CFD as a Design Tool for Fixed‐Bed Reactors with Small Tube‐to‐Pellet Diameter Ratio: Now or in the Future?

Wehinger, Gregor D.; Kraume, Matthias

doi:10.1002/cite.201600155

Cited by 20 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 20 publications

(32 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Wehinger and Kraume [5] expanded previous work with STAR-CCM+ on fixed-bed reactors by including heat transfer and reaction kinetics. Their work together with coauthors on dry reforming of methane [6] shows excellent agreement of numerical results with own experimental data.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 60%

Scripting as an Approach to Automated CFD Simulation for Packed Bed Catalytic Reactor Modeling

Fernengel

Habla

Hinrichsen

2018

Chemie Ingenieur Technik

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years computational fluid dynamics (CFD) has become a widely applied tool for the simulation of catalytic fixed‐bed reactors and numerous authors have contributed towards methods for random packed bed generation and flow simulation. The presented approach focuses on an automated simulation routine realized through bash and python scripting covering multiple entire simulation runs including preprocessing, simulation as well as post‐processing based on open‐source software. As an example, the routine is demonstrated with a case study on catalytic fixed‐bed reactors.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 60%

Scripting as an Approach to Automated CFD Simulation for Packed Bed Catalytic Reactor Modeling

Fernengel

Habla

Hinrichsen

2018

Chemie Ingenieur Technik

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The DEM has advantages over the Monte Carlo method, as it describes the physical process of filling more accurately. Wehinger and Kraume [17] showed satisfactory agreement of radial porosity profiles between packed beds of spheres and cylinders generated with DEM in comparison with experimental data. One disadvantage of the DEM is the very high computing effort, since the contact forces for each generated particle must be determined.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 73%

Synthetic Packed-Bed Generation for CFD Simulations: Blender vs. STAR-CCM+

Flaischlen¹,

Wehinger²

2019

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A common reactor type in the chemical and process industry is the fixed-bed reactor. Accurate modeling can be achieved with particle-resolved Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) simulations. However, the underlying bed morphology plays a paramount role. Synthetic bed-generation methods are much more flexible and faster than image-based approaches. In this study, we look critically at the two different bed generation methods: Discrete Element Method (DEM) (in the commercial software STAR-CCM+) and the rigid-body model (in the open-source software Blender). The two approaches are compared in terms of synthetically generated beds with experimental data of overall and radial porosity, particle orientation, as well as radial velocities. Both models show accurate agreement for the porosity. However, only Blender shows similar particle orientation than the experimental results. The main drawback of the DEM is the long calculation time and the shape approximation with composite particles.  

show abstract

“…The other factors are the tangential velocity components v t and v o of velocity at the contact point, which are also used to calculate the sliding speed β Equation (17).…”

Section: Blender-rigid Body Approach In Blendermentioning

confidence: 99%

Synthetic Packed-Bed Generation for CFD Simulations: Blender vs. STAR-CCM+

Flaischlen

Wehinger

2019

ChemEngineering

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A common reactor type in the chemical and process industry is the fixed-bed reactor. Accurate modeling can be achieved with particle-resolved computational fluid dynamic (CFD) simulations. However, the underlying bed morphology plays a paramount role. Synthetic bed-generation methods are much more flexible and faster than image-based approaches. In this study, we look critically at the two different bed generation methods: Discrete element method (DEM) (in the commercial software STAR-CCM+) and the rigid-body model (in the open-source software Blender). The two approaches are compared in terms of synthetically generated beds with experimental data of overall and radial porosity, particle orientation, as well as radial velocities. Both models show accurate agreement for the porosity. However, only Blender shows similar particle orientation than the experimental results. The main drawback of the DEM is the long calculation time and the shape approximation with composite particles.

show abstract

CFD as a Design Tool for Fixed‐Bed Reactors with Small Tube‐to‐Pellet Diameter Ratio: Now or in the Future?

Cited by 20 publications

References 20 publications

Scripting as an Approach to Automated CFD Simulation for Packed Bed Catalytic Reactor Modeling

Scripting as an Approach to Automated CFD Simulation for Packed Bed Catalytic Reactor Modeling

Synthetic Packed-Bed Generation for CFD Simulations: Blender vs. STAR-CCM+

Synthetic Packed-Bed Generation for CFD Simulations: Blender vs. STAR-CCM+

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About