Direct validation of MFIX-DEM simulations of a small-scale full-loop circulating fluidized Research &

bed under different operation conditions Innovation Center

Yupeng Xua,*, Tingwen Lia,b, Jordan Mussera, William A. Rogersa
aNational Energy Technology Laboratory, Morgantown, WV 26505, USA; bAECOM, Morgantown, WV 26505, USA

Objective Validation Further Analyses

Validation of MFIX-DEM by direct comparison between simulation and
experiments of a small-scale circulating fluidized bed.
Introduction
1. Circulating fluidized beds (CFB) are deployed in industry for a wide variety of
gas-solid contacting operations.
2. Numerical simulations of full-loop CFB hydrodynamics at particle-scale are
extremely useful to understand flow behaviors that are crucial in the design and
operation of systems, including particle residence time distribution and cluster
formation.
3. A thorough comparison between computational predications and experimental
measurements is necessary to evaluate computational models accuracy. (a) (b)
Simulation approach Figure 3. (a) Time-averaged, predicted void fraction at the riser center
Multiphase Flow with Interphase eXchanges-Discrete Element Model (MFIX- plane, (b) Time-averaged, predicted solids holdup in the riser (note the S-
DEM), available from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Energy Figure 1. Direct comparison between simulation and experiments shape curves seen in typical CFB riser flow)
Technology Laboratory (NETL), was used. The CFD-DEM approach tracks (Left: Experiment, Right: Simulation)
individual particles (DEM portion) within a continuum fluid phase (CFD
portion).
Experimental setup and operation conditions
A 3D printed cold-flow CFB of 1.32m high is used. The internal diameters of the
cyclone, riser and standpipe are 0.127m, 0.0508m and 0.0254m, respectively.
Several conditions are tested with operational parameters listed in Table 1.
Table 1. Operation conditions (SLPM)

(a) (b) (c)

Table 2. Various Properties Figure 4. (a) Time-averaged, predicted axial (vertical) solids velocity surface
plots along the riser, (b) Instantaneous particle plots along the riser where
Figure 2(a). Measured, time-averaged pressure profile around the system particles are colored by the particle axial (vertical) velocity, (c) Time-
averaged, predicted radial variation of solids volume fraction illustrates the
core-annulus nature of the flow structure typically observed in riser
operation

Figure 2 (b). Comparison of measured and predicted time-averaged

High Density Polyethylene particles pressure drop across key system components

Experimental techniques Table 3. Solids circulation rate and standpipe bed height

Pressure drop, solids circulation rate and standpipe bed height were measured. Experiment Simulation
The solids flux was measured using High speed Particle Image Velocimetry Solids Case 1 0.060.1 0.359 Figure 5. Typical particle trajectory and residence time distribution for Case
(HsPIV) developed at NETL. Low solid fluxes were measured by directly circulation Case 2 6.81.5 10.375 Conclusions
2
counting the number of particles that crosses a section of standpipe within a set rate (g/s) 1. Detailed comparison of simulations and experiments for full-loop CFB
Case 3 7.91.5 10.658
time. For high solid fluxes the velocity was measured using HsPIV and the systems have been performed over a range of operating conditions;
Standpipe Case 1 0.433 0.420 2. Simulation results and experimental data match very well for all operating
concentration was estimated using the high speed video and an in-house
bed Case 2 0.469 0.500 conditions while keeping model parameters fixed;
calibration procedure. Subsequently, the solid flux was determined. This
height (m) 3. The MFiX-DEM model has demonstrated its value as a high fidelity
technique was validated with measurement accuracy of 1% for low solids flux Case 3 0.652 0.679
and reduced to 15% for higher solids fluxes. simulation tool capable of predicting key performance parameters for
challenging CFB flow conditions.
This technical effort was performed in support of the National Energy Technology Laboratorys ongoing research under the RES
contract DE-FE0004000 and the NETL/ORISE Faculty Fellowship Program.

This project was funded by the Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory, an agency of the United States Government, through a support contract with AECOM. Neither the United States Government nor any
agency thereof, nor any of their employees, nor AECOM, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any
information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark,
Science & Engineering To Power Our Future
manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not
necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.