4.6 Article

Minimum Velocity of Impingement Fluidization for Parachute-Shaped Vegetables

Journal

SUSTAINABILITY
Volume 14, Issue 7, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/su14074257

Keywords

parachute-shaped vegetable; drag coefficient; minimum velocity of fluidization; impingement fluidization

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Accurate calculation of the minimum fluidization velocity is crucial for reducing raw material losses, especially for parachute-shaped raw materials. This paper focuses on determining the drag coefficient for cauliflower florets, mushrooms, and broccoli, and analyzes their minimum fluidization velocity in the impingement fluidization method.
Accurate calculation of the minimum fluidization velocity makes it possible to reduce raw material losses due to the use of excessively high or excessively low air velocities. This is particularly true for impingement fluidization, which is little studied, especially when treating parachute-shaped raw material. This paper focused on determining the drag coefficient for cauliflower florets, mushrooms, and broccoli. Analysis of the critical particle lift velocity showed that the lowest value of the drag coefficient was found for mushrooms (0.9). The parachute-shaped vegetables analyzed had a large scatter of drag coefficient values associated with their specific shape (standard deviation: mushrooms 0.10 broccoli 0.14, and for cauliflower 0.15). The measured mean values of the minimum fluidization velocity of the tested vegetables in the impingement fluidization method ranged from 6.9 m center dot s(-1) to 10.97 m center dot s(-1). Application of the procedure recommended by Shilton and Narajan for calculating the minimum fluidization velocity on the basis of the shape coefficient epsilon resulted in large discrepancies between the calculated and experimental values (from 2.4 m center dot s(-1) to 3.8 m center dot s(-1)).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available