Heat transfer coefficient solids concentration

In model equations, Uf denotes the linear velocity in the positive direction of z, z is the distance in flow direction with total length zr, C is concentration of fuel, s represents the void volume per unit volume of canister, and t is time. In addition to that, A, is the overall mass transfer coefficient, a, denotes the interfacial area for mass transfer ifom the fluid to the solid phase, ah denotes the interfacial area for heat transfer, p is density of each phase, Cp is heat capacity for a unit mass, hs is heat transfer coefficient, T is temperature, P is pressure, and AHi represents heat of adsorption. The subscript d refers bulk phase, s is solid phase of adsorbent, i is the component index. The superscript represents the equilibrium concentration. 

Figure 17. Dependence of heat transfer coefficient on solid concentration. (Data of Fraley et al., 1983, from Grace, 1985).

The experiments of Dou et al. (1991) also indicate that the heat transfer coefficient varied with radial position across the bed, even for a given cross-sectional-averaged suspension density. Their data, as shown in Fig. 20, clearly indicate that the heat transfer coefficient at the bed wall is significantly higher than that for vertical surfaces at the centerline of the bed, over the entire range of suspension densities tested. Almost certainly, this parametric effect can be attributed to radial variations in local solid concentration which tends to be high at the bed wall and low at the bed centerline. 

The data of Fig. 20 also point out an interesting phenomenon—while the heat transfer coefficients at bed wall and bed centerline both correlate with suspension density, their correlations are quantitatively different. This strongly suggests that the cross-sectional solid concentration is an important, but not primary parameter. Dou et al. speculated that the difference may be attributed to variations in the local solid concentration across the diameter of the fast fluidized bed. They show that when the cross-sectional averaged density is modified by an empirical radial distribution to obtain local suspension densities, the heat transfer coefficient indeed than correlates as a single function with local suspension density. This is shown in Fig. 21 where the two sets of data for different radial positions now correlate as a single function with local mixture density. The conclusion is That the convective heat transfer coefficient for surfaces in a fast fluidized bed is determined primarily by the local two-phase mixture density (solid concentration) at the location of that surface, for any given type of particle. The early observed parametric effects of elevation, gas velocity, solid mass flux, and radial position are all secondary to this primary functional dependence. 

The parametric effect of bed temperature is expected to be reflected through higher thermal conductivity of gas and higher thermal radiation fluxes at higher temperatures. Basu and Nag (1996) show the combined effect (Fig. 23) which plots heat transfer coefficients as a function of bed temperature for data from four different sources. It is seen that for particles of approximately the same diameter, at a constant suspension density (solid concentration), the heat transfer coefficient increases by almost 300% as the bed temperatures increase from 600°C to 900°C. 

The simplest correlations are of the form shown by Eq. (15), in attempts to recognize the strong influence of solid concentration (i.e., suspension density) on the convective heat transfer coefficient. Some examples of this type of correlation, for heat transfer at vertical wall of fast fluidized beds are ... 

With the above functions and empirical correlations, it becomes possible to calculate the overall convective heat transfer coefficient hc by Eqs. (16, 4, and 22-24). Figure 26 shows a plot presented by Lints and Glicksman which compares predictions by this method with experimental data from several different sources. Reasonably good agreement is obtained over a range of bed densities corresponding to approximately 0.5 to 3% volumetric solid concentration. 

Dou, S., Herb, B., Tuzla, K., and Chen, J. C., Dynamic Variation of Solid Concentration and Heat Transfer Coefficient at Wall of Circulating Fluidized Bed, Fluidization VII, 793-801 (1993)... 

A single-effect evaporator is used to concentrate 7 kg/s of a solution from 10 to 50 per cent of solids. Steam is available at 205 kN/m2 and evaporation takes place at 13.5 kN/m2. If the overall heat transfer coefficient is 3 kW/m2 K, calculate the heating surface required and the amount of steam used if the feed to the evaporator is at 294 K and the condensate leaves the heating space at 352.7 K. The specific heat capacity of a 10 per cent solution is 3.76 kJ/kgK, the specific heat capacity of a 50 per cent solution is 3.14 kJ/kgK. 

A liquor containing 15 per cent solids is concentrated to 55 per cent solids in a doubleeffect evaporator operating at a pressure of 18 kN/m2 in the second effect. No crystals are formed. The feedrate is 2.5 kg/s at a temperature of 375 K with a specific heat capacity of 3.75 kJ/kg K. The boiling-point rise of the concentrated liquor is 6 deg K and the pressure of the steam fed to the first effect is 240 kN/m2. The overall heat transfer coefficients in... 

A three-stage evaporator is fed with 1.25 kg/s of a liquor which is concentrated from 10 to 40 per cent solids. The heat transfer coefficients may be taken as 3.1,2.5, and 1.7 kW/m2 K in each effect respectively. Calculate the required steam flowrate at 170 kN/m2 and the temperature distribution in the three effects, if ... 

A triple-effect evaporator is fed with 5 kg/s of a liquor containing 15 per cent solids. The concentration in the last effect, which operates at 13.5 kN/m2, is 60 per cent solids. If the overall heat transfer coefficients in the three effects are 2.5, 2.0, and 1.1 kW/m2K, respectively, and the steam is fed at 388 K to the first effect, determine the temperature distribution and the area of heating surface required in each effect The calandrias are identical. What is the economy and what is the heat load on the condenser ... 

A double-effect forward-feed evaporator is required to give a product which contains 50 per cent by mass of solids. Each effect has 10 m2 of heating surface and the heat transfer coefficients are 2.8 and 1.7 kW/m2 K in the first and second effects respectively. Dry and saturated steam is available at 375 kN/m2 and the condenser operates at 13.5 kN/m2. The concentrated solution exhibits a boiling-point rise of 3 deg K. What is the maximum permissible feed rate if the feed contains 10 per cent solids and is at 310 K The latent heat is 2330 kJ/kg and the specific heat capacity is 4.18 kJ/kg under all the above conditions. 

A salt solution at 293 K is fed at the rate of 6.3 kg/s to a forward-feed triple-effect evaporator and is concentrated from 2 per cent to 10 per cent of solids. Saturated steam at 170 kN/m2 is introduced into the calandria of the first effect and a pressure of 34 kN/m2 is maintained in the last effect. If the heat transfer coefficients in the three effects are 1.7, 1.4 and 1.1 kW/m2K respectively and the specific heat capacity of the liquid is approximately 4 kJ/kgK, what area is required if each effect is identical Condensate may be assumed to leave at the vapour temperature at each stage, and the effects of boiling point rise may be neglected. The latent heat of vaporisation may be taken as constant throughout. 

In a modified system in which a suspension of solids is conveyed through the heat transfer section, the heat transfer coefficient is greater than that obtained with liquid alone, though lower than that obtained at the same concentration in a fluidised system. Similar conclusions have been reached by Jepson, Poll, and Smith(95) who measured the heat transfer to a suspension of solids in gas. 

An evaporator, working at atmospheric pressure, is to concentrate a solution from 5 per cent to 20 per cent solids at the rate of 1.25 kg/s. The solution, which has a specific heat capacity of 4.18 kJ/kg K, is fed to the evaporator at 295 K and boils at 380 K. Dry saturated steam at 240 kN/m2 is fed to the calandria, and the condensate leaves at the temperature of the condensing stream. If the heat transfer coefficient is 2.3 kW/m2 K, what is the required area of heat transfer surface and how much steam is required The latent heat of vaporisation of the solution may be taken as being equal to that of water. 

Several workers (Kolbel et al. [40, 41], Deckwer et al. [17], Michael and Reicheit [42]) have investigated the heat transfer in BSCR versus solid concentration and particle diameters. Deckwer et al. [17] applied Kolmogoroff s theory of isotropic turbulence in combination with the surface renewal theory of Higbie [43] and suggested the following expression for the heat transfer coefficient in the Fischer-Tropsch synthesis in BSCR ... 

It is noted that most of the models and correlations that are developed are based on bubbling fluidization. However, most of them can be extended to the turbulent regime with reasonable error margins. The overall heat transfer coefficient in the turbulent regime is a result of two counteracting effects, the vigorous gas-solid movement, which enhances the heat transfer and the low particle concentration, which reduces the heat transfer. 

When the particle holdup is high, the contribution of h plays a dominant role and hgc is less important. The radial distribution of the heat transfer coefficient is nearly parabolic, as shown in Fig. 12.16(a). Such a heat transfer profile is similar to the solids concentration profile described in Chapter 10. 

With further decrease in the particle concentration at a > 0.93, hgc becomes dominant except at a region very close to the wall. Thus, the heat transfer coefficient decreases with increasing r/R in most parts of the riser, as shown in Fig. 12.16(c), exemplifying the same trend as the radial profile of the gas velocity. In the region near the wall hpc increases sharply, apparently as the effect of relatively high solids concentration in that region. 

The measured heat transfer coefficients are often represented as a function of solids concentration, as shown in the experimental data of Fig. 2 for a wide range of operating conditions, bed temperatures and solids sizes. It has been found that there exists the relation h oc (1 - e)n, in which the values of exponent n generally ranges from 0.5 to 1.0. The strong dependence of heat transfer coefficient on solids concentration implies that heat transfer between suspension and surfaces is dominated by a convective particle transfer process. 

As for the higher bed sections (Figs. 8c and 8d), where solids concentrations are low, the radial profile of heat transfer coefficients has a minimum point in the region of r/R from 0.5 to 0.8, showing an inconsistency in the trend of variation with solids concentration in other words, at this particular region heat transfer becomes more complex. 

The effect of gas velocity on radial distribution of heat transfer coefficient is shown in Figs 9 and 10. With increasing gas velocity the heat transfer coefficients decrease. For the lower bed sections (see Fig. 10) the radial distributions are mainly affected by solids concentrations, and for the higher bed sections this trend changes significantly. 

When solids concentration is high (e < 0.9), the heat transfer coefficient changes directly with solids concentration. 

---