Fluidization Engineering: Lecture 09: Calculation of Gas Pumping Power Consumption in Fluidized Bed

G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
Fluidization Engineering
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
ou P
Lecture 09: Calculation of gas pumping power consumption in
ith @
w ght
fluidized bed
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
By
an er
in d
it un
Dr. Subrata K. Majumder

e is
us nt
Chemical Engineering Department, IIT Guwahati

ot e
nn um
Contact: [email protected]
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
in the fluidized bed
t p rof
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
How to calculate the power
si d
on er
consumption to pump the gas
, I IT
What to learn in this lecture
G
G
,I IT
on er
si d
is m
Power consumption of the blower
m ju
er Ma
rp K
• Power consumption is a significant cost factor in any process
rio S
t p rof
using fluidized beds
ou P
• Occasionally it can be so high that it cancels the advantages of
ith @
w ght
fluidization operation.
i
r m yr
• Therefore, roughly estimate the power requirement in the early
fo p
design stages—before making a detailed design or deciding to
pilot plant. y co
an er
in d
• Since the distributor contribute a considerable fraction of

it un
pressure drop across a fluid bed, it is always important to

e is
estimate the power consumption of the blower that drives the

us nt
ot e
gas through the bed

nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
Power consumption of the blower
is m
m ju
er Ma
• Consider a stream of gas to be compressed from an initial
rp K
pressure P1 to higher pressure P2 to pump it through the
rio S
entire fluid bed system. Then
t p rof
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
As per thermodynamics, for adiabatic reversible
an er
operations with negligible kinetic and potential energy
in d
it un
effects, the ideal shaft work to compress each kilogram of

e is
gas is given by
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
If an ideal gas behaviour is assumed
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
the ideal pumping requirement then becomes
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
where v is the volumetric flow rate of gas (in m3/s)

us nt
ot e
nn um
Cp, Cv are the specific heat capacity of gas at constant

ca cc
pressure and volume respectively

u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
Adiabatic reversible compression of a gas from pl to p2 cause to
si d
is m
increase in its temperature. From thermodynamics one can
m ju
er Ma
calculate the temperature at p2 as
rp K
rio S
t p rof
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
where γ = ratio specific heats of gas  1.67, 1.40, and 1.33 for
an er
in d
monatomic, diatomic, and triatomic gases, respectively.

it un
e is
us nt
However for real operations with its frictional losses, the actual
ot e
nn um
shaft work required is always greater than the ideal.

ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
For real operations with its frictional losses, the actual
m ju
er Ma
shaft work can be represented by
rp K
rio S
t p rof
ou P
ith @
w ght
Where  is the compressor efficiency which is roughly
i
r m yr
given by
fo p
y co
an er
 = 0.55 – 0.75 for a turbo-blower
in d
it un
 = 0.6 – 0.8 for a roots blower

e is
 = 0.8 – 0.9 for an axial blower or a two-stage

us nt
ot e
reciprocating compressor
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
The actual temperature of gas leaving a well-
er Ma
insulated (adiabatic), but not 100% efficient
rp K
compressor, is then
rio S
t p rof
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
This temperature is higher than the ideal

e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
• Example:
is m
m ju
er Ma
Determine the compressor power to pass reactant gas
rp K
rio S
into the plenum of the fluid bed system. Also calculate
t p rof
the temperature rise due to heat of compression. The
ou P
ith @
system parameters are
w ght
i
r m yr
Gas enters the compressor at
fo p
Pgrid distributor = 6 kPa
Pbed y co
= 15 kPa
T1 = 20 oC,
P1 = 101 kPa,
an er
in d
Pcyclone+filters+others = 12 kPa The volumetric flowrate of fluid is 10 m3/s

it un
Pexit of filters = 350 kPa The efficiency of compressor is 85% and

e is
the ratio of the specific heat ratio is 1.4

us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
Solution
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
t p rof
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
on er
, I IT
G
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
t p rof
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
on er
, I IT
G
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
Example
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
t p rof
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
on er
, I IT
G
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
Solution
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
t p rof
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
on er
,
Contd.. next page
I IT
G
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
t p rof
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
on er
, I IT
G
Contd.. next page
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
t p rof
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
on er
, I IT
G
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
Exercise Problem
w ght
Answer: (i) 882.04 kW, (iii) 655.72 kW

ith @
ou P
t p rof
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
on er
, I IT
G
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
Thank You
t p rof
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
on er
, I IT
G
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
ou P
ith @
Lecture 10: Bubbling Fluidization-Part 1: Bubble
w ght
Characteristics
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
By
in d
it un

e is

us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
Learning about bubbling fluidized bed
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
• What are the basic characteristic feature of bubbling fluidized bed?
rio S
• How bubbles are formed?
t p rof
ou P
• What is the maximum stable size of the bubble?
ith @
w ght
• How to estimate the bubble size?
i
r m yr
• How bubble rise velocity is related to bubble size or fluidized bed diameter?
fo p
y co
• Is there any model to represent the bubble size?
an er
• How bubbles are interacting to each other?
in d
it un
• How slug is formed? And what are the characteristic feature of slugging?
e is
• How does entrainment of particle happen in bubbling fluidized bed?

us nt
ot e
• How bubble size affect the mixing of phases in the bed?

nn um
• More..........
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
Bubbling Fluidized Bed
er Ma
rp K
rio S
Emulsion phase
t p rof
• This type of fluidization is called
ou P
aggregative fluidization Bubble phase
ith @
• Under this conditions, the bed
w ght
appears to be divided into two-
i
r m yr
phases, the bubble phase and the
fo p
emulsion phase.
y co
• The bubbles appear to be very
an er
in d
similar to gs bubbles formed in a

it un
liquid and hey behave in a similar

e is
manner.
us nt
• The bubbles coalescence as they rise

ot e
nn um
through the bed

ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
Bubble formation
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
• Bubble formation in a fluidized bed is very similar to that in
t p rof
an inviscid liquid.
ou P
• At a very low gas flow rate, the frequency and size of the
ith @
bubbles formed are primarily governed by a balance
w ght
between the surface tension of the fluid and the buoyancy
force of the bubble.
i
r m yr
fo p
• The inertia of the fluid moved by the rising bubbles becomes
y co
more important than the surface tension at higher gas rates.
an er
• At still higher gas rates, the momentum of gas issuing from
in d
the orifice can manifest as a jet before breakup into bubbles.

it un
• The gas bubble size, shape, formation, rising velocity, and

e is
coalescence, breakup in the fluidized beds have quantitative

us nt
similarity with those of gas bubbles in liquids

ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
• If the number of orifices per unit area is Nor [cm-2] and all the gas in
,
on er
excess of umf forms bubbles of equal size, the volumetric flow rate of
si d
gas from each of the orifices, vor, can be found from the expression
Bubble formation from porous plate
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
• For a low enough flow rate so that the initial bubbles from adjacent
rio S
orifices
t p rof
ou P
ith @
w ght
• Combining these above equations
i
r m yr
fo p
At low gas flowrate
y co
an er
• If lor is the spacing between adjacent holes of gas distributor
in d
it un
e is
At high flowrate
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
Bubble formation from gas jet
si d
is m
m ju
• The gas issuing from an orifice might be in the form of bubbles, a
er Ma
pulsating jet (a periodic jet), or a permanent flamelike jet, depending
on the relative properties of the gas, the bed material, and the
rp K
operating conditions
rio S
t p rof
• When the gas velocity is low, the bed material is dense, and the
particle size is small, the gas jet issuing from the orifice or the nozzle
ou P
ith @
tends to be truncated into bubbles right at the orifice, a phenomenon
very similar to that observed when gas is injected into a liquid
w ght
medium.

i
r m yr
• Markhevka et al. (1971) observed a jet in a fluidized bed located close
fo p
to the wall formed elongated cavities, which were periodically
y co
truncated to become bubbles at the orifice depending on the jet
an er
penetration length.
in d
it un
• In 1993, Roach proposed a critical Froude number, (Fr)c, as a

demarcation for jetting and bubbling. For systems above the critical
e is
Froude number, bubbles are formed; below it, jets are present. The
us nt
critical Froude number is expressed as follows:

ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
Bubble size
is m
m ju
er Ma
• Using the analogy of bubble formation in an inviscid liquid, Davidson and
rp K
Harrison (1963) derived equations for both the bubble frequency and the
rio S
bubble size (volume), assuming there is no gas leakage from the bubble to
t p rof
the emulsion phase
ou P
ith @
Applicable at high gas flowrate
w ght
Bubble volume G = gas flowrate
i
r m yr
fo p
• At high gas flow rates where the bubble sizes are independent of the
y co
bed viscosity, the inviscid liquid theory can predict the bubble sizes
an er
satisfactorily.
in d
it un
e is
• At low gas flow rates where the viscosity effects are quite pronounced,
us nt
the inviscid liquid theory underestimates the bubble sizes. In this case,
ot e
nn um
the following equation by Davidson and Schuler (1960) should be used

ca cc
Bubble volume Applicable at low gas flowrate

u do
G = gas flowrate
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
Bubble size
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
By capturing
image
rio S
by suitable camera
t p rof
Spherical
ou P
ith @
bubble
w ght
VBi
i
r m yr
fo p
With the same volume of
y co
equivalent spherical bubble of diameter db
an er
in d
it un
e is
ith bubble
us nt
ot e
nn um
Volume to surface mean

ca cc
bubble diameter or Souter –mean bubble diameter

u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
Effect of gas flowrate on bubble
,
on er
si d
is m
size
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
Size of bubbles at different levels in beds of Geldart A and Β particles; from

u do
Kunii and Levenspiel (1991)

Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
Effect of pressure on bubble size
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
At higher pressure bubbles shrink drastically in small particle (Geldart A)
rp K
beds but hardly at all in larger particle (Geldart B ) beds.
rio S
t p rof
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
Effect of pressure on bubble size in beds of Geldart A and Β solids

(adapted from Weimer and Quarderer, 1985)
ca cc
u do
from Kunii and Levenspiel (1991)

Yo is
Th
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
t p rof
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
on er
, I IT
G
Effect of group of particle on bubble size

Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
t p rof
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
on er
, I IT
G
Effect of distributor on bubble size

G
, I IT
on er
Bubble Size Correlations
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
For Geldart Β and D solids, the bubble size db at any height z in the bed as
rio S
per Mori and Wen (1975) correlation
t p rof
ou P
ith @
w ght
Porous distributor
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
where
in d
db0 is the initial bubble size formed near the bottom of the bed,
it un
dbm is the limiting (maximum) size of bubble expected in a very deep bed.
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
Bubble Size Correlations
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
Werther (1978) correlation
rio S
t p rof
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
Porous distributor
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
Similar way, from experimental data the correlation can be developed to

predict the bubble axially with other type of distributor
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
Initial bubble size formed from jet
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
• When the momentum of the jets dissipates, bubbles are formed at the end
rp K
of the jets. The initial bubble size was studied by Basov et al. (1969) and
rio S
Merry (1975).
t p rof
• They suggested the equations
ou P
ith @
w ght
Or
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
The inlet jet velocity should be calculated from the equation

it un
e is
ug, can be calculated based on the crosssectional area of

us nt
the jet nozzle and the volumetric jet flow rate.

ot e
nn um
The solid particle velocity, us, can be calculated

ca cc
assuming the gas/solid slip velocity to be the terminal

u do
velocity of a single particle of the average size

Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
Bubble Frequency
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
• Nguyen and Leung (1972) performed experiments in a 2-D bed with a
rp K
fluidizing velocity of 1.2 times the minimum fluidizing velocity and found
rio S
that the bubble frequency is better approximated by the following equation
t p rof
ou P
ith @
Bubble frequency
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
• According to Kunii and Levenspiel: consider pairs and chains of bubbles
y co
issuing from an orifice in a bed that is otherwise at minimum fluidizing
an er
conditions. At higher orifice flows, the bubble frequency just above the
in d
orifice should be
it un
e is
G is in cm3/s
us nt
g =981 cm/s2
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
For G = 200-2000 cm3/s , this equation gives fn = 19 - 12 s-1

Yo is
Th
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
t p rof
rio S
rp K
flow rates; from Kunii and Levenspiel (1991).
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
on er
, I IT
G
Frequency of bubbles passing a point in a fluidized bed at various gas
G
, I IT
on er
Bubble Rise Velocity
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
Single Bubble Rise Velocity in Liquids
rp K
rio S
• In a liquid of small viscosity, the rate of rise of large bubbles depends
t p rof
primarily on inertial forces and surface tension.
ou P
ith @
• The shape of the bubble will adjust itself to maintain the pressure inside the
w ght
bubble constant.
i
r m yr
• An approximate solution by Dumitrescu (1943) for a long bubble in a tube
fo p
gives
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
 Davies and Taylor (1950) also provided a solution with a slightly different
us nt
empirical constant.
ot e
nn um
For single bubble

ca cc
u do
where dbe is the diameter of the sphere having the same volume as the bubble
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
Important notes
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
ou P
• The wall effect predominates when equivalent bubble
ith @
diameter dbe is more than 1/3 of the bed diameter
w ght
i
• The wall effect becomes negligible only when dbe is less
r m yr
fo p
than 0.1 of the bed diameter
y co
an er
• The regime where the wall effect is dominant is generally
in d
called the slugging regime

it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
Absolute Bubble rise velocity in a stream of bubbles
is m
m ju
er Ma
• In the case of a stream of bubbles in a vertical tube generated continuously by
rp K
blowing air in at the bottom, the absolute upward rising velocity of each bubble
rio S
is greater than the velocity of a similar size single bubble rising in a stagnant
t p rof
liquid.
ou P
ith @
• By making a simple material balance, it is possible to derive the absolute bubble
w ght
velocity as
i
r m yr
Constant = 1.0 for uniform velocity
fo p
y co
an er
Nicklin et al. (1962) found experimentally that the absolute bubble velocity is
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
The factor 1.2 stems from the fact that the peak velocity at the middle of the tube is
about 1.2 times the average velocity, owing to the nonuniform velocity profile. The
ca cc
bubbles evidently rise relative to the fastest moving liquid in the middle of the tube.
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
is m
Absolute bubble rise velocity in a swarm of bubbles
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
• For a swarm of bubbles, the same concept applies:
t p rof
ou P
ith @
(A)
w ght
i
r m yr
From the continuity of gas flow it can be derived that
fo p
y co (B)
an er
in d
it un
e is
where H is the liquid height when gas velocity is u, and H0 is the liquid height when
us nt
ot e
gas velocity is zero. ubr from experimentally observable quantities.

nn um
ca cc
Equations (A) and (B) can be applied to a bubbling gas–solid fluidized bed by
u do
replacing u with u - umf, assuming that the two-phase theory applies.

Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
Single bubble rise velocity in gas-solid fluidized bed
si d
is m
m ju
• The rising velocity of a single bubble in a quiescent bed has been found
er Ma
experimentally to be
rp K
rio S
t p rof
ou P
ith @
w ght
This compares with the experimental value of Davis and Taylor (1950) for
bubbles in liquids as
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
Wall effects retard the rise of bubbles when dbe/dbed > 0.125.
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
For dbe/dbed > 0.6, the bed should be considered not to be bubbling, but slugging
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
Bubbles in gas–solid fluidized beds usually are spherical-capped with the included angle
si d
equal to 120. The bubbles in air–water systems have an angle of 100
is m
m ju
er Ma
A spherical-cap bubble with an included angle, , as shown in Fig., has a
volume
rp K
rio S
t p rof
ou P
ith @
If the equation for bubble rise velocity is written in a general form,
w ght
it can be expressed as
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
Schematic of
it un
Combining above these two equations we have spherical-cap bubble

e is
us nt
When the bubbles are large enough to

ot e
nn um
exceed approximately 25% of the

column diameter, the bubble velocity is
ca cc
affected by the presence of the vessel

u do
wall.
If C = 0.71, the included bubble angle is 120
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
Absolute bubble rise velocity in a swarm of bubbles
is m
m ju
in bubbling beds
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
ou P
In order to come up with an equation for bubble rise velocity that covers
ith @
the whole range of particle sizes from Geldart A to D and that accounts for the
w ght
vessel size, Werther (1978) proposed the equation
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
where ψ is the fraction of visible bubbles, and  is a factor that accounts for the
deviation of bed bubbles from single rising bubbles.
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
dbed = dt
ca cc
u do
ψ changed with height z in the bed. Thus, up to z/dbed  1, approximately  = 0.8, 0.65, and
0.26 for Geldart A, B, and D particles.
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
is m
If Beds with Internals
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
• Hydraulic diameter of the bed
t p rof
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
For all calculations for different parameters will be based on the

us nt
hydraulic diameter instead of normal diameter of the bed

ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
t p rof
Thank You
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
on er
, I IT
G
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
Characteristics
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
By
in d
it un

e is
us nt

ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
Growth of Bubbles in Fluidized Beds
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
• The bubbles in fluidized beds grow in size due primarily to three
t p rof
ou P
factors:
ith @
• The effective hydrostatic pressure decreases toward the top of
w ght
the fluidized bed
i
r m yr
fo p
• Bubbles coalesce in the vertical direction with the trailing
y co
bubble catching up the leading bubble, and
an er
in d
• Bubbles coalesce in the horizontal direction with the

it un
neighboring bubbles
e is
us nt
• The effect of the hydrostatic pressure is usually small

ot e
nn um
• The bubbles grow in size owing largely to coalescence

ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
Galdert Model
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
• Geldart (1972) found that the fluidization behavior of
t p rof
Group B powders was independent of both of the mean
ou P
ith @
particle size and of particle size distribution.
w ght
• In particular, the mean bubble size was found to depend
i
r m yr
only on the type of the distributor, the distance above the
fo p
y co
distributor plate, and the excess gas velocity above that
an er
required at the minimum fluidization condition, u - umf.
in d
it un
Mathematically, it can be expressed as

e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
Galdert Model
si d
is m
m ju
For Porous Plate distributor
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
Experimentally, it has been found that for the porous
ou P
ith @
plates, the following equation applies
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
Applicable for porous plate of 1 hole per 10 cm2 of bed

it un
e is
area.
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
Th
used
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
t p rof
For Orifice Plate distributor
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
on er
, I IT
G
For orifice plates, the following equation can be
Galdert Model
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
Mori and Wen Model
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
Mori and Wen (1975) assumed that all gas
ou P
above the minimum fluidizing velocity went
ith @
w ght
to form a single train of bubbles rising along
i
the center line of the bed and calculated the
r m yr
fo p
diameter of bubble with bed height h as
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
• According to Mori and Wen (1975)
rp K
model, the maximum bubble size
rio S
depends on only relative velocity of gas
t p rof
to the minimum fluidization velocity and
ou P
ith @
the cross sectional area of the bed
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
where Abed is the area of

e is
the bed and Nor is the

us nt
total number of orifices.

ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
Initial Bubble size (Mori and Wen, 1975 Model)
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
For perforated plates, the initial
t p rof
ou P
bubble diameter dbo is expressed as
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
where Abed is the area of

ot e
the bed and Nor is the

nn um
total number of orifices.

ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
For porous plates:
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
The following expression should be used
rp K
to estimate the initial bubble sizes.
rio S
t p rof
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
The validity of the above equations has been tested within
an er
in d
the ranges of the following parameters

it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
Rowe model
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
• Rowe (1976) suggested the following equation to estimate the
rp K
rio S
bubble size in a fluidized bed:
t p rof
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
• Here ho is an empirical constant and is a characteristics of the
in d
it un
distributor plate.
e is
ho = 0 for a porous plate

us nt
ot e
nn um
> 1 m for large tuyeres

ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
Darton et al. model
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
• Darton et al. (1977) assumed that the
rio S
bubbles are lined up as close together
t p rof
as possible, as shown in Fig. They also
ou P
ith @
defined a so-called ‘‘catchment area’’
w ght
for each particular bubble track. The
i
r m yr
bubble frequency can then be
fo p
y co
calculated by ub/2Rb with the bubble
an er
velocity
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
it un
in d
the two phase theory.
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
• The bubble flow in each track can
be calculated as follows assuming
t p rof
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
Darton et al. model (cont.)
is m
si d
on er
, I IT
G
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
If the bubbles are hemispheres, the volume of each
rio S
individual bubble can be calculated by the equation
t p rof
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
Then, after substitution

it un
Acatch = Catchment area;

e is
us nt
The catchment area is

ot e
nn um
defined as the area of

distributor plate per hole
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
When two bubbles of equal volume
ou P
ith @
from the nth stage coalesce to form a
w ght
bubble of the (n+1)th stage, you can
i
r m yr
have
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
If you further assume that the height of each bubble
rio S
coalescence stage is proportional to the diameter of the
t p rof
catchment area, you can get
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
 = 1.17.
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
where dc is the diameter of a circular catchment area for
in d
it un
each bubble stream and hn is height of nth stage.

e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
Th
Yo is
Since
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
t p rof
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
With the initial bubble diameter, one can get
is m
si d
on er
,
I IT
G
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
The total bed height can thus be expressed as
rp K
rio S
t p rof
ou P
ith @
 = 1.17.
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
If the bubbles grow to the size of the vessel diameter, the
in d
it un
bed becomes a slugging bed. From this analysis, this occurs

e is
at the following conditions

us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
Zenz (1977) model
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
Zenz (1977) assumed the bubble growth in the fluidized
rp K
rio S
bed resembles the well-known Fibonacci series (Zenz,
t p rof
1978) and proposed the following equation for bubble
ou P
growth.
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
n is 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13,......... A Fibonacci Series

u do
Bubble growth by Fibonacci series

Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
Choi et al. (1998) Model
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
 For the model, it made use of the simplified collision theory to
t p rof
account for the coalescing frequency of the bubble with
ou P
ith @
assumptions that
w ght
the bubble moves upward,
i
r m yr
fo p
the time-averaged instantaneous bubble movement at a point
y co
of bed cross section is regular, and
an er
in d
it un
the bubble speed, Vb, as constant. And hence, average bubble-

e is
rising velocity, ub, is related as half of Vb.

us nt
ot e
Bubble coalescence was considered to occur on a pair of

nn um
bubbles at a time.
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
Choi et al. Model (cont.)
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
The coalescing frequency per unit volume Fcv is
t p rof
expressed as
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
where db and n are the spherical bubble diameter and the

ca cc
number of bubbles per unit volume, respectively.

u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
When the number of bubbles is assumed to increase by 1 (one)
t p rof
at a breakup of a bubble, the total splitting frequency per unit
ou P
ith @
volume Fs can be written as
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
in which fs* is the average splitting frequency of an original

ot e
nn um
single bubble.
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
ou P
ith @
The variation of the number flow rate Nf of bubbles across the
w ght
bed cross section with respect to height h above the distributor
i
r m yr
is
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
with an initial condition that Nf = Nfo at h = 0

ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
When umb = umf and volumetric bubble flux qb = (u - umf),
rp K
rio S
t p rof
the number flow rate Nf of bubbles across the bed cross section
ou P
ith @
and bubble voidage b are estimated from the following relations,
w ght
respectively:
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
where  is a coefficient.
ot e
For coarse particles, the minimum

nn um
bubbling velocity equals umf, but

ca cc
for fine particles it is much larger

u do
than umf.
Yo is
Th
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
t p rof
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
on er
, I IT
G
G
, I IT
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
Since ub = Vb/2 the variation of bubble diameter db
rio S
t p rof
with respect to height h is
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
with an initial condition that db = dbo at h = 0.

e is
us nt
ot e
Glicksman et al. (1987) considered the mean coalescence rate while assuming the
nn um
bubbles were in a random spatial distribution like that of the present Choi et al.
ca cc
(1998) Model.
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
If the coalescence frequencies = breakup frequencies,
t p rof
ou P
ith @
the bubble diameter becomes the equilibrium bubble diameter that is
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
the equilibrium bubble diameter increases linearly with the ratio

it un
of volumetric bubble flux qb to the splitting frequency of a bubble

e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
Substituting the above equation of equlibrium condition, and with the initial
boundary condition, the variation of bubble diameter db with respect to height h
rp K
can be expressed as
rio S
t p rof
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
Where
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
Miwa et al.
nn um
(1972)
ca cc
u do
For perforated plate distributor For porous plate distributor

Yo is
Th
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
t p rof
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
et al. (1998)
on er
, I IT
G
How bubble size is changing
fluid velocity is shown by Choi

with height of fluidized bed and
G
, I IT
on er
si d
Bubble growth from Mutiple Entry Nozzles
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
Bubble growth from mutiple entry nozzles was studied by Yates et al. (1995)
rio S
t p rof
for a Group A powder by means of x-rays. The simple correlation expressed
here was found to correlate the data well:
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
ls = the orifice separation distance
r m yr
fo p
y co hc = the average height above the
an er
orifice at which coalescence completes
in d
it un
e is
The volume of the bubble void and its associated gas shell following
us nt
ot e
coalescence can be correlated as

nn um
ca cc
u do
Vb = the bubble volume

Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
Pattern of bubble growth and
si d
is m
m ju
solid circulation
er Ma
rp K
rio S
• All the models for the growth of bubbles in fluidized Constant gas velocity, increasing bed height
t p rof
beds have assumed same type of ordered
ou P
ith @
progression and independent of solid movement in
w ght
the beds
i
• Whitehead (1979)pointed out that the pattern of
r m yr
fo p
bubble coalescence and solid circulation in large
y co
industrial fluidized beds depended on both the bed
an er
depth and the operating velocity
in d
it un
• Figure shows the patterns observed in large Constant bed height, increasing gas velocity
e is
fluidized beds of Group B powders with industrial-

us nt
type distributor plates (Whitehead and Young, 1967;

ot e
Whitehead et al., 1977)

nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
Thank You
t p rof
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
on er
, I IT
G
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
ou P
ith @
coalescence in three-phase fluidization
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co By
an er
in d

it un
e is

us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
Coalescence
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
• The coalescence of two bubbles in turbulent flow in
t p rof
three phase fluidized bed is usually considered to
ou P
occur in three steps.
ith @
• First, the bubbles collide,
w ght
• Second, the surface of the colliding bubbles
i
r m yr
flattens against each other
fo p
y co
• Third, trapping a small amount of liquid
an er
between colliding bubbles
in d
it un
• Since the collision of three or more bubbles at the

same time has a very small probability, only binary
e is
collision is normally considered in coalescence

us nt
ot e
models.
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
Colliding
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
Coalescence mechanism
ou P
surface
t p rof
v = velocity, rio S
Flattens the
rp K
er Ma
h = drainage height
m ju
is m
si d
on er
, I IT
G
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
Film thining model of coalescence
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
• Coalescence may not result from each collision, and thus
ou P
coalescence efficiency was introduced by many investigators.
ith @
w ght
The most popular model for the coalescence efficiency is the
i
film-thinning model (e.g., Kirkpatrick and Lockett, 1974,
r m yr
fo p
Prince and Blanch, 1990, Luo, 1993).
y co
an er
in d
it un
• According to the model, when the bubbles approach faster,

e is
they tend to bounce back without coalescence due to the

us nt
limitation on the film drainage rate governed by the surface

ot e
nn um
tension.
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
Film thining model of coalescence
m ju
er Ma
rp K
• Two bubbles will coalesce provided they remain in contact for
rio S
t p rof
a period of time sufficient for the liquid film between them to
ou P
thin out to the critical value necessary for rupture.
ith @
w ght
• The coalescence rate, Ω, for bubbles of size of di and dj, can be
i
r m yr
expressed as
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
Where θij is the collision frequency and Pc is the

ca cc
coalescence efficiency.
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
Collision Frequency
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
• Collision may occur due to a variety of mechanisms. One is the
rp K
random motion of bubbles due to turbulence. Saffman and Turner
rio S
t p rof
(1956) proposed a collision frequency model which only takes
ou P
turbulent collision into account
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
• where θij is the collision frequency between bubbles with diameter of di

it un
and dj.
e is
us nt
• ni and nj are the bubble number density (m-3),

ot e
nn um
• ε is local turbulent specific energy dissipation rate (m2s−3)

ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
• In addition to turbulence, bubbles
rp K
rio S
of different sizes have different
t p rof
rise velocities that may lead to
ou P
ith @
collision
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
• Also bubbles located in a region of
y co
relatively high liquid velocity may
an er
collide with bubbles in a slower
in d
it un
section of the velocity field

e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
• Prince and Blanch (1990) proposed a collision frequency model based on the
is m
m ju
summation of the turbulent collision rate, buoyancy-driven collision rate
er Ma
and laminar shear collision rate as follows:
rp K
rio S
t p rof
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
ul is the liquid velocity, R is the radius of bubble

Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
Lehr and Mewes (2001) model for collision
is m
m ju
er Ma
frequency
rp K
rio S
t p rof
• Lehr and Mewes (2001) suggested another
ou P
ith @
expression for collision frequency following
w ght
Prince and Blanch’s (1990) model which takes
i
r m yr
the turbulence and buoyancy driven induced
fo p
y co
collision into account:
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
Lehr and Mewes (2001) model for collision
is m
m ju
frequency
er Ma
rp K
rio S
• If a bubble enters another bubble’s wake
t p rof
ou P
(Figure), it will usually overtake the leading
ith @
bubble in an inline collision that may result in
w ght
coalescence.
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
• Although there are many observations of the
an er
wake effects, all of which showed that the wake
in d
it un
effect is very important for coalescence, the

e is
wake-induced collision models are rare.

us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
Collision frequency due to wake entrainment
m ju
er Ma
rp K
• Wu et al. (1998) defined the effective wake
rio S
t p rof
volume, in which the bubbles that follow may
ou P
collide with the leading one is:
ith @
w ght
= the projected bubble area  by the effective
i
r m yr
fo p
length, L, which is 5-7 times the bubble
y co
an er
diameter.
in d
it un
e is
us nt
• They assumed that the wake structure of the

ot e
nn um
leading bubble to be the same as that of a solid

ca cc
sphere
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
Collision frequency due to wake entrainment
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
• Wu et al. (1998) presented the following collision frequency due to wake
rp K
entrainment (bubble of size d is the leading bubble):
rio S
t p rof
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
Lw
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
Lw = length of wake
u do
g = gas holdup
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
Some important points
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
• Most authors use turbulence-induced collision only, partly
rio S
because the wake-induced collision, especially the wake-
t p rof
induced coalescence efficiency, is not well understood.
ou P
ith @
• As far as the order of magnitude is concerned, the wake
w ght
and turbulence induced collision are of the same order,
i
r m yr
while the laminar shear induced collision is less important.
fo p
y co
• The buoyancy-driven collision is an inline collision, and
an er
in d
when the leading bubble collides with the trailing bubble,

it un
the trailing bubble is in the wake of the leading bubble.

e is
us nt
• Hence, the velocity difference between the two bubbles

ot e
nn um
cannot be calculated by the free rising velocity difference

as suggested by Clift et al. (1978)
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
Some Important Points (contd.)
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
• In summary, in turbulent flow there are only two important
rio S
collision mechanisms: the wake entrainment and turbulence.
t p rof
ou P
• One can either assume that the wake-induced coalescence
ith @
efficiency is the same as the turbulence-induced coalescence
w ght
efficiency so that the summation of these two collision frequency
i
r m yr
can then be used to calculate the coalescence efficiency (Hibiki
fo p
and Ishii, 2000)y co
an er
in d
• or one can consider only the turbulence-induced collision as the

it un
existing coalescence efficiency models are based on turbulence

e is
induced coalescence (Luo, 1993).

us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
Coalescence Efficiency
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
• According to coalescence theory (Ross et al., 1978; Chesters,
ou P
1991), coalescence will more likely to occur upon a collision of
ith @
two bubbles if the contact time (interaction time), tI, exceeds
w ght
the coalescence time, tc, required for drainage of the liquid film
i
r m yr
between them to a critical rupture thickness
fo p
y co
• Coulaloglou and Tavlarides (1977) suggested the following
an er
in d
expression in liquid droplet coalescence rate investigation.

it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
Interaction and coalescence times
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
• the interaction time, tI, is proportional to the characteristic
rp K
lifetime of an eddy of size equal to the sum of the sizes of the
rio S
approaching bubbles which can be estimated as
t p rof
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
• the coalescence time, tc, can be estimated from the film
fo p
drainage modely co
an er
in d
it un
e is
Then the coalescence efficiency can be estimated as

us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
efficiency
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
t p rof
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
on er
, I IT
G
Different Models of bubble coalescence
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
• As per experiments of Doubliez, 1991; Duineveld,
er Ma
1994 with individual bubbles show that small
rp K
rio S
bubbles and small approach velocities lead to
t p rof
higher coalescence efficiency
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
• Thus, for two colliding bubbles with given
fo p
y co
diameters the coalescence efficiency depends on
an er
the relative velocity of approach.
in d
it un
e is
us nt
• This velocity depends on the angle at which the

ot e
nn um
two bubbles collide.

ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
is m
m ju
• Lehr and Mewes (2001) assume that the relative
er Ma
probability is equal for all steradians. Thus, the
rp K
coalescence efficiency can be written as:
rio S
t p rof
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
Wecrit = 0.06 Steradians:

ot e
the SI unit of solid angle, equal to the angle at

nn um
the centre of a sphere subtended by a part of

ca cc
the surface equal in area to the square of the

u do
radius.
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
Super imposition of buoyancy driven and laminar shear collision
si d
is m
frequencies on turbulence induce collision frequency:
m ju
er Ma
rp K
• The buoyancy driven and laminar shear collision frequencies may be
rio S
superimposed on turbulence induce collision frequency (Prince and
t p rof
Blanch, 1990) because the bubble relative velocity can be
ou P
ith @
superimposed,
w ght
• So the turbulent induced coalescence efficiency model may not be
i
r m yr
fo p
applied to buoyancy driven and laminar shear collision events.
y co
• Still coelescence rate equation can be used as
an er
in d
it un
If
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
then the coalescence rate, can be estimated as

uij is the bubble
ca cc
approach velocity
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
Ojima et al. (2015) Model for coalescence in
er Ma
slurry fluidized bed
rp K
rio S
t p rof
• The authors (Ojima et al., 2014a), therefore, measured the time,
ou P
ith @
tC, elapsed from bubble contact to the rupture of the liquid
w ght
film between two coalescing bubbles in a 2D column using
i
r m yr
hydrophilic particles of 100 μm in diameter to quantitatively
fo p
evaluate the effect of particle concentration on bubble
coalescence
y co
an er
in d
it un
• The tC decreased with increasing the volume concentration CS

of particles, i.e., bubble coalescence is enhanced with
e is
us nt
increasing CS.
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
Ojima et al. (2015) Model (cont.)
is m
m ju
er Ma
• First they have interpreted the coalescence of bubble in absence of
rp K
particle as shown in Figure which shows a typical bubble coalescence
rio S
t p rof
process between two bubbles in the absence of particles (CS=0). The origin
ou P
of the time in the figure was set at the instant of bubble coalescence. The
ith @
process can be divided into two phases:
w ght
i
r m yr
Approach phase where the trailing
fo p
y co bubble faster than the leading bubble
approaches the latter, and
an er
in d
Coalescence phase where the distance

it un
between contacting bubbles is kept

e is
almost constant before the liquid film

us nt
ruptures
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
• They also done the experiment with different conentration of particles and explained as:
rp K
• They stated that coalescing bubbles at CS= 0.20 as shown in Figure (a). compared with the
rio S
bubbles at CS=0, the coalescence phase is shorter at all dS. The decrease in dS also decreases
t p rof
the time duration of the coalescence phase, i.e., bubble coalescence is enhanced.
ou P
• The effect of dS, however, disappears at the higher concentration, CS = 0.40, as shown in
ith @
Figure (b). In this case, the bubbles coalesce immediately after the contact, so that dS has
w ght
little influence on coalescence.
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
(a) (b)
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
is m
m ju
• Figure (c) shows an example of the bubble coalescence processes of coalescing bubbles
er Ma
at CS=0.30 and dS=100 μm, where 0 s denotes the instant of film rupture. There are
rp K
particles in the film. The film thickness is about 300 μm and is almost uniform in the
rio S
recorded region before the film rupture (−3/12,500 s). The film then ruptures within the
t p rof
time duration of 1/12,500 s and the rupture front rapidly propagates. The bubble
coalescence processes at dS=60 and 150 μm are shown in Figure (d).
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
(c) (d)
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
• They reported that the final film thickness hf before the film rupture tended
rio S
to increase with increasing CS and with decreasing dS. The cause of this
t p rof
tendency can be understood as follows:
ou P
ith @
• since the order of the film thickness is a few times of dS, the liquid film
w ght
takes a porous-like structure due to the presence of particles. The liquid
i
r m yr
elements there are, therefore, to be very thin and fragile.
fo p
y co
• The particle number density increases with decreasing dS, and therefore,
an er
the decrease in dS makes the porous-like structure finer and more fragile.
in d
it un
e is
For two-phase flow

us nt
ot e
nn um
However this should be changed in presence of particle

ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
• The enhancement of bubble coalescence due to the presence of
t p rof
particles can, therefore, be implemented into the model by
ou P
ith @
accounting for the particle effect on hf.
w ght
• For this, They introduced a particle-effect multiplier into the
i
r m yr
coalescence efficiency in the Prince–Blanch model as follows:
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
Here must be one at CS=0 and =0 at CS=0.45 because of the immediate

coalescence after contact.
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
• They reported that for  can be evaluated within
ou P
ith @
a range 0<CS<0.45 using the linear interpolation,
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
• They haave suggested the following interpolation
ou P
ith @
function based on their interpolation data as
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
From their model it was concluded that
rio S
t p rof
• The time required for bubble coalescence after bubble contact
ou P
decreases, in other words, bubble coalescence is enhanced with
ith @
decreasing the particle diameter.
w ght
i
• The particle-effect multiplier is of great use to take into account the
r m yr
fo p
effects of the particle concentration and diameter in multi-fluid
y co
simulations of three-phase fluidized bed.
an er
in d
• The interaction between the bubble interfaces and particles in the

it un
bubble coalescence process after bubble contact is a local

e is
us nt
phenomenon and rarely depends on the macroscopic behavior of the

ot e
nn um
interface.
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
Thank You
t p rof
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
on er
, I IT
G
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
ou P
ith @
w ght
breakup in three-phase fluidization
i
r m yr
fo p
y co By
an er
in d
it un

e is

us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
Bubble breakup
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
• The bubbles in turbulent dispersion are not only exposed to a turbulent
rio S
field, but are also subject to both inertial and viscous forces.
t p rof
ou P
• Moreover, the gas-liquid interface is also subjected to instability due to the
ith @
difference in density and velocity of the gas and liquid phase
w ght
• The most important force in stabilizing the bubble is the surface tension
i
r m yr
fo p
• In addition, a centrifugal force, induced by internal circulation of the gas in
y co
a bubble, can suppress the disturbances at the gas-liquid interface and act
an er
as a stabilizing force
in d
it un
• On the other hand, such a centrifugal force can also disintegrate the bubble
e is
as it increases with an increase in bubble size. The bubble breaks up when

us nt
the centrifugal force exceeds the surface tension force, especially at high
ot e
pressures when gas density is high.

nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
The fate of a bubble breakup
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
• The fate of a bubble is determined by the breakup/
rp K
deformation force and the stabilization/restoration force
rio S
t p rof
(Table).
ou P
• If the bubbles are much larger than the microscale of
ith @
w ght
turbulence (Shinnar, 1961; Narsimhan et al., 1979), the viscous
i
force can be neglected.
r m yr
fo p
y co
Breakup/deformation force Stabilization/restoration force
an er
Turbulent stress/ eddy bombardment Surface tension
in d
it un
Inertial force Liquid acceleration along the bubble

e is
Viscous force surface

us nt
ot e
Kelvin-Helmholtz instability
nn um
Rayleigh-Taylor instability
ca cc
u do
Centrifugal force induced by gas internal circulation

Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
The fate of a bubble breakup
is m
m ju
er Ma
• Concerning the criterion for breakup, one can distinguish at
rp K
rio S
least five cases in the literature
t p rof
• (i) Turbulent kinetic energy of the bubble greater than a critical
ou P
ith @
value (Chatzi et al., 1989)
w ght
• (ii) Velocity fluctuation around the particle surface greater
i
r m yr
than a critical value (Alopaeus et al., 2002)
fo p
y co
• (iii) Turbulent kinetic energy of the hitting eddy greater than a
critical value (Martinez-Bazan et al., 1999)
an er
in d
• (iv) Inertial force of the hitting eddy greater than the interfacial
it un
force of the smallest daughter particle (Lehr et al., 2002)

e is
us nt
• (v)Combination of the criterion (c) and (d) (Zhao and Ge,

ot e
2007).
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
The fate of a bubble breakup (cont.)
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
• Much of the published literature assumes that the
ou P
bubble break-up occurs through bubble interactions
ith @
w ght
with turbulent eddies
i
r m yr
• Only the eddies which are approximately equal to the
fo p
y co
size of the bubble can break the bubble, since larger
an er
eddies have the tendency to transport the bubble rather

in d
it un
than break it,

e is
us nt
• while very small eddies do not contain sufficient

ot e
nn um
energy to break the bubble.

ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
• For a complete bubble breakup model, the number of daughter
rp K
bubbles produced upon breakup of a parent bubble, the daughter
rio S
t p rof
bubble size probability density function (p.d.f.) and breakup rate
ou P
need to be provided
ith @
w ght
• In addition, when a bubble exceeds a critical value, the bubble
i
interface becomes unstable and breakup is likely to occur.
r m yr
fo p
Therefore, the bubble breakup can be related to the maximum
y co
attainable stable size (Kocamustafaogullari and Ishii, 1995)
an er
in d
• And hence a complete bubble breakup model, should also include

it un
the maximum stable bubble size (which gives a threshold below

e is
us nt
which a bubble will not be breakable in a given turbulent flow

ot e
field).
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
• In turbulent flow, bubble breakup is caused by fluctuating eddies
ou P
ith @
resulting in the pressure variation along the bubble surface.
w ght
• When a bubble size exceeds a critical value, at which the
i
r m yr
breakup/deformation mechanism and the stabilization/ restoration
fo p
y co
mechanism reach equilibrium, the bubble interface becomes
an er
unstable and break-up is likely to occur
in d
it un
• It is to be noted that the maximum stable bubble size is not equal to

e is
the maximum (possible) bubble size in a given system

us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
Maximum Stable Bubble Size
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
• Levich (1962) model: recognized the importance of
ou P
internal gas circulation, assumed the centrifugal force
ith @
w ght
to be equal to the dynamic pressure induced by the gas
i
r m yr
moving at the bubble rise velocity, ub, and proposed a
fo p
y co
simple expression to calculate the maximum stable
an er
bubble size:
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
Maximum Stable Bubble Size (cont.)
is m
m ju
er Ma
• Martínez-Bazán et al. (1999) model: Martínez-Bazán et
rp K
al. (1999), based on Kolmogorov’s concept, suggested
rio S
t p rof
the following maximum stable bubble size in turbulent
ou P
ith @
flows
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co  = 8.2
an er
in d
 = the energy dissipation rate per

it un
unit mass of fluid mixture (m2s−3)

e is
us nt
In this model, only the dominant forces, turbulence stress and

ot e
nn um
surface tension, are considered

ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
Energy dissipation rate is the rate of energy loss due to fluid flow from location (1) to
si d
is m
location (2). The rate of energy loss in a turbulent flow is given by
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
ou P
ith @
w ght
where
ρ = density of the fluid (kg/m3)
i
r m yr
P1 = pressur at upstream location (N/m2)
fo p
y co
P2 = pressur at downstream location (N/m2)
u1 = superficial velocity of the fluid at the upstream location (m/s)
an er
in d
u2 = superficial velocity of the fluid at the downstream location (m/s)

it un
z1,z2 = elevation of fluid relative to reference points upstream and

e is
downstream locations, (m)

us nt
h = energy dissipation from point (1) to point (2) (J/kg)

ot e
nn um
g = gravity acceleration constant (m/s2)

ca cc
Any conversion of mechanical energy into thermal energy is

u do
accounted for the energy dissipation term h.

Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
• For estimation of energy dissipation rate in the turbulent
rio S
pipe flow, the well-known empirical relationship can be
t p rof
used
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
where
e is
dc = column diameter (m)

us nt
ot e
f = Fanning friction factor

nn um
u = superficial velocity of continuous liquid (m/s)

ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
Energy dissipation rate in the flow passing through a restriction
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
• When fluid flows through a restriction, it experiences pressure
rio S
t p rof
drop. It is due to the energy dissipation that take place when
ou P
large velocity gradients are present in the flow
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
where where
e is
E = energy dissipation rate (W) ρm = density of phase mixture (kg/m3)

us nt
ΔP = permanent pressure drop (N/m2) Vm,dis = mixture volume used for energy
ot e
Q = volumetric flow rate (m3/s) dissipation (m3)

nn um
tres = mean residence time of the mixture in

ca cc
the dissipation zone (seconds)

u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
is m
Maximum Stable Bubble Size (Cont.)-Other
m ju
er Ma
models
rp K
rio S
t p rof
Luo et al. (1999) model: accounts for the internal
ou P
ith @
circulation of the gas in a bubble by using the force
w ght
balance between the centrifugal force and the surface
i
r m yr
fo p
tension force. y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
 = Surface tension (N/m); g = gravitational acceleration (m/s2)

ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
Maximum Stable Bubble Size (Cont.)-Other
m ju
er Ma
models
rp K
rio S
t p rof
• Lehr and Mewes (2001): suggested another
ou P
ith @
formula following the idea of Levich (1962) and
w ght
Luo and Svendsen (1996):
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
t p rof
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
Breakup rate or frequency
si d
on er
, I IT
G
G
, I IT
on er
si d
is m
Breakup Rate: Prince and Blanch (1990) Model
m ju
er Ma
• Based on the energy of the eddy and the surface tension force on
rp K
rio S
the bubble, Prince and Blanch (1990) proposed a model for
t p rof
breakup rate shown below:
ou P
ith @
w ght
The model is incomplete as it does not
i
r m yr
provide the daughter bubble size p.d.f.
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
Where
ne = eddy density of size de ,
e is
N(k) = number of eddies of wave number (k) per mass of fluid.

us nt
uci = critical velocity of an eddy necessary to break a bubble of

ot e
nn um
diameter di
ca cc
ute = turbulent velocity of an eddy of diameter de,

u do
θie = collision rate of bubbles with eddies of the appropriate size.

Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
Breakup Rate: Luo & Svendsen (1996) Model
is m
m ju
er Ma
• The kinetic energy carried by the turbulent eddies plays a dominant role in the
rp K
break-up process. The imbalance between the kinetic energy and the surface energy
rio S
is used to define the break-up rate
t p rof
ou P
• Luo & Svendsen (1996) developed a bubble breakup model as given as
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
Where v and v’ are the volume of bubble of two sizes,  = eddy size, lK = Kolmogorov
nn um
length scale
ca cc
 = kinematic viscosity
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
Daughter bubble size probability density
m ju
er Ma
function (p.d.f.)- Luo and Svendsen (1996) Model
rp K
rio S
t p rof
• Based on the theory of
ou P
isotropic turbulence, Luo and
ith @
Svendsen (1996) proposed a
w ght
breakup criteria in which the
i
r m yr
fo p
breakup probability is
y co
proportional to the difference
an er
between the energy carried by
in d
it un
the arriving eddies and the

e is
increase in surface energy due

us nt
to a breakup.
ot e
nn um
Luo and Svendsen’s (1996)

ca cc
breakup model illustration

u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
Daughter bubble size probability density function
is m
m ju
(p.d.f.)- Luo and Svendsen (1996) Model (contd.)
er Ma
rp K
rio S
• The bombarding frequency of the eddies of
t p rof
size λ on bubbles of size d can be expressed as
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
 is the local gas holdup

it un
e is
Luo and Svendsen’s (1996) model also

us nt
ot e
predicts that all the bubbles of size greater

nn um
Luo and Svendsen’s (1996)

than the turbulence inertial subrange tend to
ca cc
breakup model illustration

u do
breakup
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
The probability of breakup into bubble
is m
m ju
er Ma
• The probability of breakup into bubble with a given fraction of
rp K
fBV upon such bombarding was given as
rio S
t p rof
ou P
ith @
Here
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
where y co
an er
v = the volume of the parent bubble of size d,
in d
it un
cf = ratio of increased surface area with respect to the surface

e is
area of parent bubble

us nt
ot e
nn um
As per isotropic
ca cc
turbulence theory
u do
Luo and Svendsen (1996)

Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
Breakup rate: Martínez-Bazán et al.’s (1999)
is m
m ju
model
er Ma
rp K
rio S
• Proposed a
t p rof
phenomenological model
ou P
ith @
based on turbulence stress
w ght
and surface tension analysis
i
r m yr
for daughter bubbles
fo p
distribution y co
an er
• As the bubble residence time
in d
it un
within the breakup region is

e is
very short, neither buoyancy

us nt
effect nor the dynamics of

ot e
nn um
bubble oscillation play any

ca cc
role in breakup
u do
Kg = 0.25  = 8.2
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
model (cont.)
rp K
rio S
• In this model, there are two distinct breakup regimes dependent on bubble
t p rof
size
ou P
ith @
• The breakup rate is zero for bubbles of size d  dmax
w ght
• The dreakup rate increases rapidly for bubbles larger than the maximum
i
r m yr
stable bubble size.
fo p
y co
• The breakup rate, after reaching, d = 1.63dmax , decreases with bubble size
an er
in d
• In the limit of very large bubbles, d/dmax >>1, the surface tension forces
it un
become very small and the breakup rate can be approximated by

e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
,I IT
on er
si d
is m
rm aju
model (cont.)
pe M
K
ri S
t p rof
Breakup rateor
• for small bubbles of size
ou P
ith @
smaller than, dmax but
w ght
comparable to the critical
i
r m yr
Breakup rate
diameter dbc, the breakup rate
fo p
dbc
can be written as: y co
an er
Bubble diameter
in d
it un
e is
Typical breakup rate with respect

us nt
to bubble diameter predicted by

ot e
nn um
Martínez-Bazán et al. (1999)

ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
Dauaghter bubble distribution function Based on
si d
is m
Martínez-Bazán et al.’s (1999) model
m ju
er Ma
rp K
• Accroding to this model the possibility of splitting a fraction of bubbles of size from
rio S
the parent bubble of size is proportional to the difference in the turbulence stress
t p rof
acting between the two points separated by the distance and the confinement
ou P
pressure due to the surface tension of the parent bubble. This produces an inverted
ith @
U-shaped (∩-shaped) daughter bubble distribution function and can be expressed
w ght
as:
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
 = 8.2
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
Bubble breakup rate: Lehr and Mewes (2001) Model
is m
m ju
er Ma
• Lehr and Mewes (2001) suggested another formula, following the idea
rp K
rio S
of Levich (1962) and Luo and Svendsen (1996), for bubble breakup rate
t p rof
of bubble size into bubbles of size vz and (v-vz):
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
Note: This equation is valid for bubbles larger than the maximum stable bubble.
ca cc
It does not need a predefined daughter bubble size distribution. The daughter bubble size
u do
distribution is a result that can be calculated directly from the model.

Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
The probability of breakup into bubble Lehr
on er
si d
is m
and Mewes (2001) Model
m ju
er Ma
• According to Lehr and Mewes (2001), the breakup probability
rp K
rio S
distribution can be expressed in terms of a normalized product of two
t p rof
functions related to the two breakup criteria:
ou P
ith @
w ght
For a given collision between bubbles of size di (or
volume vi ) and eddies of size j and energy level e(λj)
i
r m yr
fo p
y co Surface
an er
energy
in d
it un
criteria
e is
us nt
ot e
where
nn um
Energy di is parent bubble diameter

ca cc
density dk is daughter bubble

u do
criteria
diameter
Yo is
Th
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
t p rof
Thank You
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
on er
, I IT
G
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
Lecture 14: Entrainment Characteristics (Part 1)
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y coBy
an er
in d

it un
e is

us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
What is Entrainment?
m ju
er Ma
rp K
Lean phase or free board

rio S
t p rof
• Definition: Entrainment means the flux of
ou P
ith @
solids carried out of the fluidized bed by
w ght
the gas in kg per unit cross-sectional area
TDH
i
r m yr
fo p
per second
y co
an er
Splash
in d
Dense
phase
it un
zone
• Denoted by Gs (kg/m2.s)
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
Importance to learn
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
• The entrainment rate has to be known for the design of
ou P
gas/solid separators like cyclones or filters.
ith @
w ght
• On the other hand, the loss of bed material that is related to
i
the entrainment may be important for the technical and also
r m yr
fo p
the economic success of a fluidized bed application.
y co
an er
• It characterizes the selective removal of particles of individual
in d
it un
size from the fluidized bed

e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
Important Terms and its Definitions
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
• A fluidization vessel usually has
t p rof
three zones:
ou P
ith @
w ght
• dense bubbling phase zone: the
i
r m yr
bulk density remains almost
fo p
constant y co
an er
• lean or dispersed phase zone: the
in d
bulk density of solid decreases with

it un
height
e is
• Splash zone: the demarcation

us nt
between bed and freeboard

ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
• Freeboard: The section of the vessel between the
t p rof
surface of the dense phase and the exit of the gas
ou P
ith @
stream. The bulk density of solids decreases with
w ght
height in the freeboard, increasing the freeboard
decreases the entrainment from the bed.
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
• Transport disengaging height (TDH): a freeboard
an er
in d
height above which bulk density does not change

it un
appreciably. When the gas stream exits above the

e is
transport disengaging height, or Hf > TDH, then

us nt
both the size distribution and entrainment rate are

ot e
close to constant.
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
• Saturation carrying capacity: of the gas
t p rof
stream represents the largest flux of solid
ou P
that can be entrained out of the vessel whose
ith @
w ght
exit is above the TDH. This depends on the
i
properties of the particles and on the flow
r m yr
fo p
conditions of the gas.
y co
an er
in d
it un
• Elutriation: the classifying effect of the

e is
fluidized bed entrainment. It characterizes

us nt
the selective removal of particles of

ot e
nn um
individual size from the fluidized bed.

ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
Mechanism of entrainment
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
• Bubbles and slugs breaking at the surface
t p rof
of the bed that throw solids into the
freeboard.
ou P
ith @
• Since the bubbles' pressure is higher than
w ght
bed surface pressure, they "pop" on
reaching the surface, spraying solids
i
r m yr
from the bubble roofs into the freeboard.
fo p
y co
• Since bubbles with their wakes may rise
an er
very much faster than the surrounding
in d
medium, this wake material may be

it un
thrown as a clump into the freeboard.

e is
• Finally, when two bubbles coalesce just

us nt
as they break the surface of the bed, one

ot e
observes an especially energetic ejection

nn um
of wake solids from the trailing bubble

ca cc
into the freeboard.

u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
Entrainment Mechanism (contd.)
rp K
rio S
t p rof
• In bubbling beds, it is mainly the wake
ou P
ith @
material that is thrown into the freeboard,
w ght
whereas in slugging beds it is the roof solids
i
r m yr
that spray into the freeboard.
fo p
y co
• In liquid-solid beds there have no freeboard
an er
in d
solids because they fluidize smoothly with

it un
no bubbling action.
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
is m
Effect of dynamic variables
m ju
er Ma
rp K
• Gas velocity: It increases with the superficial gas
rio S
velocity. Both the ejection of particles from the
t p rof
dense bed into the freeboard and the transport
ou P
ith @
through the freeboard are affected by the
w ght
superficial velocity. In general, the elutriation rate
increases proportionally with the gas velocity to a
i
r m yr
power of 2 to 4.
fo p
y co
• Solid velocity: Solid velocity affect the entrainment
an er
due to the exchange of momentum between solids.
in d
it un
If there are wider particle size distribution, even

coarser particle will have higher settling velocity,
e is
due to the momentum exchange between particles,

us nt
Influence of pressure on the total

ot e
couarse particle may entrained while finer particle entrainment rates. dbed 0.3 m,
nn um
may be decllerated. sand, dp 70 m, (Chan and

ca cc
Knowlton, 1984)
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
Effect of system properties
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
• Viscosity: Effects of the changing viscosity
ou P
ith @
should not play any dominant role, since the
w ght
influence of the pressure on viscosity is small.
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
• Density: Increase in bulk density of solid or the
in d
it un
increase in density of the gas used decrease the

e is
entrainment rate
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
Effect of particle characteristics
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
• Particle type: Particles belonging to the Geldart group A
t p rof
fluidized at high velocities, the ejection from the roof
ou P
ith @
predominates and hence entrainment, while for group B
w ght
particles fluidized with lower velocities, ejection from the
i
r m yr
wake is governing the process, hence lower entrainment
fo p
y co
(Davidson,1983).
an er
in d
it un
• Size of particles: at most only slightly affected, by changing

e is
the size of the coarse material.

us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
m ju
Effect of bubble characteristics
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
ou P
• Bubble size: Bubble size should have some effect, because it
ith @
w ght
determines the quantity of fines thrown into the freeboard to
be picked up by the flowing gas.
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
• Increase of the entrainment flux is due to the increase of
an er
bubble sizes with height
in d
it un
• The probability of bubbles to coalesce near the bed surface

e is
and increase the ejection force to entrainment of the particles.

us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
Effect of thermodynamic condition
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
• Pressure:
rio S
The entrainment flux increases with pressure. These
t p rof
effects may directly be related to the increasing
ou P
density of the gas and thus decrease in single particle
ith @
terminal velocity. An increase in pressure increases
w ght
entrainment enormously and changes the size
i
r m yr
distribution of solids by including more of the larger
fo p
y co
solids (Chan and Knowlton)
an er
in d
it un
• Temperature:
e is
There is no significant effect of temperature on Influence of pressure on the total

us nt
entrainment. However, a decrease of the elutriation entrainment rates. dbed = 0.3 m,

ot e
nn um
rate constant with increasing temperature in the range sand, dp = 70 m, (Chan and
between 270 and 670K for the fine FCC (Wouters and Knowlton, 1984)
ca cc
Geldart, 1998).
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
Effect of Bed Size
is m
m ju
er Ma
• Bed heights:
rp K
rio S
Increase of the entrainment fluxes with increasing bed height, the
t p rof
influence being more pronounced for the entrainment flux at the
bed surface and higher gas velocities. Particles are not moving
ou P
ith @
individually through the freeboard; they form clusters, which
allow slip velocities between gas and particles that are much
w ght
higher than the single particle’s terminal velocity. Such clusters
i
will form also with very fine particles and thus provide an
r m yr
explanation of why the entrainment is decreasing with increasing
fo p
y co
height even for fine particle systems (Geldart and Pope,1983; Kunii
and Levenspiel, 1989)
an er
in d
• Bed diameter:
it un
Entrainment is independent of size for units larger than 0.1 m in

e is
diameter. the entrainment in the larger unit to be higher than in

us nt
the smaller unit. The gas velocity is reduced by the square of the Effect of the bed height on the
ot e
ratio of bed diameter to freeboard diameter, which leads to a entrainment flux (a)above the TDH and (b)
nn um
significant reduction of the entrainment flux by increasing the

freeboard diameter. just above the bed surface. (dbed = 0.61 m,
ca cc
silica sand, dp = 61 m, Baron et al., 1990.)

u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
Effect of Internals
is m
m ju
er Ma
• May increase the entrainment due to the increased gas velocity in the
rp K
rio S
freeboard (Tweedle et al., 1970), depending on the design of internals.
t p rof
• It may help to reduce the entrainment flow significantly.
ou P
ith @
• Reducing the size of bursting bubbles by stirrers or bed internals can
w ght
drastically lower entrainment.
i
r m yr
• Horizontal louvers close to the bed surface reduce entrainment about 33%
fo p
y co
(Martini et al., 1976) for large particle.
an er
• Horizontal tubes in the bed do not affect the rate of entrainment (George
in d
and Grace, 1981) for large particle.

it un
• Vertical internals cause an increase in entrainment (Kato et al., 1985)

e is
us nt
whereas for small particle do not significantly affect entrainment (Zhang

ot e
et al., 1982; Kato et al., 1985)

nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
Estimation of TDH
is m
m ju
er Ma
• An important parameter for the design of a fluidized bed
rp K
rio S
vessel is the TDH. To reduce the carryover from a fluidized
t p rof
bed, the freeboard should have, wherever possible, a height of
ou P
at least the TDH
ith @
w ght
• There is only a gradual decay of the entrainment flux vs. the
i
r m yr
height at the level of TDH.
fo p
y co
• Based on experimental data different correlations were
an er
developed some of which important are given as follows:
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Ref. Kunii & Levenspiel, 1991)

Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
Entrainment Model: Lewis et al. Model
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
• The density of solids or holdup present at various
t p rof
levels Zf as the freeboard height Hf is shown in Fig.
ou P
ith @
• Curve AGB represents the solids holdup when the
w ght
freeboard height is at Hf,A > TDH
i
r m yr
• Curves CD and EF are for freeboard heights Hf,C and
fo p
Hf,E , respectively, both below the TDH
y co
an er
• At complete reflux (curve AGB), the density of solids
in d
in the freeboard falls off exponentially from the value

it un
at the bed surface, or

e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
Entrainment Model (Hf < TDH): Lewis et al. Model (contd.)
is m
m ju
er Ma
• At smaller Hf, below TDH (curves CD
rp K
and EF), the solid density is some
rio S
constant value less than at complete
t p rof
reflux, or
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
• The entrainment falls off exponentially as,
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
To discourage side reactions in the freeboard of a large-

ca cc
diameter turbulent bed reactor, to use a short freeboard

u do
is recommended.
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
Kunii and Levenspiel Model
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
• A simple flow model to represent the complex
t p rof
phenomena occurring in the freeboard.
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
• Their model lumped velocities and other
fo p
quantities incorporated the main features of
y co
freeboard behavior, such as the ejection of
an er
in d
agglomerates of solids into the freeboard,

it un
followed by the upflow, downflow, and

e is
breakup of these agglomerates.

us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
Generalized version of Kunii and Levenspiel
on er
si d
is m
Model: Freeboard-Entrainment Model
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
• Consider a freeboard above bubbling or turbulent fluidized
t p rof
bed with the following assumptions:
ou P
ith @
• Assumptions 1: Three distinct phases are present in the
w ght
freeboard.
i
r m yr
• Phase 1: Gas stream with completely dispersed solids.
fo p
The fines are carried upward and out of the bed at
y co
velocity u1 while the coarse material rains back into the
an er
bed.
in d
it un
• Phase 2: Agglomerates, coming from the bed, and moving

e is
upward at velocity u2 .
us nt
• Phase 3: Agglomerates and thin wall layers of particles

ot e
nn um
moving downward at velocity u3

ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
Freeboard-Entrainment Model (contd.)
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
• Assumption 2: At any level in the freeboard
t p rof
the rate of removal of fines from the
ou P
ith @
agglomerates to form dispersed solid of phase
w ght
1 is proportional to the volume fraction (or
i
r m yr
solid density) of agglomerates at that level.
fo p
y co
• Assumption 3: Upward-moving agglomerates
an er
will eventually reverse direction and move
in d
it un
downward, the frequency of change from

e is
phase 2 to phase 3 being proportional to the

us nt
volume fraction of phase 2 at that level.

ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
t p rof
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
on er
, I IT
G
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
t p rof
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
on er
, I IT
G
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
• Now consider at any level Zf in the freeboard Mass flux [kg/m2.s]
m ju
er Ma
Gs1= the mass flux of phase 1
rp K
rio S
Gs2 = the mass flux of phase 2
t p rof
Gs3 = the mass flux of phase 3
ou P
ith @
1 = mass of phase 1 per unit volume of freeboard [kg/m3]
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
• Then at steady state conditions the net upward flux of solids at any
in d
it un
level in the freeboard is given by

e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
(1)
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
• Also, the average (or bulk) density of solids at any level in the
si d
is m
bed is
m ju
er Ma
rp K
(2)
rio S
t p rof
ou P
ith @
• Let x be the fraction of fines in bed for which ut < u.
w ght
• Due to vigorous turbulence or mixing, the particles may inter-
i
r m yr
transfer the phase from each other like
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
Phase1 Rate coefficients for transfer:

e is
us nt
xK1 xK1 • xΚ1 for the transfer of fines from

ot e
phases 2 and 3 to 1, and

nn um
K2
ca cc
Phase 2 Phase 3 • K2 for the transfer from phase 2 to

u do
phase 3.
Yo is
Th
Th
Yo is
u do
For phase 2:
For phase 1:
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
t p rof
Mass Balances at Level Zf
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
on er
, I IT
G
(3)
(4)
G
, I IT
on er
si d
for phase 3:
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
t p rof
(5)
ou P
ith @
Since all solids that reach the freeboard height Hf leave the vessel, there
w ght
is no downflow there, so
i
r m yr
fo p
(6)
y co
an er
Only upflow agglomerates of solids projected into the freeboard from the
in d
it un
dense bed, So
e is
us nt
(7)
ot e
nn um
Solving equations (3 to 5), one can get expression for 1, 2,
ca cc
3 with these boundary conditions

u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
si d
With Eq. (1), the net flux of solids at any freeboard level and at the
is m
vessel outlet can then be expressed as
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
(8)
t p rof
ou P
ith @
w ght
where Gs* is the flux of carryover from a very tall vessel fluidizing only
i
entrainable solids when Hf > TDH .
r m yr
fo p
y co (9)
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
(10)
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
Special case
on er
si d
is m
m ju
er Ma
• For a vigorously bubbling bed or a turbulent bed with
rp K
few fines
rio S
(11)
t p rof
ou P
ith @
w ght
• So, from equation (9) and (10) one can get
i
r m yr
(12)
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
• Therefore the equation (8) becomes

e is
(13)
us nt
ot e
nn um
These expressions provide a physical interpretation of the

ca cc
u do
parameters reported by Lewis et al.

Yo is
Th
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
Since always
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
Special case
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
t p rof
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
on er
,
Since for
I IT
G
upward flux can be obtained by substituting the densities 1, 2 in equation
(15)
(14)
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
is m
• for fine particles, Lewis et al. found that product of decay
m ju
er Ma
coefficient is inversely proportional to the gas velocity in the
fluidized bed and depends on the particle size
rp K
rio S
• Walsh et al. found that the above statement is also holds for
t p rof
coarse particles.
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
Entrainment profile In terms of Density
is m
m ju
er Ma
• The entrainment profile can be expressed as density once one
rp K
solved for the densities (1, 2, 3) from the entrainment model
rio S
t p rof
for different phases as
ou P
ith @
w ght
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
I IT
,
on er
si d
Example
is m
m ju
er Ma
rp K
rio S
• Estimate the entrainment flux from a short free-board of a
t p rof
fluidized bed. Assume that the bed is operated at a certain
ou P
ith @
velocity of about 167.66 times of minimum fluidization
w ght
velocity for all particle to be entrainable.
i
r m yr
fo p
y co
an er
in d
it un
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
ca cc
u do
Yo is
Th
G
, I IT
on er
Solution
si d
is m
m ju
Fig. 1
er Ma
u = 167.66*0.003 = 0.503 m/s
rp K
rio S
t p rof
ou P
ith @
From the figure (1)
w ght
i
r m yr
Gs* = 0.654
fo p
y co
Gsu0 = 5.0 kg/m2.s From the figure (2)
an er
Fig. 2
in d
it un
a = 1.66 as per
e is
us nt
ot e
nn um
Gs = 0.92 kg/m2.s as per

ca cc
u do
Gsu0: 1, 2, 5, 6; Gsud0: 3, 4
Yo is
Th
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
t p rof
Thank You
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
on er
, I IT
G
Th
Yo is
u do
ca cc
nn um
ot e
us nt
e is
it un
in d
an er
y co
fo p
r m yr
i
w ght
ith @
ou P
t p rof
rio S
rp K
er Ma
m ju
is m
si d
on er
, I IT
G

Fluidization Engineering: Lecture 09: Calculation of Gas Pumping Power Consumption in Fluidized Bed

Uploaded by

Fluidization Engineering: Lecture 09: Calculation of Gas Pumping Power Consumption in Fluidized Bed

Uploaded by

G

Dr. Subrata K. Majumder

Chemical Engineering Department, IIT Guwahati

• Since the distributor contribute a considerable fraction of

pressure drop across a fluid bed, it is always important to

estimate the power consumption of the blower that drives the

gas through the bed

effects, the ideal shaft work to compress each kilogram of

where v is the volumetric flow rate of gas (in m3/s)

Cp, Cv are the specific heat capacity of gas at constant

pressure and volume respectively

monatomic, diatomic, and triatomic gases, respectively.

shaft work required is always greater than the ideal.

 = 0.6 – 0.8 for a roots blower

 = 0.8 – 0.9 for an axial blower or a two-stage

This temperature is higher than the ideal

Pcyclone+filters+others = 12 kPa The volumetric flowrate of fluid is 10 m3/s

Pexit of filters = 350 kPa The efficiency of compressor is 85% and

the ratio of the specific heat ratio is 1.4

Answer: (i) 882.04 kW, (iii) 655.72 kW

Dr. Subrata K. Majumder

Chemical Engineering Department, IIT Guwahati

• How does entrainment of particle happen in bubbling fluidized bed?

• How bubble size affect the mixing of phases in the bed?

similar to gs bubbles formed in a

liquid and hey behave in a similar

• The bubbles coalescence as they rise

through the bed

the oriﬁce can manifest as a jet before breakup into bubbles.

• The gas bubble size, shape, formation, rising velocity, and

coalescence, breakup in the ﬂuidized beds have quantitative

similarity with those of gas bubbles in liquids

• In 1993, Roach proposed a critical Froude number, (Fr)c, as a

critical Froude number is expressed as follows:

the following equation by Davidson and Schuler (1960) should be used

Bubble volume Applicable at low gas flowrate

Volume to surface mean

bubble diameter or Souter –mean bubble diameter

Size of bubbles at different levels in beds of Geldart A and Β particles; from

Kunii and Levenspiel (1991)

Effect of pressure on bubble size in beds of Geldart A and Β solids

from Kunii and Levenspiel (1991)

from Kunii and Levenspiel (1991)

from Kunii and Levenspiel (1991)

Similar way, from experimental data the correlation can be developed to

The inlet jet velocity should be calculated from the equation

ug, can be calculated based on the crosssectional area of

the jet nozzle and the volumetric jet flow rate.

The solid particle velocity, us, can be calculated

assuming the gas/solid slip velocity to be the terminal

velocity of a single particle of the average size

For G = 200-2000 cm3/s , this equation gives fn = 19 - 12 s-1

For single bubble

called the slugging regime

gas velocity is zero. ubr from experimentally observable quantities.

replacing u with u - umf, assuming that the two-phase theory applies.

Combining above these two equations we have spherical-cap bubble

When the bubbles are large enough to

exceed approximately 25% of the

aﬀected by the presence of the vessel

For all calculations for different parameters will be based on the

hydraulic diameter instead of normal diameter of the bed

Dr. Subrata K. Majumder

Chemical Engineering Department, IIT Guwahati

• Bubbles coalesce in the horizontal direction with the

• The effect of the hydrostatic pressure is usually small

• The bubbles grow in size owing largely to coalescence

Mathematically, it can be expressed as

Applicable for porous plate of 1 hole per 10 cm2 of bed

where Abed is the area of

the bed and Nor is the

total number of orifices.

where Abed is the area of

the bed and Nor is the

total number of orifices.

the ranges of the following parameters