FLUIDIZATION

NDXKYL003

SYNOPSIS
The experiment investigated the suitability of the Ergun equation to model the pressure-drop as a
function of superficial velocity in fluidised beds. It is found that the Ergun equation does is not at all
suitable to model the pressure-drop as a function of velocity for fluidised beds. This is so since the
statistical analysis shows that it does not correlate well by not agreeing and hence yielding
conflicting information. There is a very high correlation between pressure-drop relative to velocity
due to the coefficient of determination being very close to one at 0,97647813. The ANOVA table
however does not agree with the previous statement because the t-statistic for the x variable
(velocity) is very large at 23,23095246 though the p-value is insignificant at 5,69725E-12. Two
alternative models were proposed. These included the Foscolo et al model and the Wen and Yu
model. These models were tested statistically as well as graphically and were both found to be more
suitable in modelling the pressure-drop as a function of velocity in fluidised bed systems. From these
two alternative models, the Wen and Yu model comes out as the better model. This is so since it has
a higher coefficient of determination with a value of 0,342635642 than the Foscolo et al model,
which has a coefficient of determination of only 0,246539726. The Wen and Yu model is concluded
to be the better of the three models investigated. The sensitivity of the Ergun equation to
propagation of error was investigated. It was found that the Ergun equation can be seen to be
extremely sensitive to propagation of error. This is evident from Table 7, where the propagation of
error term (2y) ranges from approximately 3,00E+07 to 5,00E+08. This can be expected since there
are a few power terms which are multiplied in the Ergun equation. The main aim of the experiment
is to ideally find the better suiting model to model the pressure-drop as a function of velocity in a
fluidised bed system. This was done and it was found to be the Wen and Yu model.

Page 1
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

CONTENTS
SYNOPSIS ................................................................................................................................................. 1
LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................................... 4
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................................ 4
NOMENCLATURE..................................................................................................................................... 4
GLOSSARY................................................................................................................................................ 5
1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 5
1.1. Subject of Report .......................................................................................................................... 5
1.2 Background to Report ................................................................................................................... 5
1.3. Objectives ..................................................................................................................................... 6
1.4. Scope and Limitations .................................................................................................................. 6
1.5. Plan of development .................................................................................................................... 6
2. LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................................................................... 6
2.1. Practical background ................................................................................................................... 6
2.2. Different reactor systems ............................................................................................................. 7
2.2.1. Fixed bed reactor system ................................................................................................ 7
2.2.2. Fluidized bed reactor system ........................................................................................... 8
2.3. Ergun equation and alternative models....................................................................................... 9
2.3.1. Ergun equation ................................................................................................................ 9
2.3.2. Wen & Yu....................................................................................................................... 10
2.3.3. Foscolo et al .................................................................................................................. 10
2.4. Minimum fluidisation velocity .................................................................................................... 10
2.5. Statistical methods..................................................................................................................... 11
2 EXPERIMENTAL ............................................................................................................................. 11
3.1. Experimental development ........................................................................................................ 11
3.2. Apparatus ................................................................................................................................... 11
3.3. Procedure ................................................................................................................................... 12
4. RESULTS............................................................................................................................................. 13
4.1 Graphical representations of the pressure drop and bed height ................................................ 13
4.1.1. Experimental bed height as a function of superficial velocity....................................... 13
4.1.2. Experimental pressure drop as a function of superficial velocity ...................................... 14
4.1.4. Wen & Yu pressure drop as a function of superficial velocity ....................................... 15
4.1.5. Foscolo et al pressure drop as a function of velocity .................................................... 16
4.2. Summary of results .................................................................................................................... 17

Page 2
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

4.2.1 Minimum fluidization velocity ....................................................................................... 17

4.2.2 Bed height and pressure drop ....................................................................................... 17
4.3 Statistical analysis ................................................................................................................. 18
4.3.1 Ergun equation .............................................................................................................. 18
4.3.2 Wen & Yu....................................................................................................................... 19
4.3.3 Foscolo et al .................................................................................................................. 20
4.4 Error analysis......................................................................................................................... 21
4.5 Risk analysis .......................................................................................................................... 22
5. Discussion of results.......................................................................................................................... 23
5.1. Bed height and pressure-drop versus velocity graphs ............................................................... 23
5.1.1 Analysis of the graphs .............................................................................................................. 23
Experimental pressure-drop as a function of superficial velocity ..................................................... 23
Ergun pressure drop as a function of superficial velocity ............................................................. 23
Wen & Yu pressure drop as a function of superficial velocity for a fixed bed ............................... 24
Wen & Yu pressure drop as a function of superficial velocity for a fluidised bed ......................... 24
Foscolo et al pressure drop as a function of superficial velocity for a fixed bed ........................... 24
Foscolo et al pressure drop as a function of superficial velocity for a fluidised bed ..................... 24
Graphical analysis summary ......................................................................................................... 25
5.2. Minimum fluidisation velocity .................................................................................................... 25
5.3. Bed height and pressure drop .................................................................................................... 25
5.4. Statistical analysis ...................................................................................................................... 26
5.4.1. Ergun equation .............................................................................................................. 26
5.4.2. Foscolo et al .................................................................................................................. 26
5.4.3. Wen & Yu....................................................................................................................... 26
5.4.4. Summary of statistical analysis ..................................................................................... 27
5.5. Error analysis.............................................................................................................................. 27
6. Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 27
7. Recommendations ............................................................................................................................ 28
8. References ........................................................................................................................................ 29
9. Appendix ........................................................................................................................................... 29
9.1. Raw experimental data .............................................................................................................. 29
9.2 Sample calculations..................................................................................................................... 31
9.2.1. VOIDAGE ............................................................................................................................. 31

Page 3
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

9.2.2. ERGUN EQUATION .............................................................................................................. 31

9.2.3. PROPAGATION OF ERROR ................................................................................................... 31
9.2.4. ERROR ................................................................................................................................. 31

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Fixed bed reactor.....7
Figure 2: Bed height and pressure drop .8
Figure 3: Apparatus set-up.11
Figure 4: Plot of bed height vs. velocity...13
Figures 5-10: Pressure-drop vs. velocity plots....14-16
Figures 11-16: Statistical plots............18-20

LIST OF TABLES
Tables 1-6: Statistical data.......18-20
Table 7: Propagation of error.....21
Table 8: Risk matrix....22

NOMENCLATURE
Particle sphericity

Pressure-drop (Pa)

- Particle diameter (m)

Voidage

Superficial velocity (m/s)

- Minimum fluidisation velocity (m/s)

Fluid viscosity (kg/m.s)

Particle density (kg/m)

- Fluid density (kg/m)

L - Bed height (m)

Page 4
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

GLOSSARY
Minimum fluidisation velocity: The velocity at which the packed bed of particles immediately
becomes suspended and the bed height increases.

Voidage: The amount of space left in between particles which are packed together.

Fluidisation The phenomenon whereby a packed bed of particles become suspended by passing a
fluid through them.

Sphericity: The relative shape of a particle to that of a perfect sphere

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Subject of Report

This report outlays an investigation made into evaluating the performance of different reagents with
in order to increase their mineral grade. To do this the effect of depressant type and dosage on mass
and water recovery was investigated. Two depressant types are under consideration; guar gum
(guar) and carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC), and three dosages are being considered; 100 g/t, 300 g/t
and 500 g/t. A test case in which no depressant is added was also considered. SIBX was used as the
standard collector at 100g/t, and DOW200 as the frother at 40g/t (Bbosa, 2014). An analysis of the
results using the appropriate methods is included in this report. The hypothesis was tested and the
outcome of this test is given in the conclusion, section 6, of this report. This outcome led to
proposing two alternative models for estimating the pressure drop in liquid fluidized beds. The
conclusion of which was the better fitting model was established after detailed statistical analysis.
The details of each model investigated are contained in this report. These details included the
dimensional analysis, energy loss terms and physical insight into the models proposed, as well as the
Ergun equation. The experimental data was then modelled using the proposed models, as well as
the Ergun equation. These results were then compared and are shown graphically in this report. This
gave an indication to how well each model projected the pressure-drop in fluidized beds.

1.2 Background to Report

The Managing Director of a petrochemical company needs a model that accurately predicts
pressure-drop as a function of velocity in fluidized beds. (Govender, 2014).

It is suggested that the Ergun equation will work for this purpose. The Managing Director is unsure
of this since the Ergun equation was specifically developed for fixed bed systems. It is therefore
proposed that the applicability of the Ergun equation be tested and verified. The Managing Director
has a background in statistics and therefore requested that the appropriate use of statistical
methods is used in the analysis.

It is also requested that if the Ergun equation does not work well as a model for pressure-drop
across fluidized beds, at least two alternative models should be proposed.

Page 5
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

1.3. Objectives
The objectives of this report are to:

To show whether the Ergun equation is appropriate for the modelling of liquid fluidized bed
systems using correct statistical techniques.
Propose and test at least two alternative models for estimating the pressure-drop in liquid
fluidized bed systems, if the Ergun equation does not succeed in doing so.
To investigate the sensitivity of the Ergun equation to propagation of error and utilise the
results to evaluate the applicability of the alternative models proposed.

It is hypothesized that the Ergun equation will not be suitable to model the pressure-drop as a
function of velocity for a liquid fluidized bed system. Hence, as a result, two alternative models
will be proposed. This is hypothesized since the Ergun equation was specifically developed for
fixed bed systems.

1.4. Scope and Limitations

This report contains a comparison of the suitability of various models in estimating the pressure-
drop as a function of velocity in liquid fluidized bed systems. Since laboratory sized apparatus was
used, which included the rotameter, manometer and liquid fluidized bed system. The rotameter also
did not have a 10 litres per hour measuring point and so this flowrate was skipped. The outcome
may therefore not give an accurate description of the suitability of the various models investigated
in larger industry sized systems. Hence this could also be the case for using flowrates of 10 litres per
hour or lower. The report was also limited by the time available to conduct the experiment. It was in
addition limited by the lab equipment available, since wasnt possible to have flowrates above 200
litres per hour, which may be occurring in industrial processes, with the lab setup available.

1.5. Plan of development

The report first gives a background into the theory of the investigation. Thereafter the objectives
and aim of the experiment are stated. This is then followed by the setup of the apparatus and the
methodology used to conduct the investigation. Thereafter the results are stated and discussed. A
conclusion is then formulated and given, based on the results obtained. Finally, recommendations
on how to further proceed in the most suitable manner are given. These recommendations are built
on the conclusion obtained.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Practical background

Reactors play an essential role in industrial processes, since in many processes reactions are needed
to take place. The most common reactor systems used are fixed bed or fluidized bed reactor
systems. In this practical, the fluidized bed system is used. An important aspect is that of the
pressure drop required for the liquid or the gas to flow through the reactor at a specific flow rate.
Also, a large pressure drop means that it may result in more costs to adjust to the correct pressure

Page 6
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

specification for the process. It is therefore essential to know the pressure-drop occurring across a
reactor.

This can be done by measuring the pressure drop at a certain flowrate where possible. In some cases
this may not be possible and therefore other methods in obtaining the pressure drop need to be
used. This can include the use of models that represent the pressure-drop of a reactor system as a
function of a meaningful quantity that can be controlled. In most cases, this quantity is velocity. The
pressure-drop is therefore modelled as a function of velocity using various models. The pressure
drop obtained using the models can thereafter be compared to those obtained by the actual
measuring by the use of a manometer. This leads to the ability to determine which model is more
suitable in accurately describing the pressure-drop across a fluidized bed system. This model can
therefore be used in giving a good indication of the pressure-drop across a fluidized bed reactor.

2.2. Different reactor systems

2.2.1. Fixed bed reactor system
A fixed bed reactor system is a cylindrical column that is filled with a suitable packing material which
is usually non-spherical particles. This is to increase voidage and surface area, and hence decrease
pressure drop. The bed of particles is unable to move and hence in theory, the bed has a uniform
filling and a constant voidage. Practically, the voidage is more near the walls of the reactor. The
purpose of a fixed bed is essentially to enhance contact between two phases in a process. The liquid
is distributed uniformly through the column saturating the packing material. An absorber is an
example of a fixed bed (Subramanian, 2001). The vital characteristic of a fixed bed reactor is that
material flows through the reactor as a plug. Ideally, the entire substrate stream flows at the same
velocity, parallel to the reactor axis with no back-mixing. All material present at any given reactor
cross-section has had an identical residence time. The longitudinal position of a particle within the
fixed bed reactor is, therefore, proportional to the time spent in the reactor. All products have the
same residence time and therefore all particles have an equal opportunity for reaction (Chaplin,
1990). Figure 1 shows an example of a typical fixed bed reactor with its packing material.

Outlet

Packing material

Inlet

Figure 1: Fixed bed reactor

Page 7
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

2.2.2. Fluidized bed reactor system

A fluidized bed is a packed bed whereby fluid flows through at a high enough velocity that the bed is
loosened and the particle-fluid mixture behaves as though it is a fluid. Therefore, when a bed of
particles is fluidized, the entire bed can be transported like a fluid. Both gas and liquid flows can be
used to fluidize a bed of particles. The main reason for fluidizing a bed is to obtain vigorous agitation
of the particles in contact with the fluid, leading to efficient contact of the particles and the fluid and
the particles and the reactor wall. This suggests that nearly uniform temperatures can be
maintained, even in highly exothermic reactions.

Bed Height E
C
A B

B C D

A
Pressure Drop
E

Minimum Fluidization Velocity

Superficial Velocity

Figure 2: Superficial velocity vs. Pressure drop and Bed height

Figure 2 shows the traits of a bed of particles when the upward superficial fluid velocity is gradually
increased from zero to beyond the point of fluidization, and back down to zero (Subramanian, 2001).
It can be seen that as you move from A to B (i.e. increasing superficial velocity) on Figure 2, the
pressure drop increases, whereas the bed height remains constant. From B to C, the pressure drop
remains constant as it passes through the minimum fluidization velocity, whereas the bed height
increases constantly. From point C to D, the pressure drop remains constant as the superficial
velocity increases, whereas the bed height continues to increase. Thereafter we move in the reverse
direction, from D to E, decreasing superficial velocity. From point D to E, the pressure drop remains
constant until it reaches the minimum fluidization velocity, where thereafter, it decreases until zero.
The bed height on the other hand decreases as you move from D to E until you reach the minimum
fluidization velocity, where thereafter, it remains at a constant height.

Page 8
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

2.3. Ergun equation and alternative models

2.3.1. Ergun equation
The Ergun equation relates the friction factor in a fixed bed system as a function of the Reynolds
number. This relationship can be used to deduce an equation which can determine the pressure-
drop as a function of velocity in a fixed bed system. The Ergun equation for the pressure drop during
flow through a fixed bed is shown to be simply represented as a function of a modified interstitial
Reynolds number, Rei*, and a modified Galileo number, Ga*, both based on a characteristic
dimension of voidage in the porous medium. The end result is an equation in a simple dimensionless
form, which more effectively reflects the fundamental physical laws than previously given forms. The
Reynolds number, Rei*, and Galileo number, Ga*, are both based on the particle diameter, porosity
and sphericity. The Reynolds number shows the ratio of inertial and viscous forces, reflecting the
tendency towards turbulence (Niven, 2001). The Galileo number is the square of the ratio of the
Galileo number to the particle Froude number, Fr, shown by Equation 2. The Galileo number is
expressed by Equation 1.

2
= 2 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Equation 1

Where:

= ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Equation 2

The particle diameter, dp, can be calculated by (Leva, 1959):

6
= ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Equation 3

The most common and useful form of the Ergun equation is given by Ergun (1952):

150 (1)2 1.75 (1)

= 2 2
3
+ 3
2 ----------------------------------------------------------------Equation 4

Where:

, denotes the change in pressure

L, denotes the fixed bed height
, denotes the dynamic fluid viscosity
, denotes the particle sphericity
, denotes the particle diameter
, denotes the fluid density
, denotes the prosity (voidage)
, denotes the particle surface area

Since the Ergun equation was developed for fixed bed systems, the change in bed height and
porosity is not accounted for. This can be seen in Equation 2.4. This may lead to irregularities when
applying the Ergun equation to fluidized bed systems, where a change in bed height and porosity
occurs.

Page 9
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

2.3.2. Wen & Yu

The Wen and Yu is one of the alternative models that will be proposed should the Ergun equation
not succeed in modelling the pressure-drop as a function of velocity for a fluidized bed system. The
Wen and Yu equation for the minimum fluidisation velocity is also reduced to a simpler form. This is
based on a modified Archimedes number Ar**mf, relating to the void length scale and buoyant weight
at a minimum fluidisation velocity and a modified interstitial Reynolds number at a minimum
fluidisation velocity, Re*i,mf. The Wen and Yu voidage terms are represented to be basic functions of
the modified and normal Archimedes and Reynolds numbers and the unit weights (Niven, 2001).

The Wen and Yu equation is based on that fact that incipient fluidization is occurring, which is when
particles are becoming suspended in the fluid. It therefore does somehow consider the change in
bed height by taking into account the buoyant weight of the bed. This gives a better insight into the
pressure drop in a fluidized bed.

The Wen and Yu equation is given as:

= (1 )( ) = ---------------------------------------------------------------------------Equation 5

Where is the solid particle density, is the porosity at minimum fluidisation, and is the
buoyant weight of the bed.

2.3.3. Foscolo et al
Foscolo et al provides a model that predicts the steady state expansion as a function of velocity for a
fluidized bed from its initial packed bed form to the final fully expanded state (i.e. fluidized state).
The relationship between voidage and superficial liquid velocity is described well by the equation.
The equation is given as:

2
= 17.3 2 (1 ) 4.8 + 0.336 (1 ) 4.8 ---------------------------------------------Equation 6

The proportionality constants 0.336 and 17.3 have been selected to match with the Burke-Plummer
and Blake-Kozney equations, respectively, at fixed bed voidages of 0.4 to correspond with the
randomly packed spheres. Although Foscolo et al describes the superficial velocity and voidage well,
at the laminar to turbulent regime extremes, it is not sufficiently precise in between these regions.
This is due to the fact that Reynolds number does not apply in this region. This results in an
underestimated superficial liquid velocity in this region (Foscolo, 1982). This disadvantage is minimal
since it is limited to the intermediate region and therefore Foscolo et al can still be seen as a viable
method to model pressure-drop as a function of velocity.

2.4. Minimum fluidisation velocity

The minimum fluidisation velocity is the velocity at which the bed particles immediately become
suspended. This phenomenon occurs as a result of the force of the fluid on the particles. The
minimum fluidisation velocity can be determined by using the following equation:
Dp2 p g 3s2
MFV ---------------------------------------------------------------------------Equation 7
150 1

Page
10
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

This equation is developed by solving the Ergun equation (Equation 4) simultaneously with a force
balance. It is the reduced to its final form in Equation 7 by assuming that the flow at the minimum
fluidisation velocity is laminar.

2.5. Statistical methods

A test for linear correlation should first be compared. Thereafter the residual mean squares of the
regression lines should be tested. If they are not the same, the structure of the error may be
different. The gradients of the regression lines should then be compared. If the gradients are found
to be different, it means that the lines are in fact different as well. If the regression lines do not cross
around the central range of the data it may mean that one data set is much greater than the other. If
the regression lines are parallel, the separation between them should be checked. If there isnt any
separation, the lines are the same and more data should be collected (Napier-Munn, 1998).

2 EXPERIMENTAL
3.1. Experimental development
The aim of the experiment is to use correct statistical techniques to show whether the Ergun
equation is appropriate for the modelling of liquid fluidized beds. If the Ergun is not appropriate, two
alternative models should be proposed and tested for estimating the pressure drop in liquid
fluidized beds. Thereafter, the Ergun equation should be investigated with regards to propagation of
error and these results should be used to evaluate the suitability of the alternative models proposed.

3.2. Apparatus

Figure 3: Apparatus setup

Page
11
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

The experimental apparatus for the fluidization process is shown in Figure 3 and consists of:

Rotameter

Packed bed reactor with sand as packing particles

Ruler

Manometer

The water enters at the water inlet through the inlet valve and into the rotameter. The rotameter
controls the flowrate of the water going into the system. After the desired flowrate is set on the
rotameter the water then enters the packed bed reactor which is a fluidized bed system. This leads
to the bed height increasing after the minimum fluidization velocity is exceeded. The ruler is used to
measure the changing bed height. The pressure-drop can thereafter be measured by means of the
manometer besides the reactor.

3.3. Procedure
The initial pressure-drop and bed height are recorded when there is no flow of water

The mains are opened to allow water to flow as far as the inlet valve

The inlet valve is opened and the rotameter is set to a flowrate of 20 l/h.

The pressure-drop and bed height are measured at 20 l/h. This is done after the system has
been allowed at least 10 seconds to stabilize, which is done for each flowrate thereafter as
well.

The flowrate is then increased in increments of 10 l/h until a flowrate of 100 l/h is reached.
The bed height and pressure-drop are recorded at each of these increments.

The minimum fluidization velocity was found to be 70 l/h (i.e. when the bed height began to
increase).

The flowrate is then increased from 100 l/h to 200 l/h in increments of 20 l/h. Again, the bed
height and pressure-drop are recorded at each of these increments.

The flowrate is then decreased from 200 l/h to 100 l/h in increments of 20 l/h. The bed
height and pressure-drop are recorded at each of these increments.

The flowrate is then decreased from 100 l/h to 20 l/h in increments of 10 l/h. Again, the bed
height and pressure-drop are recorded at each of these increments.

The flow of water is thereafter stopped (i.e. the flowrate is 0 l/h).

The entire process is then carried out four more times, obtaining five sets of readings for the
forward and reverse flowrates.

Once the five runs are completed, the flowrate is set to zero by means of the rotameter, the
mains are shut off and all the valves are closed.

Page
12
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

4. RESULTS

4.1 Graphical representations of the pressure drop and bed height

Contained through this section are plots which describe the pressure drop and bed height as a
function of superficial velocity. These are obtained from the experimental results. It then goes on to
graphically represent the various models investigated. The suitability of the models can be visualised
using these plots. It also gives an insight into the accuracy of the experimental results by comparing
it with the general cases shown in Figure 2.

4.1.1. Experimental bed height as a function of superficial velocity

Figure 4: Plot of experimental bed height as a function of velocity

Figure 3 shows the bed height plotted as a function of the superficial velocity obtained from the
experimental results. This is displayed on the plot for both the forward and reverse cases. Forward,
being when the flowrate is increased and reverse, being when the flowrate is decreased. It also
displays the standard error in the bed height by the use of error bars.

Page
13
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

4.1.2. Experimental pressure drop as a function of superficial velocity

Figure 5: Plot of experimental pressure-drop as a function of velocity

Figure 4 shows the pressure-drop plotted as a function of the superficial velocity obtained from the
experimental results. This is displayed on the plot for both the forward and reverse cases. Forward,
being when the flowrate is increased and reverse, being when the flowrate is decreased. It also
displays the standard error in the pressure-drop by the use of error bars.

4.1.3. Ergun pressure drop as a function of superficial velocity

8000.0

7000.0

6000.0 y = 446199x - 534,52

R = 0,9765
5000.0
Ergun
4000.0
P(Pa)

Experimental
3000.0
Linear (Ergun)
2000.0 Linear (Experimental)

1000.0 y = 96936x + 637,98

R = 0,6395
0.0
0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010 0.012 0.014 0.016
-1000.0
U (m/s)

Figure 6: Plot of Ergun and experimental pressure-drop as a function of velocity

Page
14
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

Figure 5 shows the pressure-drop plotted as a function of the superficial velocity obtained from the
Ergun equation model as well as the experimental results. This is the result of modelling the
pressure-drop as a function of velocity for a fluidised bed using the Ergun equation. It displays the
standard error in the pressure-drop by the use of error bars. The plot also shows the trendlines for
the Ergun and the Experimental data points, which helps compare and describe the data.

4.1.4. Wen & Yu pressure drop as a function of superficial velocity

2000

1500
y = 346223x + 25,48
R = 0,9946 Wen & Yu
1000
P (Pa)

y = 326296x - 32,622 Experimental

500 R = 0,997
Linear (Wen & Yu)
Linear (Experimental)
0
0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005
-500
U (m/s)

Figure 7: Plot of Wen & Yu and experimental pressure-drop as a function of velocity for fixed bed

Figure 7 shows the pressure-drop plotted as a function of the superficial velocity obtained from the
Wen & Yu equation model as well as the experimental results. This is the result of modelling the
pressure-drop as a function of velocity for a fixed bed using the Wen & Yu equation. It displays the
standard error in the pressure-drop by the use of error bars. The plot also shows the trendlines for
the Wen & Yu and the experimental data points, which helps compare and describe the data.

1800
1600
y = 10885x + 1494,8
1400 R = 0,9132
1200
P (Pa)

1000 y = -31731x + 1632 Wen & Yu

R = 0,9985
800 Experimental
600
Linear (Wen & Yu)
400
200 Linear (Experimental)
0
0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020
U (m/s)

Figure 8: Plot of Wen & Yu and experimental pressure-drop as a function of velocity for fluidised bed

Figure 8 shows the pressure-drop plotted as a function of the superficial velocity obtained from the
Wen & Yu equation model as well as the experimental results. This is the result of modelling the
pressure-drop as a function of velocity for a fluidised bed using the Wen & Yu equation. It displays
the standard error in the pressure-drop by the use of error bars. The plot also shows the trendlines
for the Wen & Yu and the experimental data points, which helps compare and describe the data.

Page
15
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

4.1.5. Foscolo et al pressure drop as a function of velocity

2000

y = 346223x + 25,48
1500
R = 0,9946

1000 Foscolo et al
P (Pa)

Experimental
y = 269837x - 9,3111
500 R = 0,9997 Linear (Foscolo et al)
Linear (Experimental )
0
0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005
-500
U (m/s)

Figure 9: Plot of Foscolo et al and experimental pressure-drop as a function of velocity for fixed bed

Figure 9 shows the pressure-drop plotted as a function of the superficial velocity obtained from the
Foscolo et al equation model as well as the experimental results. This is the result of modelling the
pressure-drop as a function of velocity for a fixed bed using the Foscolo et al model. It displays the
standard error in the pressure-drop by the use of error bars. The plot also shows the trendlines for
the Foscolo et al and the Experimental data points, which helps compare and describe the data.

1800
1600
y = 10885x + 1494,8
1400 R = 0,9132
1200
P (pa)

1000 Foscolo et al
800 y = -28410x + 1269,2 Experimental
600 R = 0,9418
Linear (Foscolo et al)
400
Linear (Experimental)
200
0
0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010 0.012 0.014 0.016
U (m/s)

Figure 10: Plot of Foscolo et al and experimental pressure-drop as a function of velocity for fluidised bed

Figure 10 shows the pressure-drop plotted as a function of the superficial velocity obtained from the
Foscolo et al equation model as well as the experimental results. This is the result of modelling the
pressure-drop as a function of velocity for a fluidised bed using the Foscolo et al model. It displays
the standard error in the pressure-drop by the use of error bars. The plot also shows the trendlines
for the Foscolo et al and the Experimental data points, which helps compare and describe the data.

Page
16
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

4.2. Summary of results

The following section summarises the results obtained from the experimental data and those
involving the various models investigated, highlighting the key aspects.

4.2.1 Minimum fluidization velocity

The minimum fluidisation velocity was found to be 70 l/h or 0.005 m/s when determined empirically.
This was done by visually detecting when the bed height began to increase and the velocity at which
this phenomenon occurred was recorded as the minimum fluidization velocity. An analytical solution
to the minimum fluidisation velocity yielded a value of 0,007237m/s. This was determined by using
Equation 7.

4.2.2 Bed height and pressure drop

It is found that the highest bed height reached at a maximum flowrate/velocity of 200 l/h or 0.014
m/s was 0.2766 m.

The highest experimental pressure drop was determined to be 1656.22 Pa. This occurred at a
flowrate of 200 l/h, though it remained more or less constant from 90 l/h onwards. This trend can be
seen from Figure 5.

Page
17
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

4.3 Statistical analysis

4.3.1 Ergun equation

Figure 11: Normal probability plot of Ergun data

Figure 12: Residuals plot of Ergun data

Table 1: Regression statistics for the Ergun data

Regression Ergun
statistics
R Square 0,97647813
Adjusted R 0,974668756
Square
Standard Error 312,1396113
t-stat 23,23095246
p-value 5,69725E-12

Table 2: ANOVA table for the Ergun data

ANOVA
df SS MS F Significance F
Regression 1 52581358,52 52581358,52 539,6771522 5,69725E-12
Residual 13 1266604,78 97431,13694
Total 14 53847963,3

Page
18
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

4.3.2 Wen & Yu

Figure 13: Normal probability plot of Wen & Yu data

Figure 14: Residuals plot of Wen & Yu data

Table 3: Regression statistics for the Wen & Yu data

Regression Wen & Yu

statistics
R Square 0,342635642
Adjusted R 0,292069153
Square
Standard Error 365,2441528
t-stat 2,603064134
p-value 0,021878

Table 4: ANOVA table for the Wen & Yu data

ANOVA
df SS MS F
Significance
F
Regression 1 903933,1 903933,1 6,775943 0,021878
Residual 13 1734243 133403,3
Total 14 2638176

Page
19
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

4.3.3 Foscolo et al

Normal Probability Plot

1500
1000
Y 500
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Sample Percentile

Figure 15: Normal probability plot of Foscolo et al data

Figure 16: Residuals plot of Foscolo et al data

Table 5: Regression statistics for the Foscolo et al data

Regression Foscolo et al
statistics
R Square 0,246539726
Adjusted R 0,188581243
Square
Standard Error 290,1938794
t-stat 2,062457229
p-value 0,059738445

Table 6: ANOVA table for the Foscolo et al data

ANOVA
df SS MS F Significance
F
Regression 1 358217,2 358217,2 4,25373 0,059738
Residual 13 1094762 84212,49
Total 14 1452980

Page
20
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

4.4 Error analysis

Table 7: Propagation of error for the Ergun equation

dy/dP dy/d dy/dL 2P 2 2L 2y 2y y rel. error

1989,695 1517639 -859932 0,017 0,0036 0 29850991 5463,606 780388,4 0,007001
868,2307 1533169 -868731 0,34 0,0036 0 30550992 5527,295 516026,4 0,010711
471,2436 1548698 -877531 0,327 0,0036 0 31107850 5577,441 377222,7 0,014786
286,0394 1564227 -886330 0,372 0,0036 0 31721931 5632,223 289082,2 0,019483
198,9695 1579756 -895129 0,085 0,0036 0 32343650 5687,148 243698,9 0,023337
180,294 1770682 - 0,058 0,0036 0 40633770 6374,462 266731,5 0,023898
1000672
179,4056 2033112 - 0,003 0,0036 0,003 65301625 8080,942 316244,7 0,025553
1141679
180,5796 2296953 - 0,455 0,0036 0,002 74926423 8656,005 372250,7 0,023253
1278947
178,7689 2534319 - 0,003 0,0036 0 83239150 9123,549 423335,2 0,021552
1398954
180,6315 3081676 - 0,002 0,0036 0,002 1,34E+08 11582,05 549510,1 0,021077
1663303
182,6952 3693756 - 0,047 0,0036 0,003 2,11E+08 14516,11 692883,3 0,02095
1940602
186,8877 4374054 - 0,005 0,0036 0,012 9,63E+08 31038,4 864079,2 0,035921
2228956
189,2602 5009284 - 0,008 0,0036 0,005 4,79E+08 21894,74 1040531 0,021042
2483347
194,0131 5803420 - 0,005 0,0036 0,003 5,06E+08 22496,14 1258815 0,017871
2780636

Page
21
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

4.5 Risk analysis

Table 8: Risk analysis according to the Anglo risk matrix

Incident Loss Type Risk Rating Guidelines for Risk

Matrix

A water leak can make Safety/Health 4(L) Monitor and

the floor slippery and manage as
induce slipping appropriate

Watch where you

walk

Check equipment
before operation

The inlet pressure of Safety/Health 2(L) Monitor and

water is too high and manage as
causes a pipe burst Business Disruption/Material
appropriate
Damage and Other
which may lead to high
pressure water being Consequential Losses Use safety glasses
sprayed into the eye Carefully open
valves

Check equipment
before operation

Page
22
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

5. Discussion of results
In this section, each aspect of the results mentioned in section 4 will be discussed in detail.

5.1. Bed height and pressure-drop versus velocity graphs

The experiment consisted of recording the bed heights and the pressure-drops at specific velocities.
This procedure was done in replicate of five times. The average of the bed heights and pressure-
drops over these five runs were taken. For the models, not including the experimental data plots,
these average values were taken from the forwards data only (i.e. increasing flowrate). This was
chosen since it showed a less variation in measurements than of those from the reverse data. It was
deduced that it would therefore give a better representation than the reverse data. The bed height
was plotted as a function of velocity for the experimental results obtained. The pressure-drop was
then plotted as a function of velocity for the experimental results. Data for the various models
investigated, Ergun, Foscolo et al and Wen and Yu, were then generated using their various
equations shown in section 2 literature review. This was done separately for the fixed bed case,
before the bed is fluidized (i.e. before the minimum fluidization velocity is reached), and also for the
fluidise bed scenario. This data are shown in separate plots specifically for fixed bed systems and
fluidized bed systems. Error bars were added to the plots to describe the standard errors associated
with the data and hence give a better insight to the results and any discrepancies that may arise.

5.1.1 Analysis of the graphs

Experimental bed height as a function of superficial velocity

Figure 4 shows the plot of the experimental bed height as a function of superficial velocity for the
forward and reverse case. It can be seen that the bed height remains constant until it reaches the
minimum fluidisation velocity after which it begins to increase. This is the expected trend as
discussed in section 2.2.2. and is shown in Figure 2. This is due to the fact that before the minimum
fluidisation velocity is reached, the force of the fluid on the packed bed is not sufficient to cause it to
change as it is less than the weight of the packed bed. After the minimum fluidisation velocity is
reached, the force of the fluid acting in the upwards direction upon the packed bed is greater and
therefore the packed bed increases in height. The particles therefore become suspended. This is the
point at which fluidisation occurs.

Experimental pressure-drop as a function of superficial velocity

Figure 5 shows the plot of the experimental pressure drop as a function of superficial velocity for the
forward and reverse case. It can be seen that the pressure-drop continually increases once the
flowrate is increased. It then levels of after the minimum fluidisation velocity is reached. This is the
expected trend as discussed in section 2.2.2. and is shown in Figure 2. This occurs since the bed is
fixed which therefore results in the pressures across the packed bed being different and hance a
pressure-drop is evident.

Ergun pressure drop as a function of superficial velocity

Figure 6 shows the plot of the pressure-drop determined by modelling the system with the Ergun
equation and the experimental data. It can be seen that it is a continuous straight line of positive
gradient displayed by the Ergun plot, whereas the experimental plot levels off and remains constant

Page
23
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

after the minimum fluidisation velocity is reached. A continuous straight line of positive gradient
should be the case before the minimum fluidisation velocity is reached as the bed is fixed.
Thereafter the pressure-drop should remain at a constant value as the bed is fluidized. This trait is
shown by the experimental data but not by the Ergun equation. This shows that the Ergun equation
does not describe the pressure-drop as a function of superficial velocity well in fluidized bed
systems. The Ergun equation is therefore not suitable for fluidized beds and alternative models
should therefore be investigated.

Wen & Yu pressure drop as a function of superficial velocity for a fixed bed
Figure 7 shows the pressure drop as a function of superficial velocity for a fixed bed modelled by the
Wen and Yu equation as well as the experimental data. It can be seen that the pressure-drop
continually increases as the velocity increases. This is described by the constant positive gradient of
the plot. This trait is shown by both the Wen and Yu equation and the experimental data. This should
be the case since the system can be seen as a fixed bed, as it has not yet reached the minimum
fluidisation velocity. The pressure-drop should therefore continually increase as the velocity is
increased. This expected trend is discussed in section 2.2.2. and is shown in Figure 2.

Wen & Yu pressure drop as a function of superficial velocity for a fluidised bed
Figure 8 shows the pressure drop as a function of superficial velocity for a fluidised bed modelled by
the Wen and Yu equation as well as the experimental data. It can be seen that both the
experimental and Wen and Yu plots start from the same position at the minimum fluidisation
velocity. Thereafter the experimental data assumes a slight positive gradient and the Wen and Yu
assumes a slight negative gradient, though the absolute values of both the plots gradients are very
similar. This may suggest that the Wen and Yu does appropriately describe pressure drop as a
function of superficial velocity for a fluidised bed, though it may deviate at higher velocities. This
may be an irregularity due to the fact that there may be too little data points for the Wen and Yu
equation to describe itself sufficiently. It does though give a good overall description of pressure
drop as a function of superficial velocity for a fluidised bed.

Foscolo et al pressure drop as a function of superficial velocity for a fixed bed

Figure 9 shows the pressure drop as a function of superficial velocity for a fluidised bed modelled by
the Foscolo et al equation as well as the experimental data. It can be seen that the pressure-drop
continually increases as the velocity increases. This is described by the constant positive gradient of
the plot. This trait is shown by both the Foscolo equation and the experimental data. This should be
the case since the system can be seen as a fixed bed, as it has not yet reached the minimum
fluidisation velocity. The pressure-drop should therefore continually increase as the velocity is
increased. This expected trend is discussed in section 2.2.2. and is shown in Figure 2.

Foscolo et al pressure drop as a function of superficial velocity for a fluidised bed

Figure 10 shows the pressure drop as a function of superficial velocity for a fluidised bed modelled
by the Foscolo et al equation as well as the experimental data. It can be seen that both the
experimental and Foscolo et al start from a spread out position at the minimum fluidisation velocity.
Thereafter the experimental data assumes a slight positive gradient and the Foscolo et al assumes a
slight negative gradient, though the absolute values of both the plots gradients are very similar. This
may suggest that the Foscolo does appropriately describe pressure drop as a function of superficial
velocity for a fluidised bed, though it may deviate at higher velocities. It is however more widely

Page
24
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

spread from the experimental data unlike the Wen and Yu equation. This suggests that the Wen and
Yu is the better of the three models investigated to model the pressure-drop as a function of
superficial velocity in fluidised beds when based solely on the graphical analysis.

Graphical analysis summary

The Ergun equation deviates from the expected trend once the bed is fluidised. This shows that the
Ergun equation does not describe the pressure-drop as a function of superficial velocity well in
fluidized bed systems. The Ergun equation is therefore not suitable for fluidized beds and alternative
models should therefore be investigated. The Wen and Yu does appropriately describe pressure
drop as a function of superficial velocity for a fluidised bed, though it may deviate at higher
velocities. This may be an irregularity due to the fact that there may be too little data points for the
Wen and Yu equation to describe itself sufficiently. It does though give a good overall description of
pressure drop as a function of superficial velocity for a fluidised bed. Foscolo et al is similar to that of
the Wen and Yu model though it is however more widely spread from the experimental data unlike
the Wen and Yu equation. This suggests that the Wen and Yu is the better of the three models
investigated to model the pressure-drop as a function of superficial velocity in fluidised beds when
based solely on the graphical analysis.

5.2. Minimum fluidisation velocity

The minimum fluidisation velocity was found to be 70 l/h or 0.005 m/s when determined empirically.
This was done by visually detecting when the bed height began to increase and the velocity at which
this phenomenon occurred was recorded as the minimum fluidization velocity.

An analytical solution to the minimum fluidisation velocity yielded a value of 0,007237m/s. This was
determined by using Equation 7. The difference may be due to sources of error contributed to the
varying particle diameter range of 600 to 850 m. The particle diameter which was used in all
calculations was approximated as 725 m, which is the average value of this range. Since the particle
diameter is not fixed at 725 m, but ranges from 600 to 850 m, this is a valid explanation for the
variation in minimum fluidisation velocity of that determined empirically and of that determined
analytically.

5.3. Bed height and pressure drop

It is found that the highest bed height reached at a maximum flowrate/velocity of 200 l/h or 0.014
m/s was 0.2766 m. This should be the case as the highest bed height should occur at the highest
velocity. This is so since it is at this point that the fluid will have the most force to cause maximum
displacement in the bed particles.

The highest experimental pressure drop was determined to be 1656.22 Pa. This occurred at a
flowrate of 200 l/h, though it remained more or less constant from 90 l/h onwards. This trend can be
seen from Figure 5. There shouldnt be an absolute highest value of the pressure drop at a single
particular point as it should be constant after the minimum fluidisation velocity is reached. The fact
that it is not exactly constant, as in ideal cases, in this period may be due to the varying flowrates
due to the imprecise rotameter.

Page
25
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

5.4. Statistical analysis

The summary of the statistical analysis including the regression for the various models investigated
data will be discussed in this section.

5.4.1. Ergun equation

The normal probability plot of the experimental data shows a right skew whereby the plotted points
appear to bend up and to the left. This indicates a long tail to the right. This may mean that there
may be points in the tail which are beyond the specification limits.

The residuals seem to not follow normality since the residual plot is not scattered and seems to
follow a cosine function. More helpful information can be recovered if there was data from more
trails was available.

There is a very high correlation between pressure-drop relative to velocity due to the coefficient of
determination being very close to one at 0,97647813. The regression data however does not agree
with the previous statement because the t-statistic for the x variable (velocity) is very large at
23,23095246 though the p-value is insignificant at 5,69725E-12. This again shows that the Ergun
equation does not correlate well with the data.

5.4.2. Foscolo et al
The normal probability plot of the experimental data shows a bit of a left skew whereby the plotted
points appear to bend down and to the right. This indicates a long tail to the left. This may mean that
there may be points in the tail which are beyond the specification limits.

The residuals seem to not follow normality since the residual plot is not scattered and seems to
follow an inverse cosine function. More helpful information can be recovered if there was data from
more trails was available.

There is a low correlation between pressure-drop relative to velocity due to the coefficient of
determination being far from one at 0,246539726. The ANOVA table does not agree as strongly with
the previous statement because the t-statistic for the x variable (velocity) is relatively large at
2,062457229 and the p-value is highly significant at 0,059738445. This shows that the Foscolo et al
equation does not correlate extremely well with the data but can provide a reasonable description.

5.4.3. Wen & Yu

The normal probability plot of the experimental data shows a bit of a left skew whereby the plotted
points appear to bend down and to the right. This indicates a long tail to the left. This may mean that
there may be points in the tail which are beyond the specification limits.

The residuals seem to not follow normality since the residual plot is not scattered and seems to
follow an inverse cosine function. More helpful information can be recovered if there was data from
more trails was available.

There is a relatively low correlation between pressure-drop relative to velocity due to the coefficient
of determination being relatively far from one at 0,342635642. The ANOVA table does not agree as
strongly with the previous statement because the t-statistic for the x variable (velocity) is relatively
large at 2,603064134and the p-value is highly significant at 0,021878. This shows that the Wen & Yu
equation may not correlate extremely well with the data. This may be so since it has a relatively low

Page
26
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

coefficient of determination. The ANOVA table on the other hand shows that it can provide a
reasonable description. It may be seen as a sufficient model for the pressure-drop as a function of
velocity in fluidised beds.

5.4.4. Summary of statistical analysis

All three of the models satisfy the ANOVA F test, in that they all yield positive F values. The Ergun
equation does is not at all suitable to model the pressure-drop as a function of velocity for fluidised
beds. This is so since the statistical analysis shows that it does not correlate well by not agreeing and
hence yielding conflicting information. The Foscolo et al model does not correlate extremely well
with the data but can provide a reasonable description. The Wen & Yu model also does not correlate
extremely well with the data like the Foscolo et al model. It does however have a larger coefficient
of determination. Therefore from the three models investigated, it is the better of the three models
to for modelling the pressure-drop as a function of velocity in fluidised beds.

5.5. Error analysis

The Ergun equation can be seen to be extremely sensitive to propagation of error. This is evident
from Table 4, where the propagation of error term (2y) ranges from approximately 3,00E+07 to
5,00E+08. This can be expected since there are a few power terms which are multiplied in the Ergun
equation. These power terms lead to an enhancement in the error as terms are squared and
multiplied, increasing the room for error significantly. The Ergun equation may therefore not be very
reliable considering the large amounts of error which may be associated with it.

6. Conclusion
The objectives of this report were to:

To show whether the Ergun equation is appropriate for the modelling of liquid fluidized bed
systems using correct statistical techniques.
Propose and test at least two alternative models for estimating the pressure-drop in liquid
fluidized bed systems, if the Ergun equation does not succeed in doing so.
To investigate the sensitivity of the Ergun equation to propagation of error and utilise the
results to evaluate the applicability of the alternative models proposed.

These objectives have been met in this report and the outcomes are as follows:

The Ergun equation does is not at all suitable to model the pressure-drop as a function of
velocity for fluidised beds. This is so since the statistical analysis shows that it does not
correlate well by not agreeing and hence yielding conflicting information. There is a very
high correlation between pressure-drop relative to velocity due to the coefficient of
determination being very close to one at 0,97647813. The ANOVA table however does not
agree with the previous statement because the t-statistic for the x variable (velocity) is very
large at 23,23095246 though the p-value is insignificant at 5,69725E-12.

Two alternative models were proposed. These included the Foscolo et al model and the Wen
and Yu model. These models were tested statistically as well as graphically and were both
found to be more suitable in modelling the pressure-drop as a function of velocity in
fluidised bed systems. From these two alternative models, the Wen and Yu model comes out
as the better model. This is so since it has a higher coefficient of determination with a value

Page
27
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

of 0,342635642 than the Foscolo et al model, which has a coefficient of determination of

only 0,246539726. The Wen and Yu model is concluded to be the better of the three models
investigated.

The sensitivity of the Ergun equation to propagation of error was investigated. It was found
that the Ergun equation can be seen to be extremely sensitive to propagation of error. This
is evident from Table 7, where the propagation of error term (2y) ranges from
approximately 3,00E+07 to 5,00E+08. This can be expected since there are a few power
terms which are multiplied in the Ergun equation.

The main aim of the experiment is to ideally find the better suiting model to model the pressure-
drop as a function of velocity in a fluidised bed system. This was done and it was found to be the
Wen and Yu model.

It is hypothesized that the Ergun equation will not be suitable to model the pressure-drop as a
function of velocity for a liquid fluidized bed system. This is hypothesized since the Ergun equation
was specifically developed for fixed bed systems. This hypothesis is accepted due to the outcome of
this report.

7. Recommendations
Problem statement
o It is recommended that the M.D. should use the Wen and Yu model in modelling the
pressure-drop as a function of superficial velocity for a fluidised bed system since it
is the better suiting model.
Experiment
o A more accurate rotameter should be installed so that there will be less fluctuations
in the flowrate and also to be able to cater for a flowrate of 10 l/h.
o The apparatus set-up should be modified so that different packing materials can be
investigated.
o More time should be allocated so that more replicate runs can be performed and
hence account better for error.
o Different sizes of the reactor should also be introduced. This would give a better
understanding on the effect of reactor volume on the pressure-drop

Page
28
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

8. References
Govender, E., 2014, Fluidization, CHE3049W: Chemical Engineering Laboratory II Problem
Statement, pp. 3.
Napier-Munn, TJ, 1998, Analysing plant trails by comparing recovery-grade regression
lines, Minerals Engineering, 11(10), 949-958.
Subramanian, R.S., 2001, Flow through Packed Beds and Fluidized Beds,
http://web2.clarkson.edu/projects/subramanian/ch301/notes/packfluidbed.pdf, [Accessed:
9 August 2014].
Niven, RK, 2002, Physical insight into the Ergun and Wen & Yu equations for fluid flow
in packed and fluidised beds, Chemical Engineering Science. 57(3), 527-534.
Foscolo, PU, 1982, A unified model for particulate expansion of fluidised beds and flow in
fixed porous media, Chemical Engineering Science, 38(8), 1251-1260.
Golub, G., Charles F., 1996, Matrix Computations, 3rd ed., Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins
University Press, pp. 53.

9. Appendix
9.1. Raw experimental data
Table 9: Raw experimental data

flowrate l/hr bed height p1 p2 P forward bed height p1 p2 P reverse

0 19,8 27,4 27,4 0 19,8 27,4 27,4 0
20 19,8 25,3 29,5 4,2 19,8 25 30 5
30 19,8 24,4 30,2 5,8 19,8 23,5 31,3 7,8
40 19,8 23,3 31,7 8,4 19,8 21,9 32,8 10,9
50 19,8 21,8 32,8 11 19,8 20,7 33,3 12,6
60 19,8 19,9 34,1 14,2 20,2 19,7 34,5 14,8
70 20,3 19,2 35 15,8 20,6 19,2 34,8 15,6
80 21 19 34,9 15,9 21,1 19 34,9 15,9
90 21,6 19,9 34,9 15 21,7 18,8 34,9 16,1
100 22,1 18,7 34,9 16,2 22,2 18,7 34,7 16
120 23,2 18,4 34,8 16,4 23,3 18,4 34,7 16,3
140 24,3 18 34,5 16,5 24,4 18 34,5 16,5
160 25,7 17,6 34,3 16,7 25,5 17,7 34,3 16,6
180 26,6 17,3 34 16,7 26,5 17,3 34 16,7
200 27,7 16,9 33,7 16,8 27,7 16,9 33,7 16,8
0 19,8 27,4 27,4 0 19,8 27,4 27,4 0
20 19,8 25 29,4 4,4 19,8 24,6 30,1 5,5
30 19,8 23,9 30,5 6,6 19,8 23,6 31 7,4
40 19,8 22,5 32 9,5 19,8 21,5 33 11,5
50 19,8 21 33,4 12,4 20 20,5 33,7 13,2
60 19,8 19,7 34,6 14,9 20,2 19,6 34,5 14,9
70 20,3 19,3 34,9 15,6 20,6 19,2 34,8 15,6
80 20,9 19 34,9 15,9 21,2 19 34,9 15,9
90 21,6 18,9 35,8 16,9 21,7 18,8 34,8 16
100 22,1 18,7 34,8 16,1 22,3 18,4 34,7 16,3
120 23,2 18,4 34,7 16,3 23,3 18,5 34,6 16,1
140 24,4 18 34,5 16,5 24,5 18 34,5 16,5
160 25,4 17,5 34,3 16,8 25,5 17,6 34,3 16,7
180 26,5 17,3 34 16,7 26,5 17,4 33,9 16,5
200 27,6 16,8 33,7 16,9

Page
29
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

flowrate l/hr bed height p1 p2 P forward bed height p1 p2 P reverse

0 19,8 27,4 27,4 0 19,8 27,4 27,4 0
20 19,8 25 29,5 4,5 19,8 24,7 30,2 5,5
30 19,8 23,7 31,1 7,4 19,8 23,5 31,4 7,9
40 19,8 22,5 32 9,5 19,8 21,7 32,9 11,2
50 19,8 21 33,4 12,4 20 19,7 33,7 14
60 19,8 20 34,4 14,4 20,3 19,6 34,6 15
70 20,3 19,3 34,7 15,4 20,5 19,2 34,9 15,7
80 20,9 19 34,9 15,9 21,1 19 34,9 15,9
90 21,5 18,9 34,9 16 21,7 18,8 34,9 16,1
100 22,1 18,6 34,8 16,2 22,2 18,7 34,8 16,1
120 23,2 18,3 34,6 16,3 23,3 18,8 34,6 15,8
140 24,3 18 34,5 16,5 24,5 18 34,4 16,4
160 25,5 17,5 34,4 16,9 25,5 17,6 34,7 17,1
180 26,5 17,2 34 16,8 26,5 17,4 33,9 16,5
200 27,6 16,8 33,7 16,9 27,6 16,8 33,7 16,9
0 19,8 27,4 27,4 0 19,8 27,4 27,4 0
20 19,8 25,1 29,3 4,2 19,8 24,6 30,4 5,8
30 19,8 24 30,4 6,4 19,8 23,3 31,5 8,2
40 19,8 22,8 31,4 8,6 19,8 21,3 32,4 11,1
50 19,8 21,3 33,2 11,9 20 20,3 33,6 13,3
60 19,8 20 34,2 14,2 20,3 19,5 34,6 15,1
70 20,3 19,4 34,6 15,2 20,5 19,3 34,8 15,5
80 21 19 34,8 15,8 21,2 18,9 34,9 16
90 21,6 18,8 34,8 16 21,7 18,9 34,9 16
100 22,1 18,6 34,7 16,1 22,2 18,6 34,7 16,1
120 23,2 18,3 34,6 16,3 23,3 18,4 34,5 16,1
140 24,4 17,9 34,9 17 24,5 18 34,4 16,4
160 25,5 17,5 34,3 16,8 25,6 17,6 34,1 16,5
180 26,4 17,3 34 16,7 26,5 17,4 33,9 16,5
200 27,7 16,7 33,7 17 27,7 16,7 33,7 17
0 19,8 27,4 27,4 0 19,8 27,4 27,4 0
20 19,8 25 29,3 4,3 19,8 24,9 30 5,1
30 19,8 23,8 30,6 6,8 19,8 23,1 31,5 8,4
40 19,8 22,5 32,1 9,6 19,8 22 32,5 10,5
50 19,8 21 33,4 12,4 20 20,5 33,6 13,1
60 19,8 20 34,3 14,3 20,2 19,6 34,6 15
70 20,3 19,4 34,7 15,3 20,6 19,1 34,9 15,8
80 21 19 34,8 15,8 21,2 18,9 34,9 16
90 21,6 18,7 34,8 16,1 21,7 18,7 34,9 16,2
100 22,1 18,6 34,7 16,1 22,2 18,6 34,7 16,1
120 23,3 18,3 34,6 16,3 23,3 18,4 34,6 16,2
140 24,4 17,9 34,5 16,6 24,5 18 34,5 16,5
160 25,5 17,5 34,3 16,8 25,5 17,6 34,1 16,5
180 26,5 17,1 34 16,9 26,5 17,3 34 16,7
200 27,7 16,7 33,6 16,9 27,7 16,7 33,6 16,9

Page
30
 FLUIDIZATION
NDXKYL003

9.2 Sample calculations

9.2.1. VOIDAGE

=

9.2.2. ERGUN EQUATION

P 150 (1)2 1.75f (1) 2

= U + U
L p 2 dp 2 3 p dp 3

150 (1 )2 1.75 (1 ) 2
= ( 2 3
+ )
2 3

9.2.3. PROPAGATION OF ERROR

(y)2 =( )2 * (P)2 + ( )2 * ()2 + ( )2 *(L)2

Where:

3
= (1)

3 2 (1)+ 3
=
(1)2

3
= 2 (1)

9.2.4. ERROR
()2
o Standard deviation () = ( (1)
) where n = number of data points
o Coefficient of variance (Cov %) = 100/

Given some value v and its approximation vapprox, the absolute error is

where the vertical bars denote the absolute value. If the relative error is

(Golub, 1996)

Page
31