You are on page 1of 11

China Particuology 5 (2007) 284–294

Bubble dynamics in a two-dimensional gas–solid fluidized bed


Ruoyu Hong a,∗ , Zhiqiang Ren, Jianmin Ding c,1 , M. Kawaji d , Hongzhong Li b
a Chemical Engineering Department & Key Laboratory of Organic Synthesis, Soochow University, Dushuh, SIP, Suzhou 215123, China
b Institute of Process Engineering, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100080, China
c IBM, HYDA/050-3 C202, 3605 Highway 52 North, Rochester, MN 55901, USA
d Department of Chemical Engineering and Applied Chemistry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont. M5S 3E5, Canada

Received 15 February 2006; accepted 4 April 2007

Abstract
Related referential studies on gas–solid two-phase flows were briefly reviewed. Bubble ascending in a two-dimensional (2D) gas–solid fluidized
bed was studied both experimentally and numerically. A modified continuum model expressed in the conservation form was used in numerical
simulation. Solid-phase pressure was modeled via local sound speed; gas-phase turbulence was described by the K–ε two-equation model. The
modified implicit multiphase formulation (IMF) scheme was used to solve the model equations in 2D Cartesian/cylindrical coordinates. The bubble
ascending velocity and particle motion in the 2D fluidized bed were measured using the photochromic dye activation (PDA) technique, which was
based on UV light activation of particles impregnated with the dye. Effects of bed height and superficial gas velocity on bubble formation and
ascent were investigated numerically. The numerically obtained bubble ascending velocities were compared with experimental measurements. Gas
bubble in jetting gas–solids fluidized bed was also simulated numerically.
© 2007 Chinese Society of Particuology and Institute of Process Engineering, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Published by Elsevier B.V.
All rights reserved.

Keywords: Fluidization; Numerical simulation; Flow visualization; Bubble dynamics

1. Introduction ble ascending velocity was greater than the calculated value
of Eq. (1). They thought this was due to the intense circula-
Bubbly gas–solid flows are widely encountered in many unit tion of the dense (emulsion) phase. Assuming an ideal bed of
operations in the chemical, petroleum, agricultural, biochemical, equally sized spherical particles where the upward gas flow was
and power-generation industries. It is essential to understand and everywhere Umf and all particles were just hydrodynamically
predict gas–solid flows, and bubble formation mechanism and supported, Rowe (1964) studied a bubble in a gas–solid fluidized
bubble motion behavior for better design and better operation of bed. Instantaneous streamlines referred to stationary axes around
fluidized beds. the bubble were obtained.
The ascending velocity of bubbles, which is an important Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) has been widely used
parameter in designing a gas–solid fluidized-bed reactor, has in chemical and other industries for process scale-up, design,
been the subject of many experiments. An empirical equation or optimization following a rapid development of computer
was proposed by Davidson and Harrison in 1963 to correlate the hardware. There are three major different models describ-
bubble ascending velocity with bubble size, ing gas–solid flow: the two-fluid model, the particle source
in cell (PSIC) model, and the Lagrangian model. The PSIC
Ub = 0.711(gdb )1/2 . (1) model was devised by Crowe et al. (1977), and has been
widely used in dilute gas–solid two-phase flow (Hoomans,
Morooka, Tajima, and Miyauchi (1971) and Miyauchi, Kuipers, Mohd Salleh, Stein, & Seville, 2001; Li & Kuipers,
Furusaki, Morroka, and Ikeda (1981) found that the actual bub- 2002). The Lagrangian model calculates the motion of indi-
vidual particles (Tsuji, Tanaka, & Ishida, 1991), and thus

needs huge memory and long computational time. The two-
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: rhong@suda.edu.cn (R. Hong).
fluid model, which treats both phases as inter-penetrating
1 Present address: MSC Software, 2 MacArthur Place, Santa Ana, CA 92707, continuous fluids in the Eulerian coordinates, can be fur-
USA. ther classified into the continuum model (Gidaspow, Seo, &

1672-2515/$ – see front matter © 2007 Chinese Society of Particuology and Institute of Process Engineering, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.cpart.2007.04.002
R. Hong et al. / China Particuology 5 (2007) 284–294 285

1985), which adopts fully implicit scheme, stresses the general-


Nomenclature ity and practicality of the computer program. The IPSA and its
modification were also used widely (Ding, Lyczkowski, & Sha,
αk gas or solid volume fraction 1995; Hong, 1993; Hong, Li, Cheng, & Zhang, 1996).
Cμ a parameter used in turbulence model Experimentally, different kinds of techniques have been
db bubble size (m) employed to visualize particle movement in fluidized beds.
dp diameter of particle (m) Some techniques as well as the measured hydrodynamic behav-
D bed width (m) iors of gas–solid flows can be found in a comprehensive review
g gravitational acceleration (m/s2 ) by Lim, Zhu, and Grace (1995). Caicedo, Marques, Ruiz, and
G1 , G2 constants in Eq. (8), Soler (2003) studied the bubble behavior in a 2D fluidized bed
Hb fluidized bed height (m) using digital image analysis. Ozawa, Umekawa, Furui, Hayashi,
I unit matrix and Takenaka (2002) investigated bubble behavior in a vertical
K turbulent fluctuation kinetic energy (m2 /m2 ) tube immersed in a fluidized bed using neutron radiography. The
ps solids phase pressure (Pa) photochromic dye activation (PDA) technique, originally devel-
Pg gas phase pressure (Pa) oped by Popovich and Hummel (1967a, 1967b), was used in the
Rep particle Reynolds number present investigation to visualize the flow pattern and the veloc-
Sk deformation rate tensor (s−1 ) ity field of the dense phase in a fluidized bed. A video camera
t time (s) was also used to record the formation and detachment of gas
Ub bubble ascending velocity (m/s) bubbles in a 2D fluidized bed (Hong, Guo, Luo, Zhang, & Ding,
Uf superficial gas velocity in bed (m/s) 2003; Hong, Li, Li, & Wang, 1997).
−→
Uk velocity vector of phase k (m/s)
Umf incipient fluidization velocity (m/s) 2. Experimental
X, r axial and radial direction (m)
A fluidized bed with a uniform gas inlet at the bottom was
Greek letters used first, which will be described in Section 2.1. Another flu-
β gas–solids drag coefficient (kg/m3 s) idized bed with a central gas jet at the bed bottom was used
ε dissipation rate of turbulent kinetic energy later.
(m2 /m3 )
εk volume fraction of phase k
μeg , μes gas or solids effective viscosity (kg/m s) 2.1. Fluidization with uniform gas inlet
μg gas viscosity (kg/m s)
ρk gas or solids density (kg/m3 ) 2.1.1. Materials
ϕs sphericity of particle Fine porous alumina particles were used as the bed mate-
τk stress tensor of phase k (Pa) rial in the experiments, as described in Table 1. The alumina
particles with original density of 870 kg/m3 were impregnated
Subscripts with a 0.5% aqueous solution of a photochromic dye, and were
g gas phase dried later. The color of the particles after impregnation was
p particle yellowish, and it turned dark blue after irradiation by UV light.
s solids phase The color contrast between the activated particles and the back-
ground particles was high enough to record the dye trace on a
Operators high-speed video camera. It took only several seconds for the
 gradient activated particles to fade by reverse reaction.
· divergent
2.1.2. Apparatus
Compressed air was introduced into a buffer tank through a
Ettehadieh, 1983) and the kinetic model (Ding, 1989; Gidaspow, rotameter, and then to a two-dimensional (2D) fluidized bed. The
1994). bed is made of transparent polymethylmethacrylate resin sheets.
There are two major types of numerical algorithms to solve The cross-section area of the 2D bed is 120 mm × 10 mm with
the partial differential equations of the two-phase model. The
IMF (implicit multiphase formulation) algorithm (Harlow & Table 1
Amsden, 1975) is comparatively time-consuming because of Physical properties of the experimental material
the point-by-point iteration. Improvement of the IMF can be Mean diameter, dp (␮m) 54
found in detail in Lin, Chen, and Chao (1985), Ding (1989) and Original density, ρp (kg/m3 ) 870
Hong, Li, Li, and Wang (1997). The 2D computer code devel- Final density, ρs (kg/m3 ) 1610
Shape factor, ϕs 0.9
oped by Ding (1989) was used by Wang and Li (2002). Recently, Incipient fluidization velocity, Umf (m/s) 0.024
McKeen and Pugsley (2003) simulated a freely bubbling bed of Superficial gas velocity, Uf (m/s) 0.025–0.14
FCC catalyst. The Interphase Slip Algorithm (IPSA) (Spalding,
286 R. Hong et al. / China Particuology 5 (2007) 284–294

a height of 1.5 m. The front side of the bed is made of a 3.0 mm-
thick glass plate to admit the UV light. At the bottom of the bed,
there is a gas distributor. The settled bed height was 0.4 m. The
alumina particles were fluidized by air at ambient pressure and
room temperature. The superficial gas velocity in the bed could
be varied from 0.025 to 0.14 m/s. At the top of the bed, there is
a bag filter to catch the alumina particles.

2.1.3. Measurements
The measurement system consists of a He–Cd laser, and a
high-speed video camera, as shown in Fig. 1. The UV beam
with a wavelength of 325 nm was chopped mechanically to pro-
duce light pulses of 5.56 ms duration at a rate of 30 Hz. A set of
UV-transmitting lens with an adjustable focal length was used
to focus the beam to form a small and circular spot dye trace in
the dense phase inside the 2D fluidized bed. A high-speed video Fig. 1. Experimental apparatus.
camera system with a resolution of 256 × 256 pixels was used
to record the motion of the activated particles. The shutter speed

Table 2
Governing equations for gas–solid flow
1. Continuity equations for phase k (=g, s)
∂ρk
៝ k) = 0
+ ∇ · (ρk U (2)
∂t
where
ρk = ρk × αk (3)

αk = 1 (4)
k
2. Momentum equations for phase k (k = g or s; l = g or s; l = k)
∂ ៝ ៝ kU
៝ k ) = −εk ∇pg + β(U
៝l − U
៝ k ) + ∇ · τk + ρ g៝
(ρ Uk ) + ∇ · (ρk U (5)
∂t k k
3. Stress tensor
τk = 2αk μk Sk (6)
where
1
 T
 1
Sk = −δsk ps I + ∇U ៝ k + (∇ U ៝ k) − (7)
2 3∇ · U ៝ k I
δsk = 1 when k = s, else δsk = 0 when k = g.
4. K–ε model for gas turbulence
K equation   
∂   ៝
μeg
(ρ K) + ∇ · (ρg Ug K) = ∇ · ∇K + (Gk − ρg ε)αg (8)
∂t g σk
ε equation   
∂  μeg ε
(ρg ε) + ∇ · (ρg U៝ g ε) = ∇ · ∇ε + (C1 Gk − C2 ρg ε)αg (9)
∂t σε K
where C1  and 
∂U
2 ∂V
2 V
2 ∂U
C2 are constants. σ k and σ ε are Prandtl numbers of K and ε, respectively. Gk is the source term of the generation rate of turbulence stress.
∂Vg 2

g g g g
Gk = μt 2 + + + + (10)
∂X ∂r r ∂r ∂X
K 2
μeg = μeg αg , μeg = μg + μt , μt = Cμ ρg (11)
ε
5. Solid phasepressure (B.A. Kashiwa, 2002, private communication)

1 −G −α 2
ps = ρs A (αg − αg,cp ) + (αg − αg,cp ) + G1 e
2 2 2 (α g g,cp ) (12)
2
where αg,cp is the close packed volume fraction, A is the sound speed at close packing, G1 and G2 are constants, G1 = 4 × 10 , G2 = 10 . −12 6

6. Drag coefficient between the two fluid


When αg ≤ 0.8, the pressure drop can be determined by Ergun equation recommended by Kunii and Levenspiel (1966):
150(1 − αg )2 μg 1.75(1 − αg )ρg ៝ ៝ s|
β= 2
+ |Ug − U (13)
αg (ϕs dp ) ϕs dp
When αg > 0.8, the pressure drop can be described by the equation correlated by Wen and Yu (1966):
ρg ρs |U ៝g − U ៝ s |αg
β = 0.75Cd (1 − εg ) α−2.65 (14)
ϕs dp (ρs − ρg ) g
where Cd = Rep (1 + 0.15Rep ) for Rep < 1000 and Cd = 0.44 for Rep ≥ 1000.
24 0.687
R. Hong et al. / China Particuology 5 (2007) 284–294 287

Fig. 4. Bubble ascending velocity vs. superficial gas velocity.

2.2. Fluidization with a central gas jet

The flow diagram, bed materials and experimental measure-


ments were described in detail by Hong, Li, Cheng, and Zhang
(1996), Hong, Guo, Luo, Zhang, and Ding (2003).

3. Hydrodynamic model
Fig. 2. Void fraction contours obtained using half domain.
A list of partial differential equations describing gas–solids
flows is given in Table 2. Different to our previous research
of the video system is 5000 s−1 . The recorded digital images
(Hong, Li, Cheng, & Zhang, 1996; Hong, Li, Li, & Wang,
can be transferred to video tapes and downloaded to a computer.
1997), the superficial density ρk (= ρk αk ) is used instead of
The digital images can be saved on a hard disk as files with cer-
the actual density ρk . Thus the developed computer program
tain optional formats, and analyzed on a computer. Kai, Kanda,
is greatly simplified. The K–ε two-equation model is used
Takahashi, and Kawaji (2003) used similar photochromic dye
for gas turbulence. For the solid-phase viscosity, the aver-
activation technique to study gas bubble behavior in a fluidized
age value of 0.5 kg/m s (Ding & Gidapow, 1990) is used in
bed.
this investigation. The solid phase pressure is modeled via a
new treatment (Kashiwa, 2002, private communication). The
gas–solids momentum interaction terms are from the Ergun
equation (Kunii & Levenspiel, 1966), and an empirical equa-
tion (Wen & Yu, 1966) for void fraction (αg ) ≤ 0.8 and void
fraction >0.8, respectively. For boundary conditions: (1) on the
wall, the no-slip b.c. was used for the gas phase and partial
slip b.c. for the solid phase; (2) at the inlet, all the variables
were known; (3) at the exit, the flow was assumed as fully
developed.

Fig. 5. Bubble ascending velocity vs. bubble size (circles: experimental; solid
Fig. 3. Void fraction contours obtained using full domain. dots: numerical; solid line: Eq. (1) of Davidson and Harrison (1963)).
288 R. Hong et al. / China Particuology 5 (2007) 284–294

To solve the equations in Table 2, we use the IMF algorithm was slightly higher than the incipient fluidization velocity. At
with appropriate boundary conditions. See details in Harlow t = 20 ms (Fig. 2a), the gas bubble moved to a relatively higher
and Amsden (1975), Ding and Gidapow (1990), and Hong, Li, position. At t = 40 ms (Fig. 2b), the bubble moved upward fur-
Li, and Wang (1997). Numerical computations were carried out ther, and changed its shape and size. And at roughly t = 90 ms
using a Dec Alpha workstation with a 21264 processor operat- (Fig. 2c), it split into two small gas bubbles. It should be noticed
ing at a frequency of 667 MHz. Post-processing was performed that a large gas bubble was in the center of the bed bottom at
using the Tecplot (version 7.5, Amtec, 1999) with a personal this time.
computer (Pentium IV-1.7 GHz).
4.1.2. Bubble ascending mechanism
4. Results and Discussion Because of the uniform inlet gas velocity in the fluidized
bed, which was higher than the incipient fluidization velocity,
4.1. Gas bubbles of uniform fluidization the gas phase dragged the solid particles up. This resulted in the
gas bubble ascending.
4.1.1. Behavior of an existing bubble
Assume that a gas bubble was introduced into the center of 4.1.3. Bubble burst mechanism
the 2D fluidized bed at t = 0. The bubble was 2 cm in diameter Solid particles move upward due to drag. The particles at
and located at 10 cm above the bottom of the bed. The uni- the top of the bubble experience higher resistance because
form inlet gas velocity at the bed bottom was 2.5 cm/s, which they have to push large amount of particles upward (see

Fig. 6. Calculated flow patterns in deep fluidized bed at Uf = 2.5 m/s.


R. Hong et al. / China Particuology 5 (2007) 284–294 289

Fig. 3b), and therefore move slower than the particles near void fraction αg = 0.8 was plotted, which was defined as the bub-
the bottom of the gas bubble. As a result, the gas bub- ble surface. In this study, the maximum and the minimum of the
ble splits into two smaller ones, as shown in Figs. 2c and void fraction were found, and twenty levels were interpolated in
3c. between, as shown in the flood contours in Figs. 2 and 3. Thus
the artificial diffusion of the numerical scheme can be evaluated
clearly.
4.1.4. Asymmetric phenomenon
Both the half domain and the full domain were adopted
during numerical computations (see Figs. 2 and 3, respec- 4.1.5. Bubble ascending velocity versus gas velocity
tively). For the half domain simulation, the right half of the The bubble ascending velocity was directly measured from
2D fluidized bed was adopted; while for the full domain the images taken using a high-speed video camera. Numeri-
simulation, the whole 2D fluidized bed was employed. By cal simulation was also conducted for the same conditions. The
comparing Fig. 2 with Fig. 3, it can be seen that there computed bubble ascending velocities were then compared with
is also no major difference between the two treatments, the measured values. Both computed and experimental bub-
except that the anti-axial symmetrical phenomenon appeared ble ascending velocities increase with increasing superficial gas
in the full domain simulation, as occurred in the experi- velocity. Moreover, they are close to each other, as shown in
ments. Fig. 4. The maximum difference between computational and
In some referential work (Gidaspow, Seo, & Ettehadieh, experimental ones is about 15% at the superficial gas velocity
1983; Hong, Li, Cheng, & Zhang, 1996), only the contour of of 0.14 cm/s.

Fig. 7. Calculated flow patterns in the left part of shallow fluidized bed at Uf = 2.5 m/s.
290 R. Hong et al. / China Particuology 5 (2007) 284–294

4.1.6. Bubble ascending velocity versus bubble size Ding & Lyczkowski, 1992; Gidaspow, Seo, & Ettehadieh,
The video images obtained in the experiments were exam- 1983; Hong, Li, Cheng, & Zhang, 1996; Hong, Li, Li, &
ined frame by frame. The influence of bubble size on Wang, 1997; Lin, Chen, & Chao, 1985), while the bub-
bubble ascending velocity is shown in Fig. 5. The bubble ble formation mechanism in bed fluidized with uniform
ascending velocity increases with increasing bubble size. Com- inlet gas velocity was found to be different. Four different
putational results are also presented in Fig. 5 showing a experimental runs were conducted, including two different
similar trend. The bubble ascending velocities from the cor- bed heights, 6 and 40 cm, each of which was carried out
relation equation of Davidson and Harrison (1963) are also with two different uniform inlet gas velocities, 2.5 and
shown in Fig. 5. Good agreement is found between exper- 5 cm/s, respectively. From Figs. 6–9, the bubble formation
imentally observed, numerically computed, and empirically mechanism in the fluidized bed can be interpreted as fol-
predicted bubble-ascending velocities as a function of bubble lows:
size.
(a) If there is a small cavity, channel, or any small domain
4.1.7. Bubble formation mechanism during uniform where the void fraction is slightly higher than its sur-
fluidization rounding, more gas will flow through this domain because
In the case of fluidization with a jet, bubbles always form of its smaller resistance and with higher interstitial gas
above the jet nozzle (Ding, 1989; Ding & Gidapow, 1990; velocity, with the result that more solid particles will

Fig. 8. Calculated flow patterns in deep fluidized bed at Uf = 5.0 m/s.


R. Hong et al. / China Particuology 5 (2007) 284–294 291

Fig. 8. (Continued ).

move out of the channel due to drag. The channel thus 4.1.8. Flow patterns of uniform fluidization at different gas
expands, the interstitial gas velocity increases further, and velocities
more particles will move out, in a manner of “positive Four different runs were conducted to simulate the experi-
feedback”. mental fluidized bed with uniform inlet gas velocity and shown
(b) If the interfacial gas velocity of a certain domain is higher in Figs. 6–9, respectively. The small arrows indicate the flow
than its surroundings, either due to non-uniform gas distri- direction of the solid particles. It can be seen that the particles
bution through the gas distributor, or due to channeling or move upward near the wall of the fluidized bed, while descend
gas bubbling at its top or bottom, similar “positive feedback” in the center of the bed. Moreover, the gas bubbles form near
will occur. the wall, and move toward the center of the bed. This is con-
292 R. Hong et al. / China Particuology 5 (2007) 284–294

Fig. 9. Calculated flow patterns in the left part of shallow fluidized bed at Uf = 5.0 m/s.

sistent with the results of Soo (1991), and Ding and Gidapow Fig. 10a illustrates that at t = 0.06 s, the gas jet of high veloc-
(1990). ity pushes the solids upwards, and a vacant space, that is, a gas
bubble, is formed. Fig. 10b illustrates that at t = 0.10 s, the gas
4.2. Gas bubbles detaching from a vertical jet velocity near the neck of the gas bubble is very high, thus entrain-
ing both gas and solids into the neck of the gas bubble. The neck
Gas bubbles formed and detached from a nozzle in a 2D of the bubble is consequently compressed to detach the bubble
gas–solids fluidized bed were also simulated numerically using from the jet nozzle. Therefore, gas bubble forms and detaches
the two-fluid model listed in Table 2. The experimental apparatus alternately above the jet nozzle.
was illustrated in detail by Hong, Li, Cheng, and Zhang (1996),
Hong, Li, Li, and Wang (1997), Hong, Guo, Luo, Zhang, and 4.2.2. Bubble ascending mechanism
Ding, (2003). Fig. 11 demonstrates that solids at the top of and at the bottom
of a gas bubble move upward, due to gas drag and pressure gra-
4.2.1. Bubble formation mechanism dient, counteracting gravity and thus propelling the gas bubble
This section investigates by numerical simulation the bubble upward.
formation mechanism in a 2D fluidized bed with a central gas
jet. The operation conditions in numerical computation are as 4.2.3. Bubble burst mechanism
follows: the diameter of silica sand (dp ) is 50 ␮m and its density Gas tends to flow through a gas bubble because of
(ρp ) 2600 kg/m3 , the central jet velocity Uj = 10 m/s, and the gas lower resistance to flowing through this vacant space.
velocity surrounding the central jet was at incipient fluidization. Fig. 11 also shows that solids at the bubble top move
R. Hong et al. / China Particuology 5 (2007) 284–294 293

Fig. 10. Velocity vectors around a central jet in a fluidized bed (dp = 50 ␮m,
ρp = 2600 kg/m3 , Uj = 10 m/s).

Fig. 12. Formation of two gas bubbles (dp = 50 ␮m, ρp = 2600 kg/m3 ,
Uj = 10 m/s).

upward comparatively slowly since there are solids above,


while the solids at the bottom of the gas bubble move
upward faster because of no solids above, as also shown in
Figs. 2 and 3. Thus, the gas bubble may break sidewise into
two pieces.

4.2.4. Bubble combination mechanism


Numerical simulations illustrate that a lower second gas bub-
ble always rises faster than the first bubble, leading to the
combination of the two, as shown in Fig. 12. This is also veri-
Fig. 11. Void fraction contours (left) and gas velocity vectors (right) around a fied by experimental observations. The reason is similar to that
gas bubble. in Section 4.2.3.
294 R. Hong et al. / China Particuology 5 (2007) 284–294

5. Conclusions Gidaspow, D., Seo, Y. C., & Ettehadieh, B. (1983). Hydrodynamics of fluidiza-
tion: Experimental and theoretical bubble sizes in a two-dimensional bed
with a jet. Chemical Engineering Communications, 22, 253–272.
The behaviors of gas bubbles in a gas–solid fluidized bed
Harlow, H. F., & Amsden, A. A. (1975). Numerical calculation of multiphase
were studied experimentally and numerically. The PDA tech- flow. Journal of Computational Physics, 17, 19–57.
nique was used for the visualization of the solids flow field Hong, R., Guo, Q., Luo, G., Zhang, J., & Ding, J. (2003). On the jet penetration
in uniform fluidization, while a high-speed video camera in height in fluidized beds with two vertical jets. Powder Technology, 133(1–3),
jetting fluidization. A continuum two-phase model was used 216–227.
Hong, R., Li, H., Li, H., & Wang, Y. (1997). Studies on the inclined jet penetration
to simulate the gas–solid fluidization. Using both experimen-
length in a gas-solid fluidized bed. Powder Technology, 92(3), 205–212.
tal techniques and numerical modeling based on the continuum Hong, R., Li, H., Cheng, M., & Zhang, J. (1996). Numerical simulation and
two-fluid model, bubble ascending phenomena and mechanism verification of a gas-solid jet fluidized bed. Powder Technology, 87(1),
were studied. The bubble ascending velocities as a function of 73–81.
superficial gas velocity and bubble size were correctly predicted. Hong, R. (1993). Mathematical simulation and demonstrations of gas-solid flow
in jet fluidized beds. Master thesis, Institute of Coal Chemistry, Chinese
By simulating uniform fluidization, the formation mechanism
Academy of Sciences, Taiyuan, China.
of bubbles was unravelled. Generally, in bubbling gas–solids Hoomans, B. P. B., Kuipers, J. A. M., Mohd Salleh, M. A., Stein, M., & Seville,
fluidized beds, the solid particles move upward near the bed J. P. K. (2001). Experimental validation of granular dynamics simulations
wall, and downward at the center of bed, independent of bed of gas-fluidized beds with homogenous in-flow conditions using positron
height and the uniform inlet gas velocity. Compared with exper- emission particle tracking. Powder Technology, 116, 166–177.
Kai, T., Kanda, T., Takahashi, T., & Kawaji, M. (2003). Application of pho-
imental results, the general-purpose computer code developed is
tochromic dye to the measurement of particle movement in a fluidized bed.
applicable to modeling gas–solids fluidization and efficient for Powder Technology, 129, 22–29.
designing fluidized beds. Kunii, D., & Levenspiel, O. (1966). Fluidization engineering. New York: Wiley.
Lim, K. S., Zhu, J. X., & Grace, J. R. (1995). Hydrodynamics of gas solids
Acknowledgments fluidization. International Journal of Multiphase Flow, 21, 141–193.
Li, J., & Kuipers, J. A. M. (2002). Effect of pressure on gas–solid flow behavior
in dense gas-fluidized beds: A discrete particle simulation study. Powder
The project was supported by the National Natural Science Technology, 127, 173–184.
Foundation of China (NNSFC, No. 20476065), the Scientific Lin, J. S., Chen, M. M., & Chao, B. T. (1985). A novel radioactive particle
Research Foundation for the ROCs of the State Education Min- tracking facility for measurement of solids motion in gas fluidized beds.
istry (SRF for ROCS, SEM), the Key Laboratory of Multiphase AIChE Journal, 31(3), 465–473.
McKeen, T., & Pugsley, T. (2003). Simulation and experimental validation of a
Reaction of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (No. 2003-5), the
freely bubbling bed of FCC catalyst. Powder Technology, 129, 139–152.
Key Laboratory of Organic Synthesis of Jiangsu Prov., Chemical Morooka, S., Tajima, K., & Miyauchi, T. (1971). Behavior of bubbles in a fluid
Experiment Center of Soochow University and R&D Foundation bed. Kagaku Kogaku, 35, 680–686.
of Nanjing Medical University (NY0586). Miyauchi, T., Furusaki, S., Morroka, S., & Ikeda, Y. (1981). Transport phe-
nomena and reaction in fluidized catalyst beds. Advances in Chemical
Engineering, 11, 275–448.
References
Ozawa, M., Umekawa, H., Furui, S., Hayashi, K., & Takenaka, N. (2002). Bubble
behavior and void fraction fluctuation in vertical tube banks immersed in a
Amtec Engineering Inc. (1999). Tecplot User’s Manual, Version 7.5. Bellevue, gas–solid fluidized-bed model. Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science,
Washington. 26, 643–652.
Caicedo, G. R., Marques, J. J. P., Ruiz, M. G., & Soler, J. G. (2003). A study on Popovich, A. T., & Hummel, R. L. (1967a). A new method for non-disturbing
the behavior of bubbles of a 2D gas-solid fluidized bed using digital image turbulent flow measurements very close to a wall. Chemical Engineering
analysis. Chemical Engineer Progress, 42, 9–14. Science, 22, 21–25.
Crowe, C. T., Sharma, M. P., & Stock, D. E. (1977). The particle-source-in cell Popovich, A. T., & Hummel, R. L. (1967b). Experimental study of the viscous
(PSI-cell) model for gas-droplet flows. Journal of Fluids Engineering, 99, sublayer in turbulent pipe flow. AIChE Journal, 13, 854–860.
325–332. Rowe, P. N. (1964). A note on the motion of a bubble rising through a fluidized
Davidson, J. F., & Harrison, D. (1963). Fluidized particles. London: Cambridge bed. Chemical Engineering Science, 19, 75–77.
University Press., pp. 29–35. Soo, S. L. (1991). Comparison of formulations of multiphase flow. Powder
Ding, J., Lyczkowski, R. W., & Sha, W. T. (1995). Modeling of concentrated Technology, 66, 1–7.
Liquid-solids flow in pipes displaying shear-thinning phenomena. Chemical Spalding, D. B. (1985). Computer simulation of two-phase flows with special
Engineering Communications, 138, 145–155. reference to nuclear reactor systems. In R. W. Lewis, K. Morgan, J. A.
Ding, J., & Lyczkowski, R. W. (1992). Three-dimensional kinetic theory mod- Johnson, & W. R. Smith (Eds.), Computational Techniques in Heat Transfer
eling of hydrodynamics and erosion in fluidized beds. Powder Technology, (pp. 1–44). USA: Pineridge Press.
73(2), 127–138. Tsuji, Y., Tanaka, T., & Ishida, T. (1991). Lagrangian numerical simulation of
Ding, J., & Gidapow, D. (1990). A bubbling fluidization model using kinetic plug flow of cohesionless particles in a horizontal pipe. Powder Technology,
theory of granular flow. AIChE Journal, 36(4), 523–538. 71, 239–250.
Ding, J. (1989). A fluidization model using kinetic theory of granular flow. Wang, W., & Li, Y. (2002). Pseudo-fluid simulation of transient behaviors in a
Doctoral dissertation, Department of Chemical Engineering, Illinois Institute CFB riser. Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering, 10(1), 77–83.
of Technology, Chicago, IL, USA. Wen, C., & Yu, Y. (1966). Mechanics of fluidization. Chemical Engineering
Gidaspow, D. (1994). Multiphase flow and fluidization: Continuum and kinetic Progress Symposium Series, 62(62), 100–111.
theory descriptions. Boston: Academic Press.

You might also like