4.7 Article

CFD modeling and simulation of industrial scale olefin polymerization fluidized bed reactors

期刊

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL
卷 264, 期 -, 页码 99-112

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2014.11.058

关键词

Bubbling fluidized bed; Moving bed; High density polyethylene; Two-fluid model; Coarse grid simulation; Industrial scale application

资金

  1. Christian-Doppler Research Association
  2. Austrian Federal Ministry of Economy, Family and Youth
  3. Austrian National Foundation for Research, Technology and Development
  4. Borealis Polymer Oy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A two-fluid model for the numerical simulation of industrial scale olefin polymerization fluidized bed reactors is presented. However, a fully resolved simulation of industrial scale reactor is still nearly unfeasible. We, therefore, use sub-grid models (Schneiderbauer and Pirker, 2014) for the interphase drag and the solids stresses to account for the effect of the small unresolved structures on large resolved scales when using coarse grids. The sub-grid correction for the drag force is modified to consider the wide particle size distribution of high density polyethylene (HDPE). Furthermore, the sub-grid modification for the solids stresses is adapted to include the rheological properties of the polymer. On the one hand, the presented model is validated in the case of the coarse grid simulation of lab-scale bubbling fluidized bed by comparing bed expansion, bubble size and bubble rise velocities with experimental data. On the other hand, the model is applied to the coarse grid simulation of an industrial scale fluidized bed - moving bed reactor assembly. The numerical results demonstrate that our model reveals fairly good agreement with experimental data of average bed voidage, bubble diameters and bubble rise velocities. Finally, the impact of a barrier gas injection is studied, which is aimed to separate the fluidization gas from the gas in the moving bed reactor. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据