Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract
Generalized bubbling-turbulent fluidized bed model was quantified in this work. It has been proposed that
regime transition does not occur in a distinct gas velocity. This means that at a constant superficial gas velocity,
different regimes coexist in a fluidized bed. However, each regime of fluidization has a specific probability at each
gas velocity. At gas velocities lower than transition velocity from bubbling to turbulent (Uc) probability of being in
bubbling regime is higher than turbulent while at higher velocities turbulent regime is dominant. In the present
work, contribution of each flow regime was determined at different gas velocities. Experiments were carried out in a
0.15 m ID fluidized bed. Pressure fluctuations were measured at different gas velocities. Sand particles with average
size of 0.23 mm were used in the experiments. Data were analyzed by fast Fourier transform in order to search for
characteristics of bubbling and turbulent regimes of fluidization. The most noticeable character of bubbling is
bubble itself while it is void in turbulent regime. Probabilities of being in bubbling and turbulent regimes were
evaluated by such analysis and their profiles against gas velocity were obtained.
Where
N
1
x =
N
∑ x (t )
t =1
(2)
∫ x (t )e
−2π it ω
Figure 2. Time series of pressure fluctuations at F (ω ) = dt (3)
U=0.442 m/s −∞
2
As shown in Eq. (2), Fourier transform is defined As expected, the maximum value occurs at
on the total range of time. Fig. 4 shows the fast Uc=0.95 m/s which is the transition velocity from
Fourier transform of the signal x (t) at U=0.442 m/s. bubbling to turbulent.
2500
2000
Energy
1-2 Hz
1500 2-3 Hz
3-4 Hz
1000 4-5 Hz
5-6 Hz
500
Figure 4. Fast Fourier transform of pressure
fluctuations at U=0.442 m/s 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Energy of a given signal, x (ω), between U (m/s)
frequencies i-j is defines as:
j Figure 6. Variation of energy of sessions with gas
E i − j = ∑ f (ω ) (4) velocity
ω =i
Fig. 6 illustrates the change of energy of each
Where f (ω) is amplitude of the signal x (ω) at frequency session against gas velocity. It can be seen
frequency ω. As mentioned earlier, there are many in this figure that energy of phenomena with
phenomena in a fluidized bed with different frequencies between 2-3 Hz decrease against gas
frequencies. For example, bubbles which are the most velocity and energy of phenomena with frequencies
noticeable characteristics of the bubbling regime and between 3-6 Hz increases against gas velocity. Other
voids for turbulent regime have their own frequency. frequency bonds show no significant change against
By increasing the gas velocity beyond minimum velocity. Therefore, frequencies in the range of 2-3
fluidization, excess gas enters the bubble phase and Hz can be attributed to bubbles while frequencies in
bubbles grow in size. Meanwhile, voids start to the range of 3-6 Hz can be contributed to voids.
occur. This means that with increasing the gas Consequently, probability of bubbling regime (PB)
velocity, energy of bubbles decreases while energy of was defined as the ratio of sessions with descending
voids increases. energy (EDS) to the total session energy (both
In addition to bubbles and voids, there exist other ascending and descending):
phenomena in the bed whose energy changes with
gas velocity. It is clear that with increasing the gas E Ds
velocity, probability of bubbling regime decreases PB = (5)
E A s + E Ds
and probability of turbulent regime increases.
Therefore, phenomena with decreasing energy (e.g.,
bubbles) represent the bubbling regime while E As
PT = (6)
phenomena with increasing energy (e.g., voids) E A s + E Ds
represent the turbulent regime.
In fluidized beds, dominant frequency of the
pressure fluctuations is normally below 10 Hz [6]. Fig. 7 shows probability of bubbling and turbulent
Considering the original signal up to 10 Hz it was regimes at different gas velocities.
broken it into 10 sessions (0-1, 1-2, 2-3, …, 9-10) and
the energy of each signal was calculated at different 0.8
gas velocities. Fig. 5 illustrates the variation of total
signal energy against gas velocity. 0.6
Probability
400000 0.4
300000 PT
0.2
Energy
PB U c =0.95 m/s
200000
0
100000
0 0.5 1 1.5
0 U (m/s)
0 0.5 1 1.5 Figure 7. Probability of bubbling and turbulent
U (m/s)
regime with gas velocity
Figure 5. Variation of total signal energy with gas
velocity
3
As expected, two curves reach each other at Uc group B particles. Chemical Engineering
which means that in the transition velocity Uc, Research and Design. (2008) 1236-1248.
probabilities of bubbling and turbulent regime are [5] E. Piskova, L. Moral. Characterization
equal to each other. of spouted bed regimes using pressure
fluctuation signals. Chemical
Conclusion Engineering Science 63 (2008) 2307 -
In the present study, probabilities of bubbling and 2316.
turbulent fluidization were determined [6] F. Johnson, R.C. Zijerveld, J.C.
experimentally. Pressure fluctuation data were Schouten, C.M. van den Bleek, B.
measured at various gas velocities and analyzed using Leckner. Characterization of fluidization
fast Fourier transform to determine the contribution regime by time serious analysis of
of each fluidization regime at each velocity. It was pressure fluctuation. International
assumed that phenomena with decreasing energy of Journal of Multiphase Flow 26 (2000)
the signal against gas velocity (such as bubbles) 663-715.
represent the bubbling regime and phenomena with [7] T. U. Yang, L. P. Leu. Study of
increasing energy of the signal against gas velocity transition velocities from bubbling to
(such as voids) represent the turbulent regime of turbulent fluidization by statistic and
fluidization. Finally, probabilities of bubbling and wavelet multi-resolution analysis on
turbulent fluidization regimes were quantified and absolute pressure fluctuations. Chemical
plotted against superficial gas velocity. Engineering Science 63 (2008) 1950 -
1970.
Notation [8] J.S. Murguia, E. Campos-Canton.
Ar Archimedes number Wavelet analysis of chaotic time series.
E Energy of a signal Revisits Mexican of Physical 52 (2003)
EAs Energy of ascending signal 155-162.
EDS Energy of descending signal [9] F. Afsahi, R. Sotudeh-Gharebagh, N.
F(ω) Frequency signal Mostoufi. Cluster identification and
N Number of data characterization in a gas solid fluidized
pB Bubbling regime probability bed by wavelet analysis. Canadian
pT Turbulent regime probability Journal of Chemical Engineering (2009).
Uc Transition velocity from bubbling to [10] H. T. Bi, J. R. Grace, K. S. Lim.
turbulent fluidization (m/s) Mechanism of transition from bubbling
Umf Minimum fluidization velocity (m/s) to turbulent fluidization. Chemical
U Superficial gas velocity (m/s) Research and Development 34 (1995)
ω Frequency (Hz) 4003-4008.
x(t) Time series signal [11] S. W. Kim, G. Kirbas, H. T. Bi, C. Jim
Arithmetic average of pressure fluctuations Lim, J. R. Grace. Flow behavior and
x
(Pa) regime transition in a high-density
x(ω) Time series signal circulating fluidized bed riser. Chemical
Engineering Science 59 (2004) 3955-
References 3963.
[1] M. L. Thompson, H. T. Bi, J. R. Grace. [12] R. C. Brown. Pressure fluctuation as a
A generalized bubbling/turbulent-bed diagnostic tool for fluidized beds. (1996)
reactor model. Chemical Engineering Master Thesis.
Science 54 (1999) 2175-2185. [13] D. Falkowski, R. C. Brown. Analysis of
[2] I. A. Abba, J. R. Grace , H. Bi. Variable- pressure fluctuation in fluidized beds.
gas density fluidized bed reactor model Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 43 (2004) 5721-
for catalytic processes. Chemical 5729.
Engineering Science (2002) 4797-4807. [14] S. Sasic, B. Leckner, F. Johnson. Time-
[3] J.P. Constantineaua, J. R. Grace, C.J. frequency investigation of different
Lima, G.G. Richards. Generalized models of bubble flow in a gas-solid
bubbling-slugging fluidized bed reactor fluidized bed. Chemical Engineering
model. Chemical Engineering Science Journal. 121 (2006) 27-35.
62 (2007) 70 - 81. [15] F. Johnson, G. Larsson, B. Leckner.
[4] C. Sobrino, S. Sanchez-Delgado, N. Pressure and flow fluctuation in a
Garcia-Hernando, M. de Vega. Standard fluidized bed-interaction with the air-
deviation of absolute and differential feed system. Chemical Engineering
pressure fluctuations in fluidized beds of Science 57 (2002) 1379-1392.