Abstract
Two widely used models to describe axial solid mixing in fluidised beds (the dispersion model and the countercurrent backmixing (CCBM) model) are evaluated against identical sets of experimental data. Experimental work has been obtained at different conditions (gas velocity, particle properties and two column diameters) using an image analysis technique. Previously published data by other authors are also compiled to enlarge the experimental database for model development and validation. It is shown that both models are capable to fit the majority of experiments well, in agreement with a well-known relation between the models in some extreme conditions. This relation is further explored by incorporating independent measurements of the tracer rise velocities during the mixing experiments. It is concluded that, although a simple correlation for the solid dispersion coefficients compiled in this work is useful, the CCBM model is a much more reliable idealisation in describing and scaling up axial solid mixing in fluidised beds.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call