Packed Beds and Turbulent Tubes

Chapter 9 Packed Beds and Turbulent Tubes Results for a succession of guesses for oq are as follows ... 

Referring to Figure 8.4.3, for packed beds with turbulent flow, Pe, = 10 if d = dp. For unpacked tubes, d, = d, and Pe, = 1000 with turbulent flow (not shown). Solution of Equation (8.6.1) is beyond the level of this text. 

Flow in empty tubes has a relatively narrow band of velocities—or Reynolds numbers from 2000 to 10000—wherein the character changes from laminar to turbulent. In packed beds, even the laminar flow does not mean that motion is linear or parallel to the surface. Due to the many turns between particles, stable eddies develop and therefore the difference between laminar and turbulent flow is not as pronounced as in empty tubes. 

Chapters 13 and 14 deal primarily with small deviations from plug flow. There are two models for this the dispersion model and the tanks-in-series model. Use the one that is comfortable for you. They are roughly equivalent. These models apply to turbulent flow in pipes, laminar flow in very long tubes, flow in packed beds, shaft kilns, long channels, screw conveyers, etc. 

Dispersion models, as just stated, are useful mainly to represent flow in empty tubes and packed beds, which is much closer to the ideal case of plug flow than to the opposite extreme of backmix flow. In empty tubes, the mixing is caused by molecular diffusion and turbulent diffusion, superposed on the velocity-profile effect. In packed beds, mixing is caused both by splitting of the fluid streams as they flow around the particles and by the variations in velocity across the bed. 

Bischoff and Levenspiel (B14) present some calculations using existing experimental data to check the above predictions about the radial coefficients. For turbulent flow in empty tubes, the data of Lynn et al. (L20) were numerically averaged across the tube, and fair agreement found with the data of Fig. 12. The same was done for the packed-bed data of Dorweiler and Fahien (D20) using velocity profile data of Schwartz and Smith (Sll), and then comparing with Fig. 11. Unfortunately, the scatter in the data precluded an accurate check of the predictions. In order to prove the relationships conclusively, more precise experimental work would be needed. Probably the best type of system for this would be one in laminar flow, since the radial and axial coefficients for the general dispersion model are definitely known each is the molecular diffusivity. 

Checks on the relationships between the axial coefficients were provided in empty tubes with laminar flow by Taylor (T2), Blackwell (B15), Bournia et al. (B19), and van Deemter, Breeder and Lauwerier (V3), and for turbulent flow by Taylor (T4) and Tichacek et al. (T8). The agreement of experiment and theory in all of these cases was satisfactory, except for the data of Boumia et al. as discussed previously, their data indicated that the simple axial-dispersed plug-flow treatment may not be valid for laminar flow of gases. Tichacek et al. found that the theoretical calculations were extremely sensitive to the velocity profile. Converse (C20), and Bischoff and Levenspiel (B14) showed that rough agreement was also obtained in packed beds. Here, of course, the theoretical calculation was very approximate because of the scatter in packed-bed velocity-profile data. 

Data acquired by many investigators have shown a close analogy between the rates of heat and mass transfer, not only in the case of packed beds but also in other cases, such as flow through and outside tubes, and flow along flat plates. In such cases, plots of the /-factors for heat and mass transfer against the Reynolds number produce almost identical curves. Consider, for example, the case of turbulent flow through tubes. Since... 

CSTR for most reactions. These conditions are best met for short residence times where velocity profiles in the tubes can be maintained in the turbulent flow regime. In an empty tube this requires high flow rates for packed columns the flow rates need not be as high. Noncatalytic reactions performed in PFRs include high-pressure polymerization of ethylene and naphtha conversion to ethylene. A gas-liquid noncatalytic PFR is used for adipinic nitrile production. A gas-solid PFR is a packed-bed reactor (Section IV). An example of a noncatalytic gas-solid PFR is the convertor for steel production. Catalytic PFRs are used for sulfur dioxide combustion and ammonia synthesis. 

Pea d,u/Da) is about 10 with turbulent flow Re = d,up)/]x greater than 2100) (not shown). Thus, all real reactors will have some effects of dispersion. The question is, how much Consider again Equation (8.4.7) but now define PCa d uj where d is an effective diameter and could be either dp for a packed bed or for an open tube. Equation (8.4.7) can be then written as ... 

If the flow rate is sufficiently high to create turbulent flow, then Pe is a constant and the magnitude of the right-hand side of the equation is determined by the aspect ratio, L/d. By solving Equation, (8.4.12) and comparing the results to the solutions of the PER [Equation (8.4.3)], it can be shown that for open tubes, L/d, > 20 is sufficient to produce PER behavior. Likewise, for packed beds, L/d, > 50 (isothermal) and L d, >150 (nonisothermal) are typically sufficient to provide PER characteristics. Thus, the effects of axial dispersion are minimized by turbulent flow in long reactors. 

What models should be used either for scaleup or to correlate pilot plant data Section 9.1 gives the preferred models for nonisothermal reactions in packed beds. These models have a reasonable experimental basis even though they use empirical parameters D, hr, and Kr to account for the packing and the complexity of the flow field. For laminar flow in open tubes, use the methods in Chapter 8. For highly turbulent flows in open tubes (with reasonably large L/dt ratios) use the axial dispersion model in both the isothermal and nonisothermal cases. The assumption D = E will usually be safe, but do calculate how a PFR would perform. If there is a substantial difference between the PFR model and the axial dispersion model, understand the reason. For transitional flows, it is usually conservative to use the methods of Chapter 8 to calculate yields and selectivities but to assume turbulence for pressure drop calculations. 

---