Premium
Experimental investigation of the two‐phase theory in a fluidized‐bed combustor
Author(s) -
Stubington J. F.,
Cui Yongbin
Publication year - 1995
Publication title -
international journal of energy research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.808
H-Index - 95
eISSN - 1099-114X
pISSN - 0363-907X
DOI - 10.1002/er.4440190808
Subject(s) - char , bubble , combustor , combustion , fluidization , mass transfer , limiting oxygen concentration , fluidized bed , particulates , particle (ecology) , oxygen , chemistry , thermodynamics , phase (matter) , particle size , analytical chemistry (journal) , mechanics , materials science , chromatography , physics , organic chemistry , oceanography , geology
Abstract Though the two‐phase theory of fluidization is well‐accepted, no direct experimental measurements of the different gas concentrations predicted to occur in bubble and particulate phases could be found in the literature. For the first time, theoretical predictions of these different gas concentrations have been validated experimentally, using a combined oxygen/bubble probe. Based on the two‐phase theory, a mathematical model was developed for the combustion of a batch of char particles in a fluidized‐bed combustor. The experimental oxygen concentration in the particulate phase as a function of time was well predicted by the model. Slight discrepancies for the bubble phase values were eliminated when low‐oxygen‐concentration bubbles were excluded from the data, attributed to some char combustion occurring in bubbles being contrary to the model assumption. The temperature difference between char and bed particles (Δ T ) was the only adjustable parameter in the model. A value of 20°C fitted the burnoff times measured by visual observation of the top of the bed, for both 5 and 10 g char batch masses. Model predictions of the oxygen concentrations were not sensitive to Δ T during the first half of burnoff, when mass transfer controlled the combustion rate, so the mass transfer processes were predicted correctly by the model effectively with no adjustable parameter. The Δ T value of 20°C was significantly lower than experimental measurements of maximum burning char particle temperatures, reported to be 70°C for the small‐diameter bed particles used in this work. The discrepancy was attributed to two factors: (i) the decrease in char particle temperature towards the end of the burnoff, when kinetics significantly affected the combustion rate; and (ii) a lower char particle temperature in the particulate phase than in the bubble phase, with experimental char particle temperature measurements biased towards the higher bubble phase values. It was inferred: (i) that the maximum values of Δ T measured experimentally are too high for calculation of the char particle combustion rate during the kinetic‐controlled latter stage of burnoff and (ii) that reported values of the heat transfer coefficient from burning char particles to the particulate phase deduced from these particle temperature measurements may have been underestimated.