Chem. Eng. Technol. 2006, 29, No.

7, 875881

875

Xiang-Long Zhao1
Qiang Yao1

Full Paper

Shui-Qing Li1

Effects of Draft Tubes on Particle Velocity

Profiles in Spouted Beds

Department of Thermal
Engineering, Tsinghua
University, Beijing, China.

The vertical particle velocity profiles in a full-column cylindrical conical spouted

bed, with or without a draft tube, are measured using a fibre optic probe system.
The profiles have different characteristics for a draft tube spouted bed (DTSB)
than for a conventional spouted bed (CSB). The spout of a CSB consists of a central flow where particle velocities fit exponential distributions, and a boundary
layer where particle velocities are nearly uniform. The spout of a DTSB has no
boundary layer and its radial particle velocity profiles are approximately linear.
The particle velocities in the spout of a DTSB increase when superficial gas
velocity increases, draft tube diameter decreases, or when entrainment height
decreases. A kinematic model has been used to simulate the granular flow in the
annulus of a CSB and DTSB, and they are compared with the experiments. The
particle velocities in the annulus of a DTSB are much lower than that of a CSB.
Their radial profiles are also different with a CSB. The dependence of particle
velocities in the annulus of a DTSB on superficial gas velocity, draft tube diameter, and entrainment height are also discussed. One concludes that the draft
tube diameter and entrainment height are two key factors for the solid circulation
rate of a DTSB.
Keywords: Particles, Spouted beds, Tubes, Velocity profiles
Received: March 5, 2006; revised: April 6, 2006; accepted: May 4, 2006
DOI: 10.1002/ceat.200600087

Introduction

Spouted beds are used as efficient fluid-particle contactors for

various physical and chemical processes involving coarse particles (dp > 1 mm) [1]. In a conventional spouted bed (CSB)
without an internal tube, the spout has direct contact with the
annular solids over the entire height of the bed. At the same
time, a continuous percolation of gas from the spout region to
the annular region exists. If the operational bed height is larger
than the maximum spoutable bed depth Hm, the spout cannot
support the bed, and a transition from spout to collapse occurs
[23]. In addition, it is also reported that the elevated temperature causes a decrease in Hm and the stable spout eventually
disappears at temperatures above 420 C despite the changing
operating variables [4].

Correspondence: Dr. S.-Q. Li (lishuiqing@mail.tsinghua.edu.cn), Key

Laboratory for Thermal Science and Power Engineering of the Ministry
of Education, Department of Thermal Engineering, Tsinghua University,
Beijing, 100084, China.
1)

List of symbols at the end of the paper.

2006 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

However, if a draft tube which is a vertically aligned tube

containing the spout is included in the solid bed, the spout
of the CSB efficiently becomes a vertical transport riser. Its Hm
becomes limited only by the energy of the gas stream entering
the bottom of the draft tube [5, 6]. Besides overcoming the
bed height limitation, a draft tube spouted bed (DTSB) has
several other advantages. For example, the cases with smallsized fine particles, or at high temperature, etc., which is difficult for a CSB to handle, can be used safely in a DTSB. In addition, the use of a draft tube offers accurate control of gas and
solid residence times and a greater design flexibility, which are
valuable in some specific applications. The DTSB has been
rapidly developed and used in a wide variety of industrial processes, e.g., drying [7], coal gasification [8], combustion [9],
pyrolysis [10], fuel cell [11], coating [12], pharmaceuticals
[13], and mixing [14].
There are quite a few studies on particle velocity profiles in
a CSB by using various measuring techniques. The optic fiber
probe is one of the most commonplace methods, which has
been attempted by Benkrid and Caram, He et al., and Olazar et
al., respectively, to measure the vertical particle velocities in
both the annulus and spout of a CSB [1517]. Some other
techniques, such as the radioactive tracer technique [18], magnetized marker particle with search coils [19], and the X-ray

http://www.cet-journal.com

876

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2006, 29, No. 7, 875881

X.-L. Zhao et al.

emitting particle tracking technique [20], have also been employed in full CSBs to measure particle velocities. Day et al.
measured particle velocity in the spout with a high-speed camera, by tracking the motion of colored tracers and also in the
annulus by directly using colored particles [21]. His technique
is only valid for the semi-circular spouted bed system.
However, the studies on DTSBs are relatively limited compared with CSBs. Those existing studies mainly focused on the
dependence of solid circulation rate on operating variables
such as draft tube diameter, particle size, length of entrainment
region, gas velocity, etc. [2227]. It is also impossible to extend
empirical correlations and theoretical analyses developed from
the experiments of conventional systems to the applications of
DTSBs. The only available literature on the particle velocity
profiles of a DTSB, are reported by Saadevandi and Turton,
who used a computer-based video imaging technique in a
semicircular DTSB [28]. However, they only investigated particle velocity profiles in the region of the draft tube, instead of
those in the annulus. As usual, the annulus of a DTSB is considered as a loosely uniform moving bed. The present work
investigates the flow in both the spout and annulus in a DTSB,
tries to find the differences between a DTSB and CSB, and analyzes the effects of gas velocity, draft tube diameter, and entrainment height on a DTSB.

joined to a conical base with an included angle of 60 and an

inlet diameter of 0.0257 m. Eight holes are drilled along the
column wall for the probes. Four are in the cone at 30 mm vertical intervals and the other four are in the cylinder at 75 mm
vertical intervals. Two tubes with inner diameters of 30 mm
and 40 mm, respectively, are used as draft tubes. Millets with a
mean diameter of 1.34 mm and density of 1.43 g/cm3 are used
as particles. All runs are conducted with a static bed depth of
0.42 m, at ambient temperature and pressure. Since the minimum spout velocity Ums of a DTSB is much lower than that of
a CSB, the comparisons of CSBs and DTSBs are conducted at
their 1.1 Ums, respectively.
Particle velocities are measured using a fibre optic system,
Particle Velometer PV4A, developed by the Institute of Process
Engineering of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. The probe
has an outer diameter of 4 mm and a length of 400 mm. Two
contiguous fibre assemblies, with their centres at a distance of
1.92 mm, are contained in the probe. As shown in Fig. 1, lights
from an LED are injected into the particles and then reflected.
If a particle passes through the probe tip, a signal jump will
transfer through the two fibre assemblies, in sequence. The delay between the two signals is then calculated to determine the
particle velocity. More details of the fibre optic probe can be
found in [16].

Experiments

A schematic diagram of the experimental apparatus is shown

in Fig. 1. The spouted bed unit, made of plexiglass, is a column
with an inner diameter of 0.196 m and a length of 1.2 m,

A Kinematic Model of Annulus Flow

For slow dense granular flow, there are three types of models:
potential, kinematic, and plastic, which lead to partial differential equations that are elliptic, parabolic, and hyperbolic, respectively [29]. It is observed in the
experiments that the flow field at any
level in the spouted bed does not
depend on the bed height above that
level. Therefore, the kinematic model
whose solution propagates from the
bottom up is selected here.
The approach of the kinematic model of annulus flow is based on the
research of Savage [29] and Sullivan
[30]. Assuming that the particle flow
in the annulus is a continuous, single,
pseudo-phase of constant density, the
continuity equation takes the form:

rc

Dd
He
ri

Figure 1. Schematic diagram of the experimental set-up: (1) Blast blower, (2) Control valve,
(3) Flow meter, (4) Spouted bed unit, (5) Fibre probe measuring system

2006 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

 a;r V
 a;z
1 r V
0

r
z
r

(1)

All the variables with bars are dimensionless with the reference length
lref = rc,where rc is the radius of bed
column and reference velocity Vref
Va;z H
rc =2Hm in CSB and Vref
Va;z H
rc =2He in DTSB. The selection of reference is to simplify the
boundary conditions.
The kinematic model assumes that
vacancies arising from radial changes
in axial velocity initiate radial move-

http://www.cet-journal.com

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2006, 29, No. 7, 875881

Spouted beds

ment of the particles, which can be described as:

(2)

It is convenient to introduce the Stokes stream function WP

as an alternative to Eq. (1).
wp
 a;z
 a;r 1
,V
V
r z

1 wp
r r

(3)

Substituting Eq. (3) into Eq. (2), the governing equation for
the problem is given as:
wp
2 wp
B 2
z
r

1 wp

r r

(4)

According to Sullivan [30], the boundary conditions of a

CSB are:
at r 1 or z r

wp 0
wp z1

ri tan a

rs2 at r rs

rs2 1


c0
H1

a)
5

(5)

rs2 1

exp c1z
0

at r rs

(7)

The c0 and c1 in Eq. (7) can be obtained from the experiments. The boundary conditions of a DTSB are similar to that
of a CSB, except that the boundary condition of Eq. (6)
changes to:
wp z1

rs2 at r rs & z < He ;

 e2 at r rs & z > He ;
H

Results and Discussions

4.1

Particle Velocities in The Spout

10

15

20

b)
5

z(m)
0.190
0.265
0.340
0.415

(8)

The profiles of Vs, vertical particle velocity in the spout, of a

CSB with a superficial gas velocity Us = 0.454 m/s are shown
in Fig. 2. The profiles are similar in shape to and resemble previous literature [16, 31]. It is noted that the spout can be
divided into a central flow where Vs profiles fit exponential
distributions and a boundary layer where Vs are approximately
uniform due to a high cross flow from the interface. The phenomenon of a boundary layer can also be found in other experiments [16], but was not pointed out clearly. As far as the
radial Vs profiles are concerned, Epstein and Grace have presented a general expression as below [1]:
 m
Vs
r
1
(9)
rs
Vsc

2006 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

r (mm)

V (m/s)

wp z1

z (m)
0.025
0.055
0.085
0.115

(6)

A uniform solid entrainment is assumed in Eq. (6). However, the rate of solid entrainment decreases with height, in the
praxis. To obtain a more accurate simulation, it is assumed
that the rate of solid entrainment is in terms of the exponential
function, partially, in a CSB with the expression as:
wp c0
z 1

where Vsc is the particle velocity in the centreline.

The fitting curves of experimental points in the central flow,
based on Eq. (9), are plotted in Fig. 2. The parameters at different levels are listed in Tab.1.
It can be seen that the exponential factor m of all curves are
in the range of 1.21.4. However, the rs given in Tab. 1 is lower
than the actual spout radius due to the existence of the boundary layer, and thus is different from the original meaning in
Eq. (9). It can be inferred that the Vsc can reach the maximum
value at z = 0.115mm, which is about 30 % of the bed height.
This distance (z) to achieve a maximum velocity is longer than
that reported by He et al. [16].

V (m/s)

 a;z
V

 a;r
V
B
r

877

10

15

20

r (mm)

Figure 2. Profiles of Vs in the CSB. (a) In the cone. (b) In the cylinder.
Table 1. Fitting parameters corresponding to Fig. 2.
z [m]

0.025 0.055 0.085 0.115 0.19

0.265 0.34

0.415

Vsc [m/s]

3.38

3.82

4.19

4.32

3.79

3.32

2.73

2.52

m []

1.39

1.33

1.22

1.39

1.35

1.36

1.25

1.21

rs [m]

12.18 12.32 12.62 12.83 15.37 14.33 12.82 11.21

878

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2006, 29, No. 7, 875881

X.-L. Zhao et al.

5

a)
5

z (m)
0.025
0.055
0.085
0.115

V (m/s)

V (m/s)

Us=0.285 m/s
Us=0.311 m/s

Us=0.337 m/s

0
0

10

15

r (mm)

10

15

r (mm)

Figure 4. Effects of Us on Vs in the DTSB.

b)
5

z(m)
0.190
0.265
0.340
0.415

Dd=30, He=50
Dd=30, He=75

Dd=40, He=50

V (m/s)

V (m/s)

10

15

r (mm)

Figure 3. Profiles of Vs in the DTSB. (a) In the cone. (b) In the cylinder.

The profiles of Vs for a DTSB with Dd = 30 mm, He =

50 mm, and Us = 0.285 m/s are shown in Fig. 3. Since the particle flow is confined in the draft tube and has no cross flow,
the boundary layer as in the CSB doesnt appear. The radial
profiles of Vs are nearly linear, and the exponential factor m
approximately equals 1.0 at all levels. The particle is accelerated
throughout its entire journey within the tube, which also differs from that in a CSB.
The effects of Us, Dd, and He on the Vs profiles at z = 0.34 m
of a DTSB, are shown in Figs. 4 and 5. When Us increases by
about 9 %, the average Vs increases by near 17 %. The large
change in Vs can be attributed to the fact that most of the incremental gas enters the tube rather than the annulus. The
variation of Dd and He both cause the change in the gas distribution between the spout and annulus. With He increasing,
the area of the entrainment zone will increase and more gas
will diffuse to the annulus, which will cause Vs to decrease.
With Dd increasing, the cross-sectional area of the spout will
increase and more gas will enter the tube. Clearly, increasing
the cross-sectional area causes the Vs to decrease greatly, as
shown in Fig. 5.

2006 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

10

15

20

r (mm)

Figure 5. Effects of Dd and He, respectively, on Vs in the DTSB.

4.2

Particle Velocities in The Annulus

The kinematic model described in the previous section is used

to obtain a prediction of the annulus flow. The stream function WP in a CSB is determined by Eqs. (4), (5), and (7). The
WP in a DTSB is determined by Eqs. (4), (5), and (8). The contours of WP in a CSB and DTSB are shown in Fig. 6.
The experimental results of Va of a CSB, together with the
simulation, are presented in Fig. 7. The experiments are consistent with the results of He et al. [16] except that the gradient
of the profiles is a bit higher due to the material property. The
kinematic model does not agree well with the experimental
data in the lowest level, where particle entrainment is not
properly estimated. It still delivers a good prediction of the
average particle velocity in the rest levels. However, there are
sudden velocity declines near the spout boundary in the upper
part of the CSB in the experiments and they are not predicted
by the model.
The profiles Va in the DTSB are shown in Fig. 8. The average
Va in the cylinder of the DTSB is only 30 % of that in the CSB,

http://www.cet-journal.com

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2006, 29, No. 7, 875881

25
82
0.3

0.6

0.8

0.15749

49
57
0. 1

0.5

0.4

0.32797
0.29387
0.25978
0.22568
0.19159

0.39616

0. 464 3
5
0.43
0 25
0. 3
62 0
6

0.5

0.43025

0.396 1
0.
6
25
9 7 0.2
8 93
8
0.327 9
7
0.2
7
25
68
0.1
91 5
9

25

Axial

0.769 2
8
0.

0.2

2.5

1.5
8
92
76

0.38
2

1.5

33
54
1.

0.46435

1.54
33

04
93
1.

1.1
56
3

2.
31
74

0.38225

3.
47
85

91
5
3.
0

2.5

3.5

0.36206

1.1563

4
1.930
4

4.5

2.7
04 4

4.5

3.5

Axial

Spouted beds

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Radial

Radial
Figure 6. The contour of the stream function.
a)

but the velocities at the lowest two levels of the

DTSB are almost as high as that of the CSB.
Thus, one can say that the draft tube has limited effects on the particle flow below it. The
draft tube not only prevents the particle entrainment, but also changes the state of granular flow in the annulus. The particle velocity,
which decreases with radial distance in the
CSB, increases slightly with radial distance in
the DTSB. This is probably due to the resistance to the flow, caused by friction with the
draft tube being a little higher than the friction
near the outer cylinder wall. It is noted that the
kinematic model predicts that the particle flow
in the cylindrical part is a slow, dense, uniform
flow. Obviously, this is an ideal prediction despite the variation of the particle concentrations. According to Fig. 7, the reason for the
kinematic models success at predicting particle velocities in the annulus of the CSB can be
attributed to the fact that the solid entrainment at the spout-annulus interface is successfully described by the exponential function,
i.e., Eq. (7). However, the complex stress dis-

a)
0.03

0.040

z (m)
0.025
0.055
0.085
0.115

0.035
0.030
0.025

z (m)
0.025
0.055
0.085
0.115

0.02

V (m/s)

V (m/s)

879

0.020

0.01

0.015
0.010
0.005

0.00

20

40

60

80

20

40

60

80

r (mm)

r (mm)

b)

b)

0.004

0.020

z(m)
0.190
0.265
0.340
0.415

0.003

V (m/s)

V (m/s)

0.015

0.010

z(m)
0.190
0.265
0.340
0.415

0.002

0.005

0.001

20

40

60

80

r (mm)

Figure 7. Profiles of Va in the CSB. (a) In the cone. (b) In the

cylinder.

2006 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

20

40

60

80

r (mm)

Figure 8. Profiles of Va in the DTSB. (a) In the cone. (b) In the cylinder.

http://www.cet-journal.com

880

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2006, 29, No. 7, 875881

X.-L. Zhao et al.

0.25

CSB
DTSB

WS (kg/s)

0.20

0.15

0.10

0.05

0.00
0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

z (m)

Figure 9. The comparison of solid circulation rate between the

DTSB and CSB.

0.0035

Us=0.285 m/s
Us=0.311 m/s
Us=0.337 m/s

V (m/s)

0.0030

0.0025

0.0020

20

40

60

80

r (mm)

Figure 10. Effects of Us on Va in the DTSB.

0.0040

V (m/s)

0.0035

0.0030

Dd=30, He=50

0.0025

Dd=30, He=75
Dd=40, He=50

0.0020
20

continuity due to the asymmetric wall frictions and the conical

geometry, cannot be described within the simplified kinematic
model and its given boundary conditions [32]. This also implies that the flow rule related to plastic potential instead of
the simplified kinematic model should be considered to predict the relatively slight difference of velocities within the annulus of the DTSB, which we discussed in another article [33].
The solid circulation rates Ws in the DTSB and CSB, at different levels, are shown in Fig. 9. The Ws is calculated from the
particle velocity in the annulus, Ws = qpVaAa (1ea). The voidage ea is assumed to be a constant value of 0.4. This assumption may cause an allowance error since the voidage slightly
varies around the packing value. As shown in Fig. 9, the Ws below the draft tube in the DTSB is almost the same as that in
the CSB. This means that the draft tube does not affect the entrainment below the tube where the entrainment is most intensive. Because the particle entrainment is the highest in the
lowest levels, the decline in the circulation rate is secondary
compared to its stability and energy-saving. Thus, the sacrifice
of upper entrainment is worthwhile in many cases, and the
DTSB has its advantages in the applications where high circulation rate is not a requirement.
The effects of Us, Dd, and He on the profiles of Va at z =
0.34 m of the DTSB are shown in Figs. 10 and 11. The increasing gas velocity in the spout may accelerate the solids circulation but at the same time, the gas entering the annulus will
pull the particle back, decelerating the solids circulation rate.
As a consequence, the particle velocity in the annulus shows
little change with increment of Us. Both the tube diameter and
the entrainment height have great influences on Va, as shown
in Fig. 11. The average Va increases by 28 % as Dd increases
from 30 mm to 40 mm, and by 27 % as He increases from
50 mm to 75 mm. The particles are entrained in the entrainment zone, which can be considered as a column with a diameter of Dd and length of He. Since the entrainment area is the
product of pDd and He, the increments of Dd or He exert great
influences on solid circulation rate. However, if Dd and He are
too large, the spouting of the bed will become unstable.

40

60

80

r (mm)

Figure 11. Effects of Dd and He, respectively, on Va in the DTSB.

2006 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

Conclusions

The differences between the particle velocity profiles of the

DTSB and CSB are measured and discussed. The spout of the
CSB consists of a central flow and a boundary layer. The central flow varies like the exponential function, and the boundary layer has a uniform velocity due to the existence of cross
flow. The particle velocity profiles in the spout of the DTSB
are flatter and their variations along the radial position are
approximately linear. In the spout of the DTSB, the particle
velocities will increase as superficial gas velocity increases,
entrainment height decreases, or the draft tube diameter decreases.
In the annulus, it is found that the particle velocity in the
DTSB increases slightly with the radial distance, which has an
opposite trend to that in the CSB. A kinematic granular model,
agreeing well with particle velocity in the annulus of the CSB,
only predicts the mean value of particle velocity in the DTSB,
but not the trend. The superficial gas velocity has little influ-

http://www.cet-journal.com

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2006, 29, No. 7, 875881

ence on the particle velocity in the annulus, while the increments of both the tube diameter and entrainment height cause
the particle velocity to increase immensely.
The average particle velocities in the DTSB are much lower
than in the CSB, but they are almost equivalent below the draft
tube. That is, the DTSB holds the most efficient entrainment
zone as it sacrifices entrainment to obtain stability. The tube
diameter and entrainment height are two effective factors to
optimize solid circulation rate in the DTSB.

Acknowledgement
This work is supported by the Nation Natural Science Foundation of China (No. No50306012) and National Key Fundamental Research Project (No.2002CB211600). Part of the revision
was carried out during a visit to University of Iowa. I am grateful to Professors Albert Ratner and Jeffery Marshall for their
hospitality and encouragement.

Symbols used
Aa
Dd
H
He
Hm
Us
Ums
rc
ri
rs
Va
Vs
Ws
a
ea
Wp

[m2]
[mm]
[m]
[mm]
[m]
[m/s]
[m/s]
[m]
[m]
[m]
[m/s]
[m/s]
[kg/s]
[]
[]
[]

cross area of the annulus

draft tube diameter
spouted bed height
entrainment height
maximum spoutable bed depth
superficial gas velocity
minimum spout velocity
the radius of bed column
inlet radius
spout radius
particle velocity in the annulus
particle velocity in the spout
solid circulation rate
half-angle of cone
voidage of annulus
stream function

Reference
[1] N. Epstein, J. R. Grace, in Handbook of Powder Science and
Technology, 2nd ed., Chapman & Hall, New York 1997, Ch.
10, pp. 532567.
[2] J. R. Muir, F. Berruti, L. A. Behie, Chem. Eng. Comm. 1990,
88, 153.
[3] M. L. Passos, A. S. Mujumdar, V. S. G. Raghaven, Powder
Technol. 1993, 94, 97.

2006 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

Spouted beds

881

[4] S. W. M. Wu, C. J. Lim, N. Epstein, Chem. Eng. Comm. 1987,

62, 251.
[5] H. Hattori et al., J. Chem. Eng. Japan 2004, 37, 1085.
[6] F. Berruti, J. F. Muir, L. A. Behie, Can. J. Chem. Eng. 1988,
66, 91.
[7] Z. L. Arsenijevic et al., Can. J. Chem. Eng. 2004, 82, 450.
[8] A. Adegoroye et al., Fuel 2004, 83, 1949.
[9] J. P. Lucas, C. J. Lim, A. P. Watkinson, Fuel, 1998, 77, 683.
[10] R. K. Konduri, E. R. Altwicker, M. H. Morgan,Chem. Eng.
Sci. 1999, 54,185.
[11] M. Olazar, R. Aguado, A. Barona, J. Bilbao, AIChE J. 2000,
46, 1025.
[12] B. A. Saadevandi, R. Turon, Chem. Eng. Comm. 2004, 191,
1379.
[13] K. Jono, H. Ichikawa, M. Miyamoto, Y. Fukumori, Powder
Technol. 2000, 113, 269.
[14] M. Chen et al., Proc. of the 2003 5th International Symposium
on Coal Combustion, Nanjing, China 2003.
[15] A. Benkrid, H. S. Caram, AIChE J. 1989, 35, 1328.
[16] Y. L. He, S. Z. Qin, C. J. Lim, J. R. Grace, Can. J. Chem. Eng.
1994, 72, 561.
[17] M. Olazar et al., Chem. Eng. Sci. 2001, 56, 3585.
[18] D. Van Velzen, H. J. Flamn, H. Langenkamp, A. Casile, Can
J. of Chem. Eng. 1974, 52, 156.
[19] B. Waldie, D. Wilkinson, Can J. of Chem. Eng. 1986, 64, 944.
[20] D. Roy, F. Larachi, R. Legros, J. Chaouki, Can J. of Chem.
Eng. 1994, 72, 945.
[21] J. Y. Day, M. H. Morgan, H. Littman, Chem. Eng. Sci. 1987,
42, 1461.
[22] J. R. Muir, F. Berruti, L. A. Behie, Chem. Eng. Commun.
1990, 88, 153.
[23] H. Hattori et al., J. Chem. Eng. Japan 1998, 31, 633.
[24] H. Hattori et al., J. Chem. Eng. Japan 2004, 37, 1085.
[25] K. Ijichi, M. Miyauchi, Y. Uemura, Y. Hatate, J. Chem. Eng.
Japan 1998, 31, 677.
[26] H. Ji, A. Tsutsumi, K. Yoshida, J. Chem. Eng. Japan 1998, 31,
842.
[27] T. Ishikura, H. Nagashima, M. Ide, Powder Technol. 2003,
131, 56.
[28] B. A. Saadevandi, R. Turton, Chem. Eng. Comm. 2004, 191,
1379.
[29] U. Tuzun, G. T. Houlsby, R. M. Nedderman, S. B. Savage,
Chem. Eng. Sci. 1982, 37, 1691.
[30] C. Sullivan, A. Benkrid, H. Caram, Powder Technol. 1987, 53,
257.
[31] M. Olazar et al., Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1998, 37, 4520.
[32] S. B. M. Moreea, R. M. Nedderman, Chem. Eng. Sci. 1996,
51, 3931.
[33] X.-L. Zhao, Q. Yao, S.-Q. Li, Fifth World Congress on Particle
Technology, Orlando, FL, USA, April 2006.

http://www.cet-journal.com