Minimum Fluidizing Velocities for Various Bed Packings - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

About This Presentation
Title:

Minimum Fluidizing Velocities for Various Bed Packings

Description:

Minimum Fluidizing Velocities for Various Bed Packings By Andrew Maycock Introduction to Fluidization Fluid flowed through bottom of a fixed bed Fluidization is the ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:724
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 31
Provided by: 00358
Learn more at: https://my.che.utah.edu
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Minimum Fluidizing Velocities for Various Bed Packings


1
Minimum Fluidizing Velocities for Various Bed
Packings
  • By
  • Andrew Maycock

2
Introduction to Fluidization
  • Fluid flowed through bottom of a fixed bed
  • Fluidization is the balance of gravity, drag and
    buoyant forces
  • Suspended particles have larger effective surface
    area than a packed fixed bed
  • The smallest velocity at which fluidization
    occurs is the minimum fluidization velocity

3
Fluidization Apparatus
Figure 1 Example of fluidization bed
4
Overview
  • Theoretical Approach
  • Experimental Approach
  • Results
  • Method Summaries
  • Conclusions
  • QA

5
Theoretical Approach
  • Bernoullis Equation
  • Correlations for friction loss terms through
    porous media

6
Ergun Equation
  • Sphericity term included
  • Composed of known or obtainable parameters

7
Minimum Fluidizing Velocity
  • Ergun Equation solved simultaneously with force
    balance.
  • May assume that flow is laminar (NRe lt 20)
    (Equation reduces to laminar friction term)

8
Experimental Approach
Figure 2 Example of fluidization bed
9
Determining MFV
  • Change occurs in slope of pressure drop plot

Figure 3 Plot of pressure drop vs. Fluid Velocity
10
Particle Properties
  • Graduated cylinder for bed density
  • Displaced volume for particle density
  • Microscopic photos for sphericity

11
Experimental Procedure
  • Glass Beads and Pulverized Coal
  • Increase mass flowrate
  • Measure pressure drop across bed
  • Change temperature and repeat
  • Determine fluid properties using correlations and
    equations of state

12
Experimental Problems
  • Poor Distribution
  • Faulty or imprecise pressure gauges
  • Difficulty in determining when fluidization has
    been reached

13
Results
14
Pulverized Coal Results
Figure 3 Microscopic photo of pulverized coal
15
Pulverized Coal Results (cont.)
Figure 4 Pressure drop data and Ergun Equation
for pulverized coal at 26.2 C
16
Pulverized Coal Results (cont.)
Figure 5 Pressure drop data and Ergun Equation
for pulverized coal at 32.8 C
17
Pulverized Coal Results (cont.)
Figure 6 Pressure drop data and Ergun Equation
for pulverized coal at 39.9 C
18
Pulverized Coal Results (cont.)
Example of results for pulverized coal
19
Glass Bead Results
Figure 7 Microscopic photo of glass beads
20
Glass Bead Results (cont.)
Figure 8 Pressure drop data and Ergun Equation
for glass beads at 30.0 C
21
Glass Bead Results (cont.)
Figure 9 Pressure drop data and Ergun Equation
for glass beads at 37.8 C
22
Glass Bead Results (cont.)
Figure 10 Pressure drop data and Ergun Equation
for glass beads at 42.1 C
23
Glass Bead Results (cont.)
Example of results for glass beads
24
The Laminar Assumption
25
The Laminar Assumption (cont.)
  • Reported to be accurate for Particle Reynolds
    Numbers under 20
  • More accurate as Reynolds Numbers get smaller
  • Typical values within 15-30 of Ergun Equation
  • Has no consistent relation to experimental value

26
Experimental Summary
  • Experimental determination is accurate and
    necessary
  • Difficult to determining exact value for minimum
    fluidizing velocity
  • Error in minimum fluidizing velocity measurement
    based on test interval

27
Correlation Summary
  • Provide a good estimate for actual fluidizing
    velocity.
  • Require difficult estimation of bed height and
    void fraction for operation above minimum
    fluidizing velocity.
  • Ergun Equation can show unrealistic results, as
    in this case.
  • Decent estimation requires accurate particle
    property values (void fraction and particle
    density are difficult to determine due to
    adsorption).

28
Conclusions
  • Correlations are useful, but not substitute for
    actual experimentation
  • Experimentation necessary because of inaccurate
    and imprecise instrumentation
  • Correlations are useful for industrial processes
    which are usually operated at two to three times
    the minimum fluidizing velocity

29
References
  • de Nevers, Noel, Air Pollution Control
    Engineering, 2nd ed. Mc-Graw Hill, New York
    (2005).
  • de Nevers, Noel, Fluid Mechanics for Chemical
    Engineers, 3rd ed. Mc-Graw Hill, New York (2005).
  • Seader, J.D. and Henley, Ernest J., Separation
    Process Principles, 2nd ed.Wiley, Danver,
    Massachusetts (2006).
  • Wikipedia, Sphericity, http//en.wikipedia.org/wik
    i/Sphericity

30
Questions
  • 5 Minute Question Period
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com