Stability solid-liquid fluidized beds

Equation (24) gives the stability criterion for the solid-liquid fluidized beds. Equation (24) can be rewritten as... 

Equation (61) is the transition criterion provided the conditions given by equation (52) are satisfied. From Table I it can be seen that these conditions are satisfied only in the case of gas-solid fluidized beds and in some cases of solid-liquid fluidized beds where ps Pl- Therefore, for other multiphase dispersions [such as gas-liquid (bubble columns) and solid-liquid fluidized beds (where pl is not negligible)] the comparison of dynamic wave velocity with continuity wave velocity is not valid for deciding the bed stability. Further, the above analysis holds for transition from region I to II (point P in Fig. 1) and not for III to II (point Q). Therefore, the criterion does not hold for bubble columns and dilute dispersions. 

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. 

Fig. 6. Typical stability maps, (a) Solid-liquid fluidized beds [a = 3.0, Cy = /(e), =...

Fig. 11. Effect of density difference at various liquid viscosities on particle Reynolds number evaluation at lower critical particle diameter, (a) Solid-liquid fluidized beds [a = 3.0, Cv = f(s), pi = 1000 kg/m ]. (b) Gas-solid fluidized beds [a = 3.0, Cy = /(e), po = 1 kg/m ]. (c) Unified stability map of particle Reynolds number vs density difference for different values of transition hold-up solid-liquid fluidized beds [a = 3.0, Cy = f(s), p-l = 1 mPas, pi = 1000 kg/m ].

Consider a solid-liquid fluidized bed in which the gas phase is introduced. From a stability viewpoint, there are three distinct possibihties regarding the stability of the bed before and after introducing the gas phase. 

Ghatage SV, Peng ZB, Sathe MJ, et al Stability analysis in solid-liquid fluidized beds experimental and computational, Chem Eng J 256 169—186, 2014b. http //dx.doi.org/10. 1016/j.cej. 2014.06.026. 

In gas-solid multiphase flows, the wave propagation method is commonly used to study the stability of stratified pipe flows, where an analogy to gas-liquid wave motion with a free surface is prominent. The perturbation method is commonly used to study the stability of a fluidized bed. In the following, both methods are introduced. 

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. 

Sergeev, Y.A. and Dobritsyn, D.A. (1995). Linear, non-linear small amplitude, steady and shock waves in magnetically stabilized liquid-solid and gas-solid fluidized beds. Int. J. Multiphase Flow, 21, 75. 

---