Two-fluid Modeling of Geldart A Particles in Gas-solid Bubbling Fluidized Bed: Assessment of Drag Models and Solid Viscosity Correlations
-
Tian Tian
Abstract
In this work the influences of solid viscosity and the way to scale-down traditional drag models on the predicted hydrodynamics of Geldart A particles in a lab-scale gas-solid bubbling fluidized bed are investigated. To evaluate the effects of drag models, the modified Gibilaro et al. drag model (constant correction factor) and the EMMS drag model (non-constant correction factor) are tested. And the influences of solid viscosity are assessed by considering the empirical model proposed by Gidaspow et al. (1997, Turbulence, Viscosity and Numerical Simulation of FCC Particles in CFB. Fluidization and Fluid-particle Systems, AIChE Annual Meeting, Los Angeles, 58–62) and the models based on kinetic theory of granular flow (KTGF) with or without frictional stress. The resulting hydrodynamics by incorporating the different combinations of the drag model and solid viscosity model into two-fluid model (TFM) simulations are compared with the experimental data of Zhu et al. (2008, Detailed Measurements of Flow Structure inside a Dense Gas-Solids Fluidized Bed.” Powder Technological 180:339–349). The simulation results show that the predicted hydrodynamics closely depends on the setting of solid viscosity. When solid viscosity is calculated from the empirical model of Gidaspow et al., both drag models can reasonably predict the radial solid concentration profiles and particle velocity profiles. When the KTGF viscosity model without frictional stress is adopted, the EMMS drag model significantly over-estimates the bed expansion, whereas the modified Gibilaro et al. drag model can still give acceptable radial solid concentration profiles but over-estimate particle upwards and downwards velocity. When KTGF viscosity model with frictional stress is chosen, both drag models predict the occurrence of slugging. At this time, the particle velocity profiles predicted by EMMS drag model are still in well agreement with the experimental data, but the bed expansion is under-estimated.
Funding statement: This work is financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, Grant No. 21576265, and the “Hundred Talents Program” of Chinese Academy of Sciences.
Acknowledgments
Xiaoxing Liu gratefully appreciates Dr Junwu Wang at Institute of Process Engineering, Chinese Academy of Sciences, for providing the function expression of the EMMS drag model.
References
Benyahia, S. 2012. “Analysis of Model Parameters Affecting the Pressure Profile in a Circulating Fluidized Bed.” AIChE Journal 58:427–439.10.1002/aic.12603Search in Google Scholar
Ferschneider, G., and P. Mege. 1996. “Eulerian Simulation of Dense Phase Fluidized Beds.” Oil Gas Sciences Technology 51:301–307.10.1016/B978-0-444-82463-9.50092-7Search in Google Scholar
Gao, J., X. Lan, Y. Fan, J. Chang, G. Wang, C. Lu, and C. Xu. 2009. “CFD Modeling and Validation of the Turbulent Fluidized Bed of FCC Particles.” AIChE Journal 55: 1680–1694.10.1002/aic.11824Search in Google Scholar
Gao, X., C. Wu, Y.-W. Cheng, L.-J. Wang, and X. Li. 2012. “Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Solid Behavior in a Gas-Solid Turbulent Fluidized Bed.” Powder Technology 228:1–13.10.1016/j.powtec.2012.04.025Search in Google Scholar
Gelderbloom, S.J., D. Gidaspow, and R.W. Lyczkowski. 2003. “CFD Simulations of Bubbling/Collapsing Fluidized Beds for Three Geldart Groups.” AIChE Journal 49:844–858.10.1002/aic.690490405Search in Google Scholar
Gibilaro, L.G., R. Di Felice, and S.P. Waldram. 1985. “Generalized Friction Factor and Drag Coefficient Correlations for Fluid – Particle Interactions.” Chemical Engineering Sciences 40:1817–1823.10.1016/0009-2509(85)80116-0Search in Google Scholar
Gidaspow, D., H. Lu, R. Mostofi, and Y. Wu, 1997. “Turbulence, Viscosity and Numerical Simulation of FCC Particles in CFB.” Fluidization and Fluid-particle Systems, AIChE Annual Meeting, Los Angeles, 58–62.Search in Google Scholar
Hong, K., Z. Shi, W. Wang, and J. Li. 2013. “A Structure-Dependent Multi-Fluid Model (SFM) for Heterogeneous Gas-Solid Flow.” Chemical Engineering Sciences 99:191–202.10.1016/j.ces.2013.05.050Search in Google Scholar
Karimipour, S., N. Mostoufi, and R. Sotudeh-Gharebagh. 2006. “Modeling the Hydrodynamics of Downers by Cluster-Based Approach.” Industrial Engineering Chemical Researcher 45:7204–7209.10.1021/ie060026kSearch in Google Scholar
Li, P., X. Lan, C. Xu, G. Wang, C. Lu, and J. Gao. 2009. “Drag Models for Simulating Gas-Solid Flow in the Turbulent Fluidization of FCC Particles.” Particuology 7: 269–277.10.1016/j.partic.2009.03.010Search in Google Scholar
Li, T., J. Grace, and X. Bi. 2010a. “Study of Wall Boundary Condition in Numerical Simulations of Bubbling Fluidized Beds.” Powder Technology 203: 447–457.10.1016/j.powtec.2010.06.005Search in Google Scholar
Li, T., K. Pougatch, M. Salcudean, and D. Grecov. 2007. “Numerical Simulation of Horizontal Jet Penetration in a Three-Dimensional Fluidized Bed.” Powder Technology 184: 89–99.10.1016/j.powtec.2007.08.007Search in Google Scholar
Li, T., Y. Zhang, J.R. Grace, and X. Bi. 2010b. “Numerical Investigation of Gas Mixing in Gas-Solid Fluidized Beds.” AIChE Journal 56: 2280–2296.10.1002/aic.12144Search in Google Scholar
Liu, X., C. Zhu, S. Geng, M. Yao, J. Zhan, and G. Xu. 2015. “Two-Fluid Modeling of Geldart A Particles in Gas-Solid Micro-Fluidized Beds.” Particuology 21:118–127.10.1016/j.partic.2014.05.012Search in Google Scholar
Lu, B., W. Wang, and J. Li. 2009. “Searching for a Mesh-Independent Sub-Grid Model for CFD Simulation of Gas-Solid Riser Flows.” Chemical Engineering Sciences 64:3437–3447.10.1016/j.ces.2009.04.024Search in Google Scholar
McKeen, T., and T. Pugsley. 2003. “Simulation and Experimental Validation of a Freely Bubbling Bed of FCC Catalyst.” Powder Technology 129:139–152.10.1016/S0032-5910(02)00294-2Search in Google Scholar
Oke, O., P. Lettieri, P. Salatino, R. Solimene, and L. Mazzei. 2014. “Numerical Simulations of Lateral Solid Mixing in Gas-Fluidized Beds.” Chemical Engineering Sciences 120:117–129.10.1016/j.ces.2014.08.049Search in Google Scholar
Patil, D.J., M. van Sint Annaland, and J.A.M. Kuipers. 2005a. “Critical Comparison of Hydrodynamic Models for Gas-Solid Fluidized Beds – Part Ⅰ: Bubbling Gas-Solid Fluidized Beds Operated with a Jet.” Chemical Engineering Sciences 60:57–72.10.1016/j.ces.2004.07.059Search in Google Scholar
Patil, D.J., M. van Sint Annaland, and J.A.M. Kuipers. 2005b. “Critical Comparison of Hydrodynamic Models for Gas-Solid Fluidized Beds – Part Ⅱ: Freely Bubbling Gas-Solid Fluidized Beds.” Chemical Engineering Sciences 60:73–84.10.1016/j.ces.2004.07.058Search in Google Scholar
Sharma, S.D., T. Pugsley, and R. Delatour. 2006. “Three-Dimensional CFD Model of the Deaeration Rate of FCC Particles.” AIChE Journal 52:2391–2400.10.1002/aic.10858Search in Google Scholar
Wachem, B.G.M., J.C. Schouten, R. Krishna, C.M. van den Bleek, and J.L. Sinclair. 2001. “Comparative Analysis of CFD Models of Dense Gas-Solid Systems.” AIChE Journal 47:1035–1051.10.1002/aic.690470510Search in Google Scholar
Wang, J 2009. “A Review of Eulerian Simulation of Geldart A Particles in Gas-Fluidized Beds.” Industrial Engineering Chemical Researcher 48: 5567–5577.10.1021/ie900247tSearch in Google Scholar
Wang, J., W. Ge, and J. Li. 2008. “Eulerian Simulation of Heterogeneous Gas-Solid Flows in CFB Risers: EMMS-based Sub-Grid Scale Model with a Revised Cluster Description.” Chemical Engineering Sciences 63:1553–1571.10.1016/j.ces.2007.11.023Search in Google Scholar
Wang, J., and Y. Liu. 2010. “EMMS-based Eulerian Simulation on the Hydrodynamics of a Bubbling Fluidized Bed with FCC Particles.” Powder Technology 197:241–246.10.1016/j.powtec.2009.09.022Search in Google Scholar
Wang, J., M.A. van der Hoef, and J.A.M. Kuipers. 2009. “Why the Two-Fluid Model Fails to Predict the Bed Expansion Characteristics of Geldart A Particles in Gas-Fluidized Beds: A Tentative Answer.” Chemical Engineering Sciences 64:622–625.10.1016/j.ces.2008.09.028Search in Google Scholar
Yang, N., W. Wang, W. Ge, and J. Li. 2003. “CFD Simulation of Concurrent-Up Gas-Solid Flow in Circulating Fluidized Beds with Structure-Dependent Drag Coefficient.” Chemical Engineering Journal 96:71–80.10.1016/j.cej.2003.08.006Search in Google Scholar
Ye, M., J. Wang, M.A. van der Hoef, and J.A.M. Kuipers. 2008. “Two-Fluid Modeling of Geldart A Particles in Gas-Fluidized Beds.” Particuology 6:540–548.10.1016/j.partic.2008.07.005Search in Google Scholar
Zhu, H., J. Zhu, G. Li, and F. Li. 2008. “Detailed Measurements of Flow Structure inside a Dense Gas-Solids Fluidized Bed.” Powder Technology 180:339–349.10.1016/j.powtec.2007.02.043Search in Google Scholar
Zimmermann, S., and F. Taghipour. 2005. “CFD Modeling of the Hydrodynamics and Reaction Kinetics of FCC Fluidized-Bed Reactors.” Industrial Engineering Chemical Researcher 44:9818–9827.10.1021/ie050490+Search in Google Scholar
© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Experimental and Numerical Study of the Hydrodynamics of a Thin Film Reactor (TFR) for the Decarboxylation of Anacardic Acid
- Ammonia Leaching of Zinc from Low-grade Oxide Zinc Ores Using the Enhancement of the Microwave Irradiation
- Two-fluid Modeling of Geldart A Particles in Gas-solid Bubbling Fluidized Bed: Assessment of Drag Models and Solid Viscosity Correlations
- Effect of Preparation Method on Ag Modified Ti-HMS Catalyst Structure and Catalytic Oxidative Desulfurization Performance
- Effects of Sparger and Internals Designs on the Local Hydrodynamics in Slurry Bubble Column Reactors Operating under Typical Fischer-Tropsch Process Conditions - I
- Fluidization Characteristics of TiO2 Ultrafine Particles in an Acoustic Spout-fluid Bed with a Draft Tube
- Simulation and Analysis of Flow Field in Sludge Anaerobic Digestion Reactor based on Computational Fluid Dynamics
- Bio-oil as Substitute of Phenol for Synthesis of Resol-type Phenolic Resin as Wood Adhesive
- Numerical Modeling and Parametric Optimization of Micromixer for Low Diffusivity Fluids
- Effects of Arrhenius Activation Energy and Binary Chemical Reaction on Convective Flow of a Nanofluid over Frustum of a Cone with Convective Boundary Condition
Articles in the same Issue
- Experimental and Numerical Study of the Hydrodynamics of a Thin Film Reactor (TFR) for the Decarboxylation of Anacardic Acid
- Ammonia Leaching of Zinc from Low-grade Oxide Zinc Ores Using the Enhancement of the Microwave Irradiation
- Two-fluid Modeling of Geldart A Particles in Gas-solid Bubbling Fluidized Bed: Assessment of Drag Models and Solid Viscosity Correlations
- Effect of Preparation Method on Ag Modified Ti-HMS Catalyst Structure and Catalytic Oxidative Desulfurization Performance
- Effects of Sparger and Internals Designs on the Local Hydrodynamics in Slurry Bubble Column Reactors Operating under Typical Fischer-Tropsch Process Conditions - I
- Fluidization Characteristics of TiO2 Ultrafine Particles in an Acoustic Spout-fluid Bed with a Draft Tube
- Simulation and Analysis of Flow Field in Sludge Anaerobic Digestion Reactor based on Computational Fluid Dynamics
- Bio-oil as Substitute of Phenol for Synthesis of Resol-type Phenolic Resin as Wood Adhesive
- Numerical Modeling and Parametric Optimization of Micromixer for Low Diffusivity Fluids
- Effects of Arrhenius Activation Energy and Binary Chemical Reaction on Convective Flow of a Nanofluid over Frustum of a Cone with Convective Boundary Condition
