cps)**0.2 while the thermal conductivity
of the particles s has no influence if:
1<s< Wm/K for g of the order of 0.026.
The influence of other parameters is much less direct, they essentially affect the
hydrodynamics of the bubbles.
We can already see that the complex variation of the heat transfer coefficient with
the different parameters cannot be easily represented by a single correlation of the power
law type, and that this type of correlations can only be valid for a given range of the
parameters. The modern tendency is to decompose the heat transfer coefficient into three
terms corresponding to three different mechanisms.
5.6. Heat transfer mechanisms

As a first approximation we can consider that the heat transfer coefficient is the
sum of three terms representing the different energy transfer mechanisms :
a term representing the transfer of heat to particles by conduction, hpc

a term representing the transfer of heat by convection from the gas, hgc
and a term for the transfer of heat by radiation, hr
h = hpc + hgc + hr
(1)
This representation is correct only when the terms have values very different from
each other. The conduction term (still called particle convection by some authors) uses the
mechanism of energy transfer caused by the motion of particles near the wall. The heat is
transferred to a particle during its contact with the heated surface by conduction through the
gas near the contact point. The motion of the particles allows the transfer of this heat to the
fluidized medium, where it is almost instantly transferred to the gas and the other particles.
It is the main term for small particles (<1 mm).
The convection term, hgc, represents the direct transfer between the gas that
percolates between the particles and along the surfaces. This contribution increases with the
gas velocity. This is the dominant term for the large particles (>800 m) requiring high
fluidization velocities and/or in the case of pressurised beds.
The radiation term is only important for temperatures higher than 800 C.
5.7. Heat transfer by conduction

Authors agree that for a bubbling fluidized bed the high coefficients of heat
transfer are due to the rapid renewal of particles along the heat transfer surfaces. Each time
a bubble passes near or along the transfer surface those particles along the surface are
replaced by fresh particles at bed temperature. It is the temperature gradient that allows the
heat to be transferred between particles and walls. At the beginning of the contact period
the main resistance is due to the conduction through the gas layer that separates the
particles and the surface. As the particles close to the surface are gradually heated the
particles further away also start to take part in the heat transfer process. Two approaches
have been used to model this transfer process.
1- The models that assume discrete particles in contact with the wall (Botterill
(1962), Decker (1981), and Schlunder (1980)). In Botterill's model a numerical solution is
obtained for the heating of an isolated particle immersed in gas and in contact with the wall
during a certain time. The solution given by this model can only be applied for short contact
times, such that the heat does not penetrate beyond the first layer of particles. Furthermore,
in order to reconcile the theory with the experimental results, Botterill had to introduce a
film resistance between the first layer of particles and the wall.
2-Models that consider aggregates of solids in contact with the wall for a
determined time.
The first of these models is due to Mickley and Fairbanks (1955). In this model an
aggregate of particles, initially at the temperature of the interior of the bed, is placed in
contact with wall by a bubble. An unsteady heat transfer process occurs. According to
Mickley and Fairbanks the aggregate of solids constitutes an homogeneous medium whose
conductivity and specific heat are calculated as in a gas-solids mixture at minimum
fluidization. After each bubble the aggregate is replaced by another and the process is
restarted. The exchange of heat increases as the frequency of passage of bubbles increases.
This model produces an expression for the instantaneous heat transfer coefficient identical
to the one obtained for unsteady conduction in a semi infinite homogenous medium in
contact at t=0 with a wall at constant temperature:
hpci= {e.s.Cps.(1-mf)/(.t)}
(2)
The thermal characteristics of the aggregate are those of the bed at minimum fluidization.
The instantaneous heat transfer coefficient decreases with time. Before thermal
equilibrium is reached the aggregate is replaced by a new one due to the passage of a
bubble. When the bubble surrounds the transfer surface the local instantaneous heat transfer
coefficient decreases dramatically.
The mean heat transfer coefficient can be obtained by the integration of equation (2)
considering a time distribution of wall contact. For aggregates that spend a time t at the wall
we obtain:
hpc= 2
{ e . s .C ps .(1 - mf ) / ( . t)}
(3)
This physically plausible model gives good results for long contact times with the wall (fine
particles).
The deficiencies of this model are two:
on one hand the uniformity of thermal properties of aggregates is not a good
assumption near the wall.
on the other hand this model predicts transfer velocities much too large for the short
particle contact times.
The penetration of a thermal perturbation from a flat surface into a semi infinite
homogeneous medium can be approximated by:
X =~4
.t
(4)
The thermal diffusivity of a sand-air suspension is equal to 1.10-7 m2/s , during

a residence time of 1s, reasonable time for particles at the wall of a fluidized bed, the
thermal penetration is only 400 m. For particle with a diameter superior to 400m, this
simple calculation gives a penetration smaller than the particle diameter. The assumption of
homogeneity is difficult to justify. Kubie and Broughton (1975) introduced thermal
properties that varied with the distance from the wall. Numerous other authors, in order to
account for the increase ? in porosity at the wall, introduced an additional contact resistance
independent of time. This contact resistance is expressed as being equivalent to that of a
gaseous film with a thickness of dp/m. From the literature m varies between 4 and 10 where
m=6 seems to be the optimal value.
According to Schlunder (1980) the source of thermal resistance comes from the
decrease in the thermal conductivity of the gas when the mean free path of the gas
molecules becomes larger than the distance separating the surfaces between which the
transfer by conduction occurs. He obtains a value for the maximum heat transfer velocity
given by:
hmax = (4 g/dp).[1+2l dp) ln(1+dp/2l)-1]
(5)
where l is the mean free path derived from gas kinetic theory, in which an accommodation
coefficient is introduced to account for the incomplete transfer of energy when the
molecules of gas hit the wall. This model assumes that the contact particle/wall is punctual,
it does not consider the particle or wall rugosities. Decker and Glicksman (1981) the
rugosity of a surface of a typical surface is of the order of 10-2 to 10-4 m, while the mean
free path of gas molecules is of the order of 10-4 m. For them it is the inherent rugosity of
the particles and wall which prevents a close contact and creates the thermal resistance.
They experimental study lead them to introduce a contact resistance Rc given by:
1/Rc = 12 g/dp
(6)
the heat transfer coefficient Hpc is written as:

hpc = (1-b)/(Rc+1/hpc)
(7)
where from the two phase theory:
with:
(1-b) = Ub/(U-Umf+Ub)
(8)
Ub=0.71 (gDb)
(9)
b: volume of the bed occupied by the bubbles
Db: bubble diameter

The term (1-b) takes into account the fact that during the passage of the bubbles along the
surface the coefficient is practically zero.
Glicksman and Decker (1980) introduced a thermal time constant for the heating of a
particle:
t = 1/(36.s.Cps.dp2/g)
(10)
If this time is much shorter than the residence time of the particles at the wall, the particle
renewal frequency (fb) plays a very important role. This is the case for very fine particles.
The residence time of particles is given approximately by the inverse of the local frequency
of the bubbles and hpc is written as:
hpc=~ hpc = {e.s.Cps.(1-mf)/(1-b)}
(11)
The mean frequency of bubbles fb for the volumetric fraction occupied by the bubbles can
be obtained with a method described by Grace (1982).
For the larger particles whose temperatures varies during the residence time at the wall
(t>>1/fb) hpc is given by Glicksman:
hpc = 11.2(1-b)g/dp
(12)
Other models such as those by Martin (1984) and Block (1983) use Schlunder's approach to
calculate hpc. These models are described in more detail later on.
5.8. Heat transfer by convection.

The convective heat transfer term becomes important when dealing with large
dimension particles (>800 m) and high pressures. The gas flow condition are either
unsteady or turbulent (group D particles, according to Geldart's 1973 classification).
Most authors use an experimental correlation developed by Baskakov (1972). This
correlation has been obtained measuring the mass transfer by sublimation of naphthalene
covering the transfer wall.
Nu gc = 0.009 Ar1/2 Pr1/3
(13)
This correlation has been obtained for a transfer surface of given size and shape.
Certain authors such as Botterill and Denloye (1978) suggest that the heat transfer
at minimum fluidization is a good approximation of the term hgc?. They propose the
following empirical correlation:
hgc.dp1/2/g = 0.86 Ar0.39 for 103 <Ar< 106
Note that this equation has dimension m-1/2.
(14)
5.9. Transfer by radiation

It is difficult to treat the transfer of heat by radiation rigorously since the
calculations become very rapidly very complex. When the transfer by radiation becomes
important, i.e., above 1000 C, the assumption that the components can be added is not valid
anymore. There is a coupling of the convective and radiative transfer processes (Botterill
1975).
For the large particles whose temperature does not vary during the contact with the
wall, the transfer by radiation can be predicted calculating the flux between two isothermal
grey surfaces.
hr = (Tsusp4-Tsurp4)/{(1/Esusp+1/Esurf)(Tsusp-Tsurf)
(15)
The effective emissivity of the bed is higher than that of a single isolated particle
due to the multiple reflections. The results by Botterill 1975 suggest that:
Esusp = 0.5 (1+Ep)
(16)
For smaller particles the problem is more complex since these particles change
temperature during their exposure to the wall. The rate at which are renewed at the wall
becomes important.
The relative importance of the transfer by radiation increases with the size of the
particles and the temperature. A literature review on the contribution of radiation to the
transfer of heat wall/fluidized bed was recently published by Flamant and Bergeron (1988).
Flamant and Arnaud (1984) published a literature review of the contribution of the
coefficient of heat transfer by radiation to the total heat transfer coefficient.
5.10. Transfer of heat at the walls of the fluid bed.

This portion of the heat transfer is difficult to predict since it depends on the
motion of particles near the wall. Frequently the solid particles have a descendent motion at
the fluid be wall, this motion occurs along relatively long distances with a more or less
rapid renewal of solids along the wall. This renewal depends of numerous factors, such as
the design of the distributor plate, the diameter of the bed, the nature of solids.... It is thus
very difficult to establish a general correlation, mainly considering that most investigations
published in the literature were carried out on small diameter units. It is certain that the
length of the heated surface has an influence. It is not the length itself that is important, but
the contact time particle/wall as indicated by the mechanisms described above.
No correlation in the literature gives the variation of h with the speed of fluidization can be
recommended without full confidence. For small particles (dp<1 mm), if possible, it is
preferable to use Zabrodsky's (1966) correlation for the maximum heat transfer coefficient,
hmax:
for dp<1000 mic. :
hmax = 35.8 (f)0.6 p2 dp-0.36
(17)
for dp1000 mic. Maskaev and Baskakov's equation can be used:

hmax =0.21 Ar0.32 f/dp
validity range:
(18)
14E+4 < Ar < 3.E+8
(!) All variables are given in SI units.

We will provide here Wender and Cooper's (1958) correlation of the non-dimensional
group
(h.dp/f)/[(1-)Cps.s/Cpg.g]
{1+7.5exp[-0.44(L/D) Cps/Cps]}
(19)
and the Particle Reynolds number

Rep = (g.U.dp)/
(20)
Grace (1982) recommends the use of correlations established for vertical tubes, but
also suggests that a value of 80% of the result obtained from the correlation be retained, to
account for the fact that the transfer of heat is not as good at the wall to the bed.
5.11. Transfer of heat between bed and immersed tubes

The introduction of tubes into the fluidized bed modifies the general behaviour of
the fluidized bed, mainly due to the obstacle represented by the tubes to the formation of
bubbles. The circulation of solids in the bed will be modified and as consequence the heat
transfer by particle conduction component will be as well. This modification depends on
the precise design of the tube bundle, on the other hand results for a fluidized bed with
tubes are less sensible to extrapolation.
Generally, the heat transfer coefficients obtained for vertical tubes can be similar
to those measured for horizontal tubes, even though locally the mechanisms of transfer are
quite different. If the exchanger is not very small (pitch > 2.Dtube the results obtained with
a tube bundle are not significantly different from those obtained with a single tube.
In these correlations certain authors use the mean temperature to calculate the
physical properties of the gas, while others use the film temperature calculated as the
average between the wall and bed temperatures.
According to recent studies the tube diameter has a small influence on the heat transfer
coefficient.
Bock considers that the essential parameter is the motion of bubbles in the
immediate vicinity of the vertical wall. The heat transfer coefficient for a single tube varies,
for a given fluidization velocity, with the radial position and the height in the fluid bed
(Bock 1981).
All authors observed that the bubbles pass preferentially through the centre of the
bed and that the solids flow back along the wall. At low fluidization velocities the heat
transfer coefficient varies with the lateral position of the tube, while at higher fluidization
velocities this variation is much smaller except at the wall of the bed.
The correlations obtained by different authors before 1978 are analysed in a
thorough review by Saxena (1978).
1)- Denloye & Botterill:

This very simple correlation is proposed for vertical tubes
giving reasonable values for hw_maxi for a broad range of particle sizes.
Num = .843 Ar .15 + .86 Ar .39 dp .5
(21)
hw maxi = Num f / dp
(22)
2)- Wender & Cooper :

(See the Wender & Cooper diagram previously described for wall/suspension heat transfer).
This correlation is very interesting in that it was established using hundreds of experimental
points obtained by different authors.
3)- Shah & al. :
This is a very simple correlation that can be used to test hw values, which must remain
smaller than the proposed hmaxi:
Reopt=.065 Ar.58
Reopt is Rep at the optimal exchange velocity, Reopt < 170
(23)
h.d/f = 7.6 Reopt.158 (d/dp).805 (Cps/Cpf).18

Reopt>170
h.d/f = 4.63 Reopt.695 (df/dp).805
(24)
4)- Aneeden & Glicksman

hp.d/f = 900(1-)[(U.d.f/)(2/dp3.s.g).326 Pr.3
(25)
(26)
Conditioned to Y/d =2, where Y is the horizontal spacing of tubes dp for ambient
temperature between 360 and 710 C.
5)- Grewal & Saxena :
hmax.dp/f = 0.9 (.0127 Ar/d).21 [(Cps/Cpf)^(45.5*Ar-.7)]
for 300 < Ar < 1E+5
(27)
6)- Vreedenberg :
Vreedenberg proposed several correlations that have been adopted by other authors
(Bansai). We use here only the correlation obtained with a cracking catalyst (fine and light
particles), which complements well the correlations by Catipovic and that by Zabrodsky
(dp>1000 m).
The inconvenient of this relation is that it strongly depends on , which is difficult to
estimate (correlation to be avoided).
for horizontal tubes :
if s.dp.U/ < 2050 ; c=f/(Cps.) :

(h.d/f).c^.3 = .66 [U.d.s(1-)/].44
(28)
if s.dp.U/ > 2550

(hw.d/f).c^.3 = 420 [U.d./(dp3*s*g)].3
7)- Zabrodsky :
h=7.2*f(1-).667/dp+ 26.6 U.2 Cpf f dp
(29)
(30)
subject to dp=2300 m
8)- Catipovic & al. :
h.dp/f = 6(1-)+(.0175.Ar.46 Pr.33)(1-) + (dp/d)(.88*
Repmf .5+.0042 Repmf) Pr.33
where = .55-.66/[(U-Umf)+.125]
9)- Glicksman & Decker :
h.dp/f = (1-b)[9.42+.042(dp.U.f.Cpf/f)]
(31)
(32)
(33)
for the calculation of b we use : eb =1-Hmf/H ,

H/Hmf = 1+[14.315(U-Umf).783 dp1.006 s.376 Umf-.937 * f-.126 ]
The heat transfer mechanisms previously described allow some conclusions to be
drawn regarding the effect of pressure on the heat transfer coefficient. All authors agree that
the convective heat transfer coefficient, hgc varies proportionally to P1/2, according to the
increase in gas density, g, with pressure. Martin's model predicts a variation with pressure
associated with the change in the mean free path of molecules. For a variation in pressure
from 1 to 25 bar hgc will have its value increase 5 fold, while the value of hpc will only be
multiplied by 1.5. The increase in pressure will be beneficial for particles significantly
larger than 1 mm. The compactness of the tube bundle is felt mostly by smaller particles. In
pressurised fluidized beds with a compact tube distribution, whose heat transfer is
significantly larger than those at atmospheric pressure, the temperature cannot be
considered homogeneous throughout the bed. The solid particle mixing is insufficient to
disperse rapidly the generated at the injection point and compensate the heat flux removed
at the top of the bed. Temperature differences of the order of hundred of degrees C have
been observed.
5.12. Martin's model

The three mechanisms of energy transfer in fluidized beds are: the conduction by
the particle, the convection by the gas and the radiation. They can be considered
independent and the global heat transfer coefficient, defined as h= q/(Ttube-Tbed), can be
written as the sum of the terms.
h = hpc + hgc + hr
(34)
The convective contribution of the gas is calculated by Baskakov's equation:

hgc = 0.009 Ar1/2 Pr 1/3
(35)
and the radiative contribution by the linearised Stephan-Boltzman equation:

hr = 4 T3
(36)
The particle conduction term can be written as:

hpc = (1/6) (1-)s.Cps. wp [1-exp(N)]
(37)
where wp is an average velocity of the random displacement of the particles between the
interior of the bed and the surface. The term between brackets represents a degree of
thermal accommodation of the particle during its contact with the heated or cooled wall.
And N is a non-dimensional contact time:
N=(6.hwp.tc)/[(s.Cps. wp).(4dp)]
(38)
The heat transfer coefficient between a plane wall and a single particle, hwp, is composed
of two components:
1/hwp = 1/hwp.max +1/hi
(39)
The first term, usually the dominant resistance term, is due to the conduction through the air
contained between the wall and the particle, and can be calculated by the Schlunder's
formula:
hpw.max = (4f/dp)[1+2l/dp)ln(1+dp/2l)-1]
(40)
The equations in the model contain two quantities that up until now haven't been
calculated directly, namely the contact time, tc, of the particle with the wall and the average
speed of random displacement of particles, wp. To eliminate this two unknowns two
additional assumptions have been introduced in the model:
-the contact time is supposed to be proportional to the time necessary to displace

randomly a particle of a distance equal to its diameter. In other words the product wp.tc/dp
is assumed to be constant:
tc= (
( f )( 1 )
). Z 0 . 8 . s
U U mf
s
dp
Z = (1/6) s.Cps/f
0 .4
(41)
g . d 3p . ( mf )
(42)
5 ( 1 mf ) ( 1 )
The average displacement velocity of particles ,wp, is linked to the "mean free
path" through:
l = 2(2/ -1) [ f.(2RT/Mm).5/(2.P.Cpf -R./Mm)
(43)
where =~ 0.9 (ideal gas), R gas constant, P pressure, T temperature, Mm gas molar mass
and 'f' its conductivity.
For air at 1 bar and 25 C, l is equal to 274 nm, this produces hwp(max) of 24 + 20% for
particles having sizes between 200 m and 2 mm. This result is in accordance with the
experimental results of Gloski, Decker and Glicksman (1984).
In the equation above l is calculated in an manner analogous to the that used in the gas
kinetic theory using the diameter and the concentration of the particles. Thus, the
concentration of particles (in numbers per unit of free volume) allows to relate the unknown
wp to the size of the particles and to the voidage in the bed. The model is finally written as:
hpc=(f/dp)(1-).Z.[1-exp(-Nuwp/C.Z)]
1
1
(f/s)
= +
Nuwp Numax
4 [1+(1.5 C.Z.f/ .s).5]
(44)
(45)
where Numax is:

Numax = 4[(1+2l/dp).ln(1+dp/2l)-1)]
(46)
These equations give the term hpc as function of the properties of the particles, of
the gas properties, of the degree of voids in the bed ( which itself depends on the
fluidization velocity U) and the operating variables pressure P and temperature T. It

contains only one adjustable parameter C determined from Wender's experimental results
for spherical glass balls: C= 2.6 . This value is used for all the solids.
On the other hand, to calculate Z it is necessary to use a law that gives the
expansion of the bed as a function of the fluidization velocity. Martin recommends the use
of Werther's relation to calculate bed expansion characteristics, b and . This is the
method used in the program:
b= 1/(1+f g . D b /Ub) ; where f is a correction factor
(47)
Db is the size of the bubbles (see hydrodynamic chapter) and Ub is the rising speed of the
bubbles in the bed.
b =
b .dh / H
(48)
Martin's model seems to follows closely the variations of the heat transfer
coefficient with different operating parameters as long as the mobility of the particles is not
reduced by obstacles located in the bed (Martin 1984).
According to Martin the model can be used for vertical or horizontal tubes as well
as under pressure.
For a given solid changing the value of C we can improve the determination of h
obtained, for example, in a cold bed.
5.13. Bock's model

Bock diverges from the "additiveness" of the three mechanisms of transfer. hgc is
calculated from Baskakov's empirical relation and hr is obtained from:
h = hpc + hgc + hr
(49)
E is the effective emissivity, is the modified Stefan-Boltzman's constant , 5.667 W/m2k4

and Tm the arithmetic average between the wall and the bed temperatures.
The particle conduction term in this model is written as:
1
1
c
=
+
h pc 1 h max (1 mf ) 2
t
(..c p ) bed
(50)
hmax is given (as Martin's model) by Schlunder's theory (hmax = hwp(max)).

b is the local mean volume of bubbles in contact with the transfer wall. The contact time
of the particle phase is defined by:
t=(1-b)/fb
(51)
The constant C takes into account the rugosity of the particles and of the surface.
Bock found that C was equal to 3 for all particles he tested.
If there is experimental data available to determine t and ?, we can calculate them
from the following correlations:
t = 62.2(U-Umf)-x Dh0.67 Hy dp0.54
(52)
x=(0.84-0.48 H Dh0.7) et y=1.04 Dh0.48
(53)
with
The hydraulic diameter is calculated from:

Dh=(Dt2-d2)/(Dt+n.d)
(54)
where Db is the diameter of the column, d is the diameter of the tubes and n is the number
of tubes.
b = Z (U-Umf)
(55)
Z=0.23 for a tube bank

Z=0.085 H-0.75 for a single tube (0.14<H<1.1 m)
(56)
with
This model was established for vertical tubes, the hydraulic diameter has no meaning for
horizontal tubes.
5.14. Conclusion
The discussion above, showed that the methods presented here give an idea about the
values of heat transfer coefficient (tendencies), but the hydrodynamics of the bed are too
complex and dependent on the design of the bed to obtain precise results
There are numerous correlations in the literature that can be used in similar conditions.
However, its very important to choose a proper method corresponding the exact operating
conditions under which these correlations are obtained. Many of these papers describe well
the conditions under which they were obtained. Before applying a correlation it is necessary
to make sure that it was obtained under similar conditions (same particle diameter, same
pressure, same temperature level).
We advise the user to compare results from correlations to those obtained from Martins (or
Bocks) models. These last methods have the great advantage not to be far from reality.
5.15. Notation
Cp
CR
Cpg
Cps
Db
Dt
Dh
dp
specific heat
correction for a non-axial position
gas heat capacity
solid heat capacity
bubble diameter
fluid bed diameter
hydraulic diameter
particle meau diameter
d
Esus
Ep
Mm
g
h
hgc
hmax
hpc
tube diameter
suspension emissivity
wall emissivity
gas molar mass
gravitation constant
heat transfer coefficient
gas contribution to the heat transfer coefficient
maximum heat transfer coefficient for optimal velocity
heat transfer coefficient for conduction in a semiinfinite medium
heat transfer coefficient portion due to conduction in
the particles
heat transfer coefficient radiation contribution
heat transfer coefficient between a single particle
and a plane wall
mean free path of the particles
height of the fluidized bed
height of the tube above the grid
pressure
ideal gas constant
hpc
hr
hwp
l
L
H
P
R
T
t
tc
U
Ub
Umf
Uopt
Vp
wp
X
temperature
time
contact time
fluidization velocity
bubble rising velocity
minimum fluidization velocity
optimum fluidization velocity
particle velocity
random displacement velocity (Martin's model)
heat penetration
parameter of Martin's model

Gas conductivity
g
g
s
Solid conductivity
Gas viscosity
Gas density
Solid density
Subscripts:
b
bubble
f
fluid
mf
minimum of fluidization
p
particle
s
solid
5.16. References
1)- Andeen B.R., Glicksman L.R., ASME/AIChE Heat Transfert Conf., St. Louis, Aug.
n76-HT-67, 1976
2)- Bansal R.K., Kadaba P.V., Desai P.V., ASME/AIChE National Heat Transfert Conf.,
Orlando, n80-HT-115, July 1980
3)- Basakov A.P., Chap.13 of " Fluidization" By Davidson & al., Academic Press, Lon.
p465, 1985
4)- Bock H.J., Fluidisation IV, Kunii & Toei ed., p323, 1983
5)- Bock H.J., Molerus O., Ger. Chem. Eng., vol.6, p57, 1983
6)- Bock H.J., J. Schweinzer J.S., O. Molerus, Ger. Chem. Eng. vol.6, p301, 1983
7)- Bock H.J., Ger. Chem. Eng., vol.4, p356, 1981
8)- Boothroyd R.G., /Flowing Gas-Solids Suspensions/ Ed. Chapman & Hall Ltd., 1971
9)- Botterill J.S.M., "Fluid-bed Heat Transfert", Academic Press, New York, 1975
10)- Decker N.A., Glicksman L.R., AIChE Sym. Ser., vol.77,n208, p341, 1981
11)- Denloye, Botterill J.S.M.,
12)- Flamant G., Arnaud D., Int. J. of Heat and Mass Transfer, vol.27, n10, p1752, 1984
12)- Glicksman L.R., Decker N.A., VI th Int. Conf. on Fluidised Bed Combustion, Atlanta,
vol.3, p1152, 1980
13)- Grace J.R., Chap.8 / Handbook of multiphase flow/ Hestroni,Ed. Hemisphere, 1982
14)- Grewal N.S., Fluidization and Industrial Applications, Chapter 31, p997, Pub. ,1988
15)- Grewal N.S., chap.18 / Heat & Mass Transfert Handbook / Cheremisinoff, Ed. Gulf.
Houston TX, p609, 1986
16)- Grewal N.S., Saxena S.C., Ind. Eng. Chem. ProC. Des. Dev., vol.22, p376, 1983
17)- Grewal N.S., Saxena S.C., Chem. Eng. J., vol.18, p197, 1979
18)- Grewal N.S., Powder Tech., vol.30, p145, 1981
19)- Hughmark G.A., AIChE, vol.13, p1219, 1967
20)- Kunii D., Levenspiel O., /Fluidization Engineering/ Ed. John Wiley & Sons, 1969
21)- Martin H., Chem.Eng.Proc., vol.18, 1984
22)- Martin H.,XIV th IChMT Symp., Dubrovnik, Sep. 1984
23)- Maskaev V.K., et Baskakov A.P, J. Eng. Phy., vol.24, p.411, 1973
24)- Petrie J.C., Freedy W.A., Chem. Eng., Prog., vol.64, p 45, 1968
25)- Ranz W.E., Marshal W.R., Chem.Eng.Prog., vol.48, p141, 1952
26)- Saxena S.C., Ganzha V.L., Powder Tech., vol.39, p199, 1984
27)- Shah M.M., Heat Trans. Eng., vol.4, p107, 1983
28)- Schlnder E.U., Int. Chem. Eng., vol.20 n4, p 550, 1980
29)- Wender L., Cooper G.T., AIChE J., vol.4,p 15, 1958
30)- Zabrodsky S.S., Antonishin N.V., Parnas A.L., Canadian J. Chem.Eng., vol.54, p52,
1976
31)- Zabrodsky S.S., "Heat Transfert in Fluidised Beds", MIT Press.Cambridge M.A, 1966
32)- Zabrodsky S.S., Epanov Y.G., Galershtein D.M., Saxena S.C., Kolar A.K., Int. J. Heat
& Mass Trans., vol.24, p571, 1981

ERGUN 6.2: User's Manual

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ERGUN 6.2: User's Manual

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ERGUN 6.

Ergun Fluidization Software

3.7.1. Standard Cyclones .................................................................................................... 29

Ergun Fluidization Software

1.2. Installation of the program

Ergun Fluidization Software

Ergun Fluidization Software

2.1. Program Structure

Ergun Fluidization Software

2.2. Using Menus

2.3. Data File Management

Data for Particle Module

Ergun Fluidization Software

Data for module .

Data for FB Design and Expert Analysis Module

Ergun Fluidization Software

gas flow rate per cyclone

End_CYCLONE-----Do not remove this line-----------

Ergun Fluidization Software

mass fraction cut 11

End_CYCLONE-----Do not remove this line-----------

Ergun Fluidization Software

2.3.2. Importing data from Database

2.4. Running the program

Ergun Fluidization Software

A <Project> consists of a number of items combined together, in order to build a global

2.4.1. Typical application

Ergun Fluidization Software

2.4.2. Building a Global Model

2.5. Results Files

Ergun Fluidization Software

Figure 2 Example of results file with Experts comments

2.6. Operator's privilege

Ergun Fluidization Software

2.7. Gas/Solid Database

2.7.1. Preparing data with pure gases

Figure 1 Ergun Powerful but simple use Gas/Solid database.

Ergun Fluidization Software

2.7.2. Preparing data with gases mixtures

2.8. Cut & Paste possibility, printing diagrams

Figure 3 Cut and Paste

Ergun Fluidization Software

2.10. About ERGUN 6

Ergun Fluidization Software

Chapter 3- Hydrodynamics of Fluidized Systems

3.2 Geldart's classification

Ergun Fluidization Software

Figure 1 - Geldarts classification (after Geldart [5])

3.3 Terminal Velocity

The Reynolds number is defined by:

Ergun Fluidization Software

3.4. Fluidization Grids

Ergun Fluidization Software

3.4.1 Perforated plate distributors

In this equation is the diameter of the orifices.

Ergun Fluidization Software

b. Yang & Keairns's correlation:

3.4.2 Tuyere type distributors

Ergun Fluidization Software

3.5. Expansion properties in fluidized beds

Ergun Fluidization Software

3.5.1 Calculation of Umf

Baeyens & Geldart :