Table of content

1
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

Abstract................................................................................................................. 3
Introduction........................................................................................................... 3
Results................................................................................................................... 4
Discussion............................................................................................................ 11
Conclusions.......................................................................................................... 12
References........................................................................................................... 12
Appendix A: Sample Calculations........................................................................12
Conversion of manometer reading to pressure drop........................................12
Area of cross section........................................................................................ 13
Calculation of superficial velocity from volumetric flow rate............................13
Calculation of fluidised bed density..................................................................13
Calculation of bed voidage............................................................................... 15
Calculation of bed voidage (sand)....................................................................16
Calculation of velocity of sand through orifice..................................................16
Calculation of weight per unit area of the bed..................................................16
Analysis Question 1.......................................................................................... 17
Analysis Question 2.......................................................................................... 17
Analysis Question 3.......................................................................................... 17
Analysis Question 4.......................................................................................... 19
Appendix B: Error analysis................................................................................... 19
Calculation of uncertainty in pressure drop (fat bed).......................................19
Uncertainty in pressure drop (narrow bed).......................................................20
Calculation of uncertainty in gas velocity (fat bed)..........................................20
Calculation of uncertainty in gas velocity (narrow bed)....................................20
Calculation of uncertainty in k1 values.............................................................20
Calculation of uncertainty in k2 values.............................................................21
Appendix C: Data sheet....................................................................................... 21

2
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

Abstract
The aims of the experiment were to observe and comment on the relationships between
superficial velocity and the pressure drop and the relationship and between the minimum
fluidisation velocity and the bed height. These have both been achieved and are detailed
below in the results section.
The experiment involved passing increasing air flow rates through different materials and
investigating, the change in bed height and pressure drop with the superficial velocity of
the air. From this graphs could be drawn that allowed for the achievement of the aims.
Values for Umf were 0.030+0.001m/s, 0.1680.008m/s and 0.397+0.022m/s for sand,
Ballotini red and Ballotini 8 respectively.
Values obtained for k1 were 0.00230.0004, 0.00220.0009 and 0.00180.0008 for sand,
Ballotini red and Ballotini 8 respectively.
Both of these sets of values agree with theory.
Relationships between Usf and P, and Umf and bed height were obtained and are shown on
figures 1, 2, 5, 6, 7 and 8 in the results section.
Values obtained graphically for Uv were 0.5691m/s, 0.6305m/s and 0.0494m/s for sand
Ballotini red and Ballotini 8 respectively. Values for Ub/Us obtained empirically were
0.42m/s for sand and 0.0928m/s for both Ballotini.

3
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

Introduction
Fluidisation is a technique used in chemical Engineering for solids transport - as well as to
increase rates of reaction for solids and to aid in separation. Finding the minimum
fluidisation velocity allows for energy saving (and therefore cost saving) as there is no
gain in increasing the fluid velocity to greater than this value. Studies have been
conducted similar to this in the past, examples of previous research include the study done
by The National institute of technology, Rourkela (D. Ram, 2013)
The experiment involved passing air through sand, Ballotini Red and Ballotini 8 in order
for fluidisation to occur, and using values obtained from this to plot graphs that allowed
for various values to be obtained.
As well as the minimum fluidisation velocity, k1 and k2 values will also be found for each
material. As an aside, Torricellis Law was also investigated when emptying the fat bed

4
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

Results
FIGURE 1: GRAPH USED TO DETERMINE MINIMUM FLUIDISATION VELOCITY

FIGURE 2: GRAPH OF BED HEIGHT AGAINST VELOCITY FOR FAT BED

Bed Height - Fat Bed

0.390
0.380
0.370

Bed Height (m)

0.360
0.350
0.340
0.330
0.000

0.010

0.020

0.030

0.040

0.050

0.060

Velocity (m/s)

5
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

FIGURE 3: GRAPH OF PRESSURE DROP AGAINST VELOCITY FOR PACKED BED

Packed Bed Pressure drop vs velocity

9000
8000
7000
6000
5000

Pressure Drop (Pa)

4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0.010
-1000

0.015

0.020

0.025

0.030

0.035

Velocity (m/s)

FIGURE 4: GRAPH OF BED HEIGHT AGAINST VELOCITY FOR PACKED BED

Bed Height - Packed Bed

0.450

0.400

0.350

Bed Height (m)

0.300

0.250

0.200
0.010

0.015

0.020

0.025

0.030

0.035

Velocity (m/s)

6
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

FIGURE 5: GRAPH OF PRESSURE DROP AGAINST VELOCITY FOR RED BALLOTINI

Narrow Bed - Red Ballotini

8000.0
7000.0
6000.0
5000.0

Pressure Drop (Pa)

4000.0
3000.0
2000.0
1000.0
0.0
0.050

0.100

0.150

0.200

0.250

0.300

0.350

0.400

0.450

0.400

0.450

Velocity (m/s)

FIGURE 6: GRAPH OF BED HEIGHT AGAINST VELOCITY FOR RED BALLOTINI

Bed Height - Red Ballontoni (Narrow Bed)

0.600
0.500
0.400

Bed Height (m)

0.300
0.200
0.100
0.000
0.050

0.100

0.150

0.200

0.250

0.300

0.350

Velocity (m/s)

7
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

FIGURE 7: GRAPH OF PRESSURE DROP AGAINST VELOCITY FOR BALLOTINI 8

Narrow Bed - Ballotini 8

10000.0
9000.0
8000.0
7000.0
6000.0

Pressure Drop (Pa)

5000.0
4000.0
3000.0
2000.0
1000.0
0.0
0.000 0.100 0.200 0.300 0.400 0.500 0.600 0.700 0.800

Velocity (m/s)

FIGURE 8: GRAPH OF BED HEIGHT AGAINST VELOCITY FOR BALLOTINI 8

8
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

Bed Height - Ballotoni 8 (Narrow Bed)

0.700
0.600
0.500
0.400

(Bed Height (m)

0.300
0.200
0.100
0.000
0.000

0.100

0.200

0.300

0.400

0.500

0.600

0.700

0.800

Velocity (m/s)

FIGURE 9: GRAPH USED TO CALCULATE UV AND K2 (FAT BED)

Analysis Q3 - Fat Bed

200
180
160

f(x) = 0.48x + 0.74

140
120

H/(H-Hmf)

100
80
60
40
20
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1/(U - Umf)

FIGURE 10: GRAPH USED TO CALCULATE UV AND K2 (RED BALLOTINI)

9
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

Analysis Q3 - Red Ballotini

16
14

f(x) = 0.63x - 0.09

12
10

H/(H-Hmf)

8
6
4
2
0

10

15

20

25

1/(U - Umf)

FIGURE 11: GRAPH USED TO CALCULATE UV AND K2 (BALLOTINI 8)

10
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

Analysis Q3 - Grey Ballotini

2.500

2.000
f(x) = 0.05x + 0.79
1.500

H/(H-Hmf)
1.000

0.500

0.000
0.000

5.000

10.000

15.000

20.000

25.000

2.5

1/(U - Umf)

FIGURE 12: GRAPH USED TO CALCULATE CO (TORRICELLIS LAW)

Plot using Torichelli's Law to find Co

1.4
1.2
f(x) = 0.55x + 0

1
0.8

Velocity (m/s)

0.6
0.4
0.2
0

0.5

1.5

(2gh)0.5

11
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

TABLE

1: CALCULATED K1 VALUES FOR MATERIALS

Material
Diameter (m)
K1
Sand
15025*
0.00230.0004
Red Ballotini
25050
0.00220.0009
Ballotini 8 (grey)
42872
0.00180.0008
*(Rufford Knowledge Base - Glossary of Terms, 2014)
TABLE 2: VALUES FOR MINIMUM FLUIDISATION VELOCITY AND CORRESPONDING PRESSURE DROP & W/A

Material

Umf (m/s)

P (Pa)

Sand
Red Ballotini
Ballotini 8 (grey)

0.030+0.001
0.1680.008
0.397+0.022

4510290
4550150
6170150

Weight per unit Area

(Pa)
371040
5640110
5640+110

TABLE 3: CALCULATED VALUES FOR SLUGGING AND BUBBLE VELOCITIES COMPARED WITH THOSE IN Q3

Material
Sand
Red Ballotini
Ballotini 8
(grey)

K2 (Figs 9-11)
4.50
0.093
0.792

Uv
0.5691
0.6305
0.0494

Us
0.0928
0.0928

Ub
0.42
-

For Torricellis Law the calculated value of C0 was found to be 0.550.10

The graph of Pressure drop against superficial velocity (figure 1) was used to find the
minimum fluidisation velocity for sand in the fat bed. This was done by plotting a straight
line through the points before fluidisation occurred (where the dip happens) and another
straight line from when the flow rate of air was reduced from well above the fluidisation
velocity to the fluidisation velocity, the point of intersection of these two lines was
recorded as Umf. The graph behaved almost exactly as theory suggested it would - although
perhaps the gradient after Umf should have been closer to 0. Figures 5 and 7, describing the
same relationship for materials in the narrow bed showed also what we could expect, a
liner increase in pressure drop with increased flow rate. Figure 3 for the packed bed shows
a linear increase in pressure drop with velocity, this is as expected as there will be no
change in bed height with increased air velocity.
From figure 2 it can be seen that as expected the bed height stayed constant until
fluidisation occurred, and then increased linearly. Figures 6 and 8 show the same
relationship for the material in the narrow bed. In the narrow bed case the same trend
occurs as expected. Figure 4 for the packed bed also does exactly what expected,
increased air flow rates simply leads to an increased pressure drop, and no change in bed
height.
The linear plots of H/(H-Hmf) against (1/(U-Umf) in figures 9, 10 and 11 were done by
manipulating equation [4] in the lab manual. These linear plots allowed for values of Uv
and k2 to be read off the graph the gradient and intercept of the line respectively. The
values for Uv obtained agreed somewhat with calculated values (table 3), however the
value obtained for Ballotini 8 was significantly off. Values obtained for k2 vary
significantly for each material, and so should ideally be compared to literature values.
12
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

(none can be found)

The C0 value obtained from the gradient of the graph in figure 12 and shown above appears
to be accurate as can be seen from the graph the points all lie very close to the line of best
fit, even though points at faster flow rates have fairly significant errors.
Table 1 shows the k1 values obtained for the three materials. These agree with literature
values and theory in that the smaller the particle size the greater the value of k1. However,
although they do fit the correct trend, their overall accuracy is questionable as all three
have a percentage error of approximately 40%.
Table 2 shows the minimum fluidisation velocities for the three materials examined as
expected the minimum fluidisation velocity and the pressure drop increased with
increasing particle size. The weight per unit area was approximately equal to the pressure
drop at the fluidisation velocity.

13
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

Discussion
The aims of the experiment were to observe and comment on the relationships between
superficial velocity and the pressure drop and the relationship and between the minimum
fluidisation velocity and the bed height. These have both been achieved and are detailed
above in the results section.
The values obtained for minimum fluidisation velocity from the graphs all follow the
expected trend they agree with theory and literature, (LaProm, 2011).
Before readings were taken, the flow rate was first increased to approximately 3035litres/min, this was done in order to make sure the sand particles were arranged with the
lowest voidage possible. The flow rate was then reduced to 0 and readings were now
taken as normal. This was done to make sure the voidage present in the sand was at a
minimum, thereby stopping a dip occurring in the height as the particles rearrange to a
lower voidage just before the minimum fluidisation velocity (when frictional forces are far
lower.
The minimum fluidisation velocity appeared to increase very significantly with size, with
it increasing 5 fold between 150m and 250m, and then by almost 3 between 250m and
428m. This is very significant and clearly shows the large increases of energy required
when fluidising larger particles. It would be useful in future experiments to conduct the
experiment with perhaps 3 or 4 more materials (of varying diameters), to perhaps obtain a
more insightful relationship between particle size and the minimum fluidisation velocity.
The large uncertainties in k1 values is something that unfortunately nothing could be done
about, they occurred due to the large uncertainty in the size of the error in particle size
(which then had to be doubled due to being squared in the calculation of k1. In future if
possible materials with smaller size ranges should be used.
Uncertainties at low flow rates for figures 1, 2, 5, 6, 7 and 8 can be seen to be almost
completely negligible. Even at higher flow rates the uncertainties are not massive the
curve can be seen to be well within the bounds of the highest uncertainty values. Reading
values from the manometer was difficult at higher flow rates however, as the height would
fluctuate quite significantly. This problem could be countered by perhaps using a denser
liquid. Although this will lead to increase costs and the only immediately obvious one is
mercury (MANOMETERS: FLUIDS FOR MANOMETERS, 2008).
To investigate the accuracy of calculated k2 values, they should be compared to values in
literature. Unfortunately, these have proved exceedingly difficult to find, so know overall
conclusion on their accuracy can be drawn.

14
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

Conclusions
The aims of the experiment were to observe and comment on the relationships between
superficial velocity and the pressure drop and the relationship and between the minimum
fluidisation velocity and the bed height. These have both been achieved and the results
obtained appear to be reliable although cannot be confirmed as literature values were
unable to be obtained. Minimum fluidisation velocities of 0.030+0.001m/s,
0.1680.008m/s and 0.397+0.022m/s were obtained for sand, Ballotini red and Ballotini 8
respectively.
One of the drawbacks of the experiment was the lack of different materials examined,
which would have allowed for stronger conclusions to be drawn about the correlation
between Umf and particle size. Another was the lack of available literature values that
would have allowed for the comparison of results giving a far clearer indication as to the
overall success of the experiment.
Errors in the experiment, although sometimes significant, did not appear to have a drastic
affect on the results all graphs behaved as expected (agreeing with literature and theory).
The most significant source of error in the experiment was the uncertainty in particle size.

References
LaProm, (2016) LaProm - Fluidization Technology, Fluidizacao.com.br. Available at:
http://www.fluidizacao.com.br/ing/home.php?pgi=Teoria/Velmf2.html (Accessed: 24
March 2016).
MANOMETERS: FLUIDS FOR MANOMETERS (2008)
Manometersbalancing.blogspot.co.uk. Available at:
http://manometersbalancing.blogspot.co.uk/2008/10/fluids-for-manometers.html
(Accessed: 24 March 2016).
Ram, D. (2013) "The Determination of Minimum Bubbling Velocity, Minimum
Fluidization Velocity and Fluidization Index of Fine Powders (Hematite) using Gas-Solid
Tapered Beds", nternational Journal of Science and Research, 2(2), pp. 287-293.
Rufford Knowledge Base - Glossary of Terms (2014) Rufford.co.uk. Available at:
http://rufford.co.uk/technical/glossary.html (Accessed: 21 March 2016).

15
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

Appendix A: Sample Calculations

Conversion of manometer reading to pressure drop
The manometer reading gives a height difference in cm. This is converted to a pressure drop
using equation 1 shown below. The calculation shown is for a h of 0.426m. Table 4 shows
the values used is the calculation.
TABLE 4: VALUES USED TO CALCULATE STATIC PRESSURE

Density of water ()
Gravitational force
(g)
Height difference
(h)

1000kg/m3 (source)
9.8N/kg
0.426m

EQUATION 1: CALCULATION OF STATIC PRESSURE FROM HEIGHT

P= g h

P=10009.80. 426

P=4174.8 Pa

Where,
P is the Pressure drop in across the bed (Pa)
is the density of water (kg/m3)
g is the gravitational force (N/kg)
h is the height difference (m)

Area of cross section

The area of the fat and narrow beds are simply calculated using equation 2 shown below. The
calculation shown is for the fat bed diameter 0.188m.
EQUATION 2: CALCULATION OF CROSS-SECTIONAL AREA

A=

D
4

A=

0.188
4

A=0.0278 m2

Where,
A is the area of the cross-section (m2)
D is the diameter of the bed (m)

Calculation of superficial velocity from volumetric flow rate

The flow meter gives a flow rate in litres per minute. From this the superficial fluid velocity
is calculated using equation 3 below. The calculation shown is for a flow rate of 35 litres/min
in the fat bed.
EQUATION 3: CALCULATION SUPERFICIAL VELOCITY FROM FLOW RATE

U sf =

Q
A

U sf =

35106
600.0278

U sf =0.021 m/ s

Where,
16
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

Usf is the superficial velocity of the air (m/s)

Q is the volumetric flow rate of the air (m3/s)
A is the area of the cross-section (m2)

Calculation of fluidised bed density

To calculate the density of the fluidised bed, a stainless steel (s.s.) weights apparent mass
was recorded outside the bed and while within the bed. The two resulting force balance
equations can be used to obtain the fluidised bed density for the fat bed. The volume of the
s.s. weight was found by measuring the volume of water it displaced. Firstly, shown below is
the derivation of the two equations used.
EQUATION 4: FORCE BALANCE IN AIR AROUND HYDROMETER

T air =W s W a

T air =s V s g a V s g

T air =V s g ( s a )

Where,
Tair is the tension in the Hydrometer (N)
Ws is the weight of the s.s. weight (N)
Wa is the weight of air displaced by the s.s. weight (N)
s is the density of the s.s. weight (kg/m3)
a is the density of the air (kg/m3)
Vs is the volume occupied by the s.s. weight (m3)
g is the gravitational force (N/kg)
EQUATION 5: FORCE BALANCE IN BED AROUND HYDROMETER

T bed=W sW b

T bed=( s V s gb V b g )

T bed=V s g ( sb )

Where,
Tbed is the tension in the Hydrometer (N)
Wb is the weight of the bed displaced by the s.s. weight (N)
b is the density of the bed (kg/m3)
The tension of the hydrometer in air and water is calculated by simply multiplying the mass
reading by the gravitational force. This is shown in equation 6 below. Table 2 below shows
the values used in these calculations.
TABLE 5: VALUES USED TO CALCULATE TENSIONS IN HYDROMETER

Mass reading on hydrometer in air (Mair)

Mass reading on hydrometer in bed (Mbed)
Gravitational force (g)
T air =M airg
T bed=M bedg

T air =0.0979.8
T bed=0.0619.8

97g
61g
9.8N/kg

T air =0.951 N
T bed=0. 598 N

Now, we simply do Eq. 4 minus Eq. 5 and rearrange to solve for b. Tair and Tbed are known
from multiplying the mass reading on the hydrometer by the gravitational force. The
calculation of b is shown below. Table 6 shows the values used in the calculation.
17
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

TABLE 6: VALUES USED TO CALCULATE BED DENSITY

Mass reading on hydrometer in air

(Tair)
Mass reading on hydrometer in bed
(Tbed)
Volume occupied by s.s. weight (Vs)
Density of air (a)
Gravitational force (g)

0.951N
0.598N
34ml
1.2kg/m3
9.8N/kg

T air T bed =V s g ( s a ) V s g ( s b )

b=

( 9761 )1039.8
+1.2
341069.8

T air T bed =V s g ( b a )

b=1060 kg/m

b=

T air T bed
+ a
Vs g

Calculation of bed voidage

The bed voidage is a measure of the fraction of empty space surrounding the material in the
bed. It can be calculated if the actual bed volume and the volume occupied by the material is
known. The actual bed volume at the minimum fluidisation velocity is the volume we are
interested in. Firstly, the specific volume will be calculated. This is calculated for the red
Ballotini beads from equation 7 below. Table 4 shows the values used in this calculation.
TABLE 7: VALUES USED TO CALCULATE SPECIFIC VOLUME

Measured mass of Ballotini beads (m)

Specific density of the beads from label (m)

0.284kg
2500kg/m3

EQUATION 7: FORMULA TO CALCULATE SPECIFIC VOLUME

V specific =

m
m

V specific =

0.284
2500

V specific =1 .14 104 m3

Where,
Vspecific is the volume occupied by the Ballotini beads (m3)
m is the measured mass of beads (kg)
m is the specific density of the beads (kg/m3)
The volume occupied by the bed can be simply calculated from equation 8 shown below.
Table 8 shows the values used in this calculation.
TABLE 8: VALUES USED TO OBTAIN VOLUME OF BED

Cross-sectional area of packing (A)

Height of packing (h)

4.95 x 10-4m2
0.307m

EQUATION 8: FORMULA TO CALCULATE VOLUME

V = Ah

V =4.9510 0.307

V =1.5210 m

18
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

Where,
V is the volume occupied by the bed (m3)
A is the cross-sectional area of packing (m2)
h is the height of packing (m)
With both the volume and the specific volume known, the voidage fraction can be found from
equation 9. This is shown below using the values obtained above (for red Ballotini). Table 9
shows the values used in this calculation.
TABLE 9: VALUES USED TO CALCULATE VOIDAGE FRACTION

Volume occupied by the Ballotini beads (Vspecific)

Volume occupied by the bed (V)

1.14 x 10-4m3
1.52 x 10-4m3

EQUATION 9: FORMULA TO CALCULATE VOIDAGE FRACTION

=1

V specific
V

=1

1.14104
1.52104

=10.75

=0.25

Calculation of bed voidage (sand)

The voidage fraction in the sand cannot be calculated in the same way as above as the
specific density of the sand is not known

Calculation of velocity of sand through orifice

The flow rate of sand leaving the orifice was calculated by timing how long it took to
discharge a measured volume of sand. This flow rate was then divided by the area of the
orifice to calculate the velocity of the sand through the orifice. This is shown below using
equation 2. Values used for this calculation are displayed in table 10
TABLE 10: VALUES USED TO OBTAIN VELOVITY OF SAND THROUGH ORIFICE

Volume of sand discharged through orifice

(V)
Time (t)
Area of orifice (A)
u=

V
At

u=

420106
5.031058.47

420ml
8.47s
5.03 x 10-5m2

u=0.98 m/ s

Calculation of weight per unit area of the bed

The weight per unit area of the fat bed can be calculated from equation 11 shown below.
Table 11 shows the values used in this calculation. Table 7 shows the values used in this
calculation. This is used in question 1 of the analysis questions.
TABLE 11: VALUES USED TO CALCULATE WEIGHT PER UNIT AREA

1060kg/m3
9.8N/kg
0.357m

Density of fluidised bed (b)

Gravitational Force (g)
Height of bed (h)
EQUATION 11: CALCULATION OF FORCE PER UNIT AREA

19
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

W b Vg
=
A
A

W
=b gh
A

W
=10609.80. 357
A

W
=3709 Pa
A

Analysis Question 1
At the point of minimum fluidisation, the centre of the fat bed appears to be fully fluidised
but the outer edges do not. At higher air flow rates the whole bed appears fluidised. The
weight per unit area at the minimum fluidisation velocity was calculated in Equation 11
above to be 3709Pa. The pressure drop across the bed at this height is 4508Pa. This suggests
that the point of minimum fluidisation should perhaps be slightly before this however it
also confirms that the bed is fully fluidised.

Analysis Question 2
The minimum fluidisation velocity for the narrow bed materials (Ballotini Red and Ballotini
8) was found by looking for the point on figures when the bed height rises with increased air
velocity this is the point when there should be a more or less constant pressure drop and the
bed is becoming fluidised. The two values are stated below.
Red Ballotini: Umf = 0.148m/s
Ballotini 8: Umf = 0.397m/s

Analysis Question 3
The equation given in the lab manual relating H and U is shown in the first line below. This is
rearranged so that it can be used to plot a linear function of H against U, in a way that the
unknowns Us and k2 can be measured from the gradient and the intercept of the best straight
fit line.

20
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

21
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

Values obtained from plotting this equation for the 3 different materials is shown in the
results section.

Analysis Question 4
This question as to calculate k1 using the results found in this experiment. The formula to be
used is shown below in equation 12. Table 12 below shows the values used in this calculation
for the fat bed.
TABLE 12: VALUES USED TO CALCULATE K1

Minimum fluidisation velocity (Umf)

Gravitational Force (g)
Diameter of material (dp)
Density of material (s)
Density of the air (f)
Viscosity of the air ()
EQUATION 12: CALCULATION OF K1
2

d
U mf =k 1 g p s f

k 1=

U mf
2
p

0.027m/s
9.8N/kg
150m
1060kg/m3
1.2kg/m3
(1.98 x 10-5 Pa s)
0.027

6 2

gd
sf

k 1=

1.9810

9.8( 15010 )
10601.2

k 1=0.0023

The values obtained for k1 are as follows:

Sand (in fat bed): k1 = 0.0023
Red Ballotini (in narrow bed): k1 = 0.0022
Ballotini 8 (in narrow bed): k1 = 0.0018
Literature values for these three materials could not be obtained

Appendix B: Error analysis

Calculation of uncertainty in pressure drop (fat bed)
Before fluctuations start to occur (after fluidisation), the uncertainty in the manometer
readings is 0.1cm for each tube therefore the total uncertainty in the height readings is
0.2cm. There are no uncertainties in the density of water and the gravitational force
therefore the relative error in this value will be the same as the relative error in the pressure
drop. After fluctuations start to occur it is estimated that this error increases to 0.4cm.
Equation 13 below is used to calculate the error in pressure drop. Shown below is this
calculation for a height difference of 0.508m, with a corresponding pressure drop of
4978.4Pa. At this point fluidisation had not occurred so the reading error will be simply
0.2cm

EQUATION 13: CALCULATION OR ERROR IN PRESSURE DROP

err ( P ) =rel . err ( h ) P

err ( P ) =

0.2
4978.4
50.8

err ( P ) =19.6 P a

22
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

Uncertainty in pressure drop (narrow bed)

For the uncertainty in pressure drop for the narrow bed, each reading gave a different
uncertainty. This was due to the decision that as the water level was continuously fluctuating
in the manometer, the maximum and minimum values the water level reached at each flow
rate would correspond to the error in height difference (and hence pressure difference) for
each point. Therefore this calculation cannot be shown but will be included on graphs.

Calculation of uncertainty in gas velocity (fat bed)

Before fluidisation occurs, the errors in flow rate readings (that lead to uncertainty in the
superficial gas velocity) are simply reading errors due to the scale - 1 litre/min for the fat
bed flow meter. This increases to roughly 2 litres/min at higher flow rates, where it was
often found the device would get stuck and then suddenly jump up readings.
The uncertainty in the diameter of the fat bed (and hence the cross-sectional area) is suitably
negligible so it can be disregarded. Therefore, the relative error in the flow rate will be the
same as the relative error in the velocity. This calculation is shown below in equation 14. The
calculation has been done for a flow rate of 60litres/min (when the error is now 2 litres/min)
which gave a superficial velocity of 0.036m/s.
EQUATION 14: CALCULATION OF UNCERTAINTY IN SUPERFICIAL VELOCITY

err ( U sf )=rel . err ( Q )U sf

err ( U sf )=

2
0.036
60

err ( U sf )= 0.0012 m/s

Calculation of uncertainty in gas velocity (narrow bed)

The flow meter had an uncertainty of 0.1cm, however this error got large at increased flow
rates due to the velocity being far more unstable. This increasing error was approximated to
be the equivalent of an extra 0.1cm ever 1 cm increase in the flow meter. This is the most
effective means of accounting for this changing absolute error.

Calculation of uncertainty in k1 values

The error in the calculation of k1 values is due to the error in the diameter of the particles (dp)
and the minimum fluidisation velocity (Umf). The diameter of the particles is squared in the
equation so the error should be doubled (before being added to the error in Umf). Equation 15
below shows how the total error in k1 was calculated. This is shown below for the red
Ballotini. The error in its diameter will be 50 as the value of 250m was taken from a
range 200-300m.

EQUATION 15: CALCULATION OF ERROR IN K1

err ( k 1 )= rel . error ( U mf ) 2+ ( 2rel . error ( d p ) ) k 1

err ( k 1 )=

0.008 2 250 2
+
0.0022
0.168
250

)(

err ( k 1 )=0.400.0022

err ( k 1 )= 0.0009

23
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

Appendix C: Data sheet

Constants
Density of water
(kg/m3)

1000

Acceleration due to
gravity (m/s2)

9.8

Initial Height (m)

0.174

Fat Diameter (m)

0.188

Area of Fat bed (m2)

0.0278

Narrow Diameter
(m)

0.0251

Area of Narrow bed

(m2)

0.000494
808

Orifice depth (m)

0.03

Orifice Diameter (m)

0.008

24
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

Fat bed (sand)

H/(H-Hmf)
180
120
90
60

1/(U - Umf)
333
167
111
83

41
27

67
56

18
16

48
42
Packed
Bed

Flow Rate
(litres/mi
Bed
n)
Height (m)
20
0.350
25
0.350
30
0.350
35
40
45
50

0.350
0.350
0.350
0.350

U Bed
Height
0.001
0.001
0.001

Pressure
Drop (Pa)
2998.8
3851.4
4292.4

Superficial
Gas
Velocity
(m/s)
0.012
0.015
0.018

0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001

5576.2
6370.0
7526.4
8300.6

0.021
0.024
0.027
0.030

U Superficial
Gas Velocity
(m/s)
0.0006
0.0006
0.0006
0.0006
0.0006
0.0006
0.0012

25
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

H/(H-Hmf)
14
10
7
5
4
4
3
3
3
3
3

1/(U - Umf)
23
15
11
9
8
6
6
5
4
4
4

26
Aidan Thomson

s1431433

Narrow Bed - Grey Ballotini

Flow Rate
(litres/mi
n)
2.6
3.2
3.8

Bed Height
(m)
0.348
0.348
0.348

u bed hight
0.005
0.005
0.005

Pressure
Drop (Pa)
1646.4
1832.6
2263.8

U Pressure
Drop (Pa)
147.0
147.0
147.0

Superficial
Gas Velocity
(m/s)
0.088
0.108
0.128

4.4
5.0
5.7
6.4
7.0
7.7
8.3
9.0

0.348
0.348
0.348
0.348
0.348
0.348
0.348
0.348

0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005

2783.2
3351.6
3880.8
4331.6
4870.6
5615.4
6281.8
6703.2

147.0
147.0
147.0
147.0
147.0
147.0
147.0
147.0

0.148
0.168
0.192
0.216
0.236
0.259
0.280
0.303

9.7
10.4

0.348
0.372

0.005
0.005

7232.4
6174.0

147.0
147.0

0.327
0.350

11.2
11.8
12.6
13.3

0.379
0.398
0.421
0.440

0.005
0.010
0.020
0.035

6007.4
6144.6
6389.6
6683.6

147.0
147.0
147.0
147.0

0.377
0.397
0.424
0.448

14.0
14.8
15.6
16.4
17.3
18.2
18.9
19.8

0.471
0.503
0.530
0.535
0.550
0.557
0.581
0.584

0.065
0.070
0.100
0.110
0.100
0.130
0.140
0.150

6820.8
7026.6
7369.6
7585.2
7889.0
8124.2
8575.0
8604.4

147.0
147.0
147.0
147.0
147.0
147.0
147.0
147.0

0.472
0.499
0.525
0.552
0.583
0.613
0.637
0.667

H/(H-Hmf)
2.000

1/(U - Umf)
21.206
27

Aidan Thomson

s1431433

1.333
1.167

13.495
10.237

1.083
1.077
1.053
1.048
1.053
1.040
1.037
1.034

8.247
6.747
5.709
4.948
4.303
3.806
3.493
3.158

28
Aidan Thomson

s1431433