4.7 Article

3D CFD-PBM modeling of the gas-solid flow field in a polydisperse polymerization FBR: The effect of drag model

Journal

ADVANCED POWDER TECHNOLOGY
Volume 25, Issue 5, Pages 1474-1482

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.apt.2014.04.001

Keywords

Polydisperse polymerization FBRs; 3-D CFD-PBM model; Drag model; Hydrodynamics

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [201076171]
  2. State-Key Laboratory of Chemical Engineering of Tsinghua University [SKL-ChE-13A05]
  3. Key Laboratory of Advanced Control and Optimization for Chemical Processes of the National Ministry of Education of China [2012ACOCP03]
  4. State Key Laboratory of Coal Conversion of China [J13-14-102]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This work investigated a coupled computational fluid dynamics and population balance modeling (CFD-PBM) approach to predict the hydrodynamic behavior of the complex gas-solid two-phase flow in a three-dimensional (3-D) polydisperse propylene polymerization fluidized bed reactors (FBRs). Four different drag models, namely Syamlal-O'Brien, Gidaspow, McKeen and EMMS, were incorporated into the CFD-PBM model for evaluating the different effect of drag force between the gas and solid phases. Simulation results revealed a significant effect of the drag model on gas-solid flow in polydisperse polymerization FBRs. It was found that (1) compared to Syamlal-O'Brien and Gidaspow drag models, McKeen and EMMS drag models could predict a lower bed height, a higher temperature and an obvious core-annulus structure in polymerization FBRs; (2) EMMS drag model outperforms the other three drag models with respect to pressure drop prediction; and (3) the drag coefficient had little influence on the evolution of Sauter number and particle-size distribution. (C) 2014 The Society of Powder Technology Japan. Published by Elsevier B.V. and The Society of Powder Technology Japan. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available