Journal
INDUSTRIAL & ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY RESEARCH
Volume 56, Issue 27, Pages 7865-7876Publisher
AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.iecr.7b01862
Keywords
-
Categories
Funding
- National Energy Technology Laboratory Research Participation Program - U.S. Department of Energy
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Several discrete particle methods exist in the open literature to simulate fluidized bed systems, such as discrete element method (DEM), time-driven hard sphere (TDHS), coarse-grained particle method (CGPM), coarse grained hard sphere (CGHS), and multiphase particle-in-cell (MP-PIC). The main difference between these methods is in the treatment of particleparticle interactions: by calculating collision forces (DEM and CGPM), using momentum conservation laws (TDHS and CGHS), or based on the particle stress model (MP-PIC). Here, these methods are compared by simulating the same small-scale fluidized bed with the same open-source code MFIX. The results indicate that both modeling the particleparticle collision by TDHS and lumping a few particles in a parcel increase the computation speed with little loss in accuracy. However, the MP-PIC method predicts an unphysical particleparticle overlap, which results in incorrect overall bed hydrodynamics. These results suggest using the CGHS method for fluidized bed simulations owing to its accuracy and efficiency.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available