Publication:
Comparison between two-fluid model simulations and particle image analysis & velocimetry (PIV) results for a two-dimensional gas-solid fluidized bed

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Identifiers
Publication date
2011-09-01
Defense date
Advisors
Tutors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Elsevier
Impact
Google Scholar
Export
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Journal Issue
Abstract
This work compares simulation and experimental results of the hydrodynamics of a two-dimensional, bubbling air-fluidized bed. The simulation in this study has been conducted using an Eulerian–Eulerian two-fluid approach based on two different and well-known closure models for the gas–particle interaction: the drag models due to Gidaspow and Syamlal & O'Brien. The experimental results have been obtained by means of Digital Image Analysis (DIA) and Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV) techniques applied on a real bubbling fluidized bed of 0.005 m thickness to ensure its two-dimensional behaviour. Several results have been obtained in this work from both simulation and experiments and mutually compared. Previous studies in literature devoted to the comparison between two-fluid models and experiments are usually focused on bubble behaviour (i.e. bubble velocity and diameter) and dense-phase distribution. However, the present work examines and compares not only the bubble hydrodynamics and dense-phase probability within the bed, but also the time-averaged vertical and horizontal component of the dense-phase velocity, the air throughflow and the instantaneous interaction between bubbles and dense-phase. Besides, quantitative comparison of the time-averaged dense-phase probability as well as the velocity profiles at various distances from the distributor has been undertaken in this study by means of the definition of a discrepancy factor, which accounts for the quadratic difference between simulation and experiments The resulting comparison shows and acceptable resemblance between simulation and experiments for dense-phase probability, and good agreement for bubble diameter and velocity in two-dimensional beds, which is in harmony with other previous studies. However, regarding the time-averaged velocity of the dense-phase, the present study clearly reveals that simulation and experiments only agree qualitatively in the two-dimensional bed tested, the vertical component of the simulated dense-phase velocity being nearly an order of magnitude larger than the one obtained from the PIV experiments. This discrepancy increases with the height above the distributor of the two-dimensional bed, and it is even larger for the horizontal component of the time-averaged dense-phase velocity. In other words, the results presented in this work indicate that the fine agreement commonly encountered between simulated and real beds on bubble hydrodynamics is not a sufficient condition to ensure that the dense-phase velocity obtained with two-fluid models is similar to that from experimental measurements on two-dimensional beds
Description
Keywords
Multiphase flow, Fluidization, Fluidisation, Computation, Bubble, Particle velocity, PIV
Bibliographic citation
Chemical Engineering Science, 2011, vol. 66, nº 17, p. 3753-3772