Model parameters bubble columns

Unfortunately, the present models are still on a level aiming at reasonable solutions with several model parameters tuned to known flow fields. For predictive purposes, these models are hardly able to predict unknown flow fields with reasonable degree of accuracy. It appears that the CFD evaluations of bubble columns by use of multi-dimensional multi-fluid models still have very limited inherent capabilities to fully replace the empirical based analysis (i.e., in the framework of axial dispersion models) in use today [63]. After two decades performing fluid dynamic modeling of bubble columns, it has been realized that there is a limit for how accurate one will be able to formulate closure laws adopting the Eulerian framework. In the subsequent sections a survay of the present status on bubble column modeling is given. 

The proneness of the primarily produced minute gas bubbles to coalescence depends on three parameters a) on the size of the primarily produced gas bubbles b) on the material system c) on the state of flow in the bubble column [50]. Therefore, fixing the minimum diameter of a bubble column is surely not a sufficient criterion. One would have to carry out preliminary tests in differently scaled columns to find out the necessary minimum size of the model bubble column, see also Example 34. 

In the section on bubble column reactors, the hydrodynamic parameters needed for scale-up are presented along with models for reaction and heat transfer. The mixing characteristics of colunms are described as are the directions for future research work on bubble column reactors. 

Just as with the gas holdup, gas-liquid interfacial area should also be divided into two parts. The literature, however, gives a unified correlation. The same is true for volumetric gas-liquid mass transfer coefficients and mixing parameters for both gas and liquid phases. The fundamental r.echanism for inter-phase mass transfer and mixing for large bubbles is expected to be different from the one for small bubbles. Future work should develop a two phase model for the bubble column analogous to the two phase model for fluidized beds. 

Due to density differences the particles have the tendency to settle. Thus, solid concentration profiles result which can be described on the basis of the sedimentation-dispersion model (78,79,80). This model involves two parameters, namely, the solids dispersion coefficient, E3, and the mean settling velocity, U5, of the particles in the swarm. Among others Kato et al. (81) determined 3 and U3 in bubble columns for glass beads 75 and 163 yum in diameter. The authors propose correlations for both parameters, E3 and U3. The equation for E3 almost completely agrees with the correlation of Kato and Nishiwaki (51) for the liquid phase dispersion coefficient. 

In the previous section, stability criteria were obtained for gas-hquid bubble columns, gas-solid fluidized beds, liquid-sohd fluidized beds, and three-phase fluidized beds. Before we begin the review of previous work, let us summarize the parameters that are important for the fluid mechanical description of multiphase systems. The first and foremost is the dispersion coefficient. During the derivation of equations of continuity and motion for multiphase turbulent dispersions, correlation terms such as esv appeared [Eqs. (3) and (10)]. These terms were modeled according to the Boussinesq hypothesis [Eq. (4)], and thus the dispersion coefficients for the sohd phase and hquid phase appear in the final forms of equation of continuity and motion [Eqs. (5), (6), (14), and (15)]. However, for the creeping flow regime, the dispersion term is obviously not important. 

Various model parameters involved in the derivation of the stability criterion need to be specified in order to use the stability criterion for quantitative predictions. Model parameters essential for this purpose include the slip velocity, the virtual mass coefficient, and the dispersion coefficient. The procedure for estimation of these parameters is given for gas-solid (and solid-liquid) fluidized beds and bubble columns. 

The selection and design of a reactor for bench-scale kinetic experiments should be considered case by case. It is important to stress, however, that one should not try to build a bench-scale replica of what is believed to be or is the industrial reactor. Industrial reactors are designed to operate a process in a profitable way, which is not the case for experimental reactors. In industrial reactors heat, mass and momentum transport has to occur in an economically justifiable way, leading in general to temperature, concentration and/or pressure gradients inside the reactor. Also, the hydrodynamics can be rather complicated. Fluidized beds, bubble columns and trickle-flow reactors require model equations that involve several physical parameters, besides the intrinsic kinetic parameters. Empirical... 

The main contribution from the work of Luo [95, 96] was a closure model for binary breakage of fluid particles in fully developed turbulence flows based on isotropic turbulence - and probability theories. The author(s) also claimed that this model contains no adjustable parameters, a better phrase may be no additional adjustable parameters as both the isotropic turbulence - and the probability theories involved contain adjustable parameters and distribution functions. Hagesaether et al [49, 50, 51, 52] continued the population balance model development of Luo within the framework of an idealized plug flow model, whereas Bertola et al [13] combined the extended population balance module with a 2D algebraic slip mixture model for the flow pattern. Bertola et al [13] studied the effect of the bubble size distribution on the flow fields in bubble columns. An extended k-e model was used describing turbulence of the mixture flow. Two sets of simulations were performed, i.e., both with and without the population balance involved. Four different superficial gas velocities, i.e., 2,4,6 and 8 (cm/s) were used, and the superficial liquid velocity was set to 1 (cm/s) in all the cases. The population balance contained six prescribed bubble classes with diameters set to = 0.0038 (m), d = 0.0048 (m), di = 0.0060 (m), di = 0.0076 (m), di = 0.0095 (m) and di = 0.0120 (m). 

Hagesaether et al [29, 30] adopted this approach modeling bubble column dispersions and found that with the choice of parameter values used in their... 

Shah YT, Kelkar BG, Godbole SP, Deckwer W-D (1982) Design parameter estimations for bubble column reactors. AlChE J 28(3) 353-379 Shi J, Zwart P, Frank T, Rohde U, Prasser H (2004). Development of a multiple velocity multiple size group model for poly-dispersed multiphase flows. Aimual Report 2004. Institute of Safety Research, Forschungszentrum Rossendorf, Germany... 

CFD approach. This model has too many unknown parameters when applied to multiphase flow. The kind of model used by Dudukovic group (72) computed the Reynolds stresses in agreement with measurements done in L.S. Fan s laboratory. In the Matonis et al (75) paper we show our capability to compute turbulence in a slurry bubble column in the chum-turbulent regime in agreement with our measurements. 

As already noted, these reactions are characterized by hyperbolic rate forms. Empirical power law models can also be used, but their applicability is restricted to the ranges of parameter values used in their formulation. Note in the table that mechanically agitated contactors (MACs) and bubble-column reactors (BCRs) are the most commonly used reactors. The design of such reactors is considered in Chapter 16. 

The superficial gas velocity, U is sometimes not the most pertinent process parameter, and the liquid velocity reflects better and more directly the complex liquid phase mixing when the liquids are non-Newtonian. The liquid circulation velocity increases with the increasing superficial gas velocity however, Kawase and Moo-Young developed a hydrodynamic model for the liquid phase in bubble columns with non-Newtonian fluids on the basis of an energy balance and the... 

The US DOE had a major effort to understand the many variables affecting the performance of a bubble column reactor. Dudukovic and Toseland [75] outlined the cooperative study by Air Products and Chemicals (APC), Ohio State University (OSU), Sandia National Laboratory (SNL), and Washington University in St. Louis (WU). The efforts of this group have developed valuable unique experimental techniques for the measurement of gas holdup, velocity, and eddy diffusivities in bubble columns. They have obtained data that allows improved insight in churn-turbulent flow and have assessed the impact of various effects (internals, solid concentration, high gas velocity, pressure, etc.). General ideal flow pattern-based models do not reflect bubble column reality to date the models are based on a combination where some parameters are evaluated from first principles and some from the database. 

Bubble columns. Tracers are used in bubble columns and gas-sparged slurry reactors mainly to determine the backmixing parameters of the liquid phase and/or gas-liquid or liquid-solid mass transfer parameters. They can be used for evaluation of holdup along the lines reviewed in the previous Section 6.2.1. However, there are simpler means of evaluating holdup in bubble columns, e.g. monitoring the difference in liquid level with gas and without gas flow. Numerous liquid phase tracer studies of backmixing have been conducted (132-149). Steady-state or continuous tracer inputs (132,134,140,142) as well as transient studies with pulse inputs (136,141,142,146) were used. Salts such as KC Jl or NaCil, sulfuric acid and dyes were employed as tracers. Electroconductivity detectors and spectrophotometers were used for tracer detection. The interpretation of results relied on the axial dispersion model. Various correlations for the dispersion... 

---