Radial profiles of solids loading and flux in a gas–solid circulating fluidized bed

Tortora, Paul; Ceccio, Steven L.; Mychkovsky, Alexander G.; O’Hern, Timothy J.; Torczynski, J. R.

doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2007.09.007

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The local particle concentrations and velocities have been measured by inserting different types of probes in to the riser, for example optical (Dubrawski et al, 2013;Johnsson and Johnsson, 2001;Magnusson et al, 2005;Pugsley et al, 2003;Ye et al, 2009) and capacitance based (Ellis et al, 2004;Malcus et al, 2000;Weber et al, 2018;Wiesendorf and Werther, 2000;Yang et al, 2018). Also non-intrusive methods based on tomography (Chan et al, 2009;Chaouki et al, 1997;de Velden et al, 2008;Maurer et al, 2015;Tortora et al, 2008) have been used.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of solid phase closure models in Eulerian-Eulerian simulations of a circulating fluidized bed riser

Nikku

Daikeler

Stroh

et al. 2019

Chemical Engineering Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this work, computational fluid dynamics with Eulerian-Eulerian modeling approach is used in the investigation of the effect of the solid phase closure models on the hydrodynamics of a circulating fluidized bed riser. The studied models are the kinetic theory of granular flow and the powder modulus model. Computational performance and model prediction accuracy are investigated by performing transient simulations for three different cases and for different mesh sizes. The modeling results are compared with measured vertical pressure profile, external circulation mass flow rates, and particle velocity and concentration profiles obtained from a laboratory scale circulating fluidized bed unit. Additionally the computational times are compared to estimate the computational performance and to investigate if a simpler set of closures is computationally more affordable. The results indicate that both closure models can give good predictions for some quantities, while lacking in other quantities. The results indicate that the closure models for the solid phase have a noticeable effect on the model predictions, such as the vertical pressure profile and external circulation rate of the particles.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of solid phase closure models in Eulerian-Eulerian simulations of a circulating fluidized bed riser

Nikku

Daikeler

Stroh

et al. 2019

Chemical Engineering Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The very different hydrodynamic behavior of the non-porous glass beads and real catalyst particles with porous Al 2 O 3 support suggest that a bed of glass beads is not representative for catalytic packings and should not be used for the study of hydrodynamics in such columns. Tortora et al (2008) Electrical impedence tomography (EIT) and gamma-ray tomography for circulating fluidized bed. Riser diameter 0.14 m and height 5.77 m. Solid phase was catalyst particles.…”

Section: Liquid Distribution In Packed Columnmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…distributor was found to be pronounced. Tortora et al (2008) compared the ECT and gamma-ray tomography technique and found that ECT is much less expensive, safer and faster than gamma-ray tomography. However ECT cannot be used for industrial units for the above mentioned reasons.…”

Section: Liquid Distribution In Packed Columnmentioning

confidence: 99%

Some industrial applications of gamma-ray tomography

Kalaga

Kulkarni

Acharya

et al. 2009

Journal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Several measurement techniques have been developed to characterize dispersed phases in opaque fluidized bed systems, such as impedance and optical fibre probes (Taofeeq and Al-Dahhan, (2018), Tortora et al, (2008)). Currently, axial voidage profiles can be obtained from local pressure measurements (Saadevandi and Turton, (2004)), electrical capacitance (Sines et al, (2019)) and optical probes (Liu et al, (2003)).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%