Chemical Engineering Science 64 (2009) 1232 -- 1248

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Chemical Engineering Science

journal homepage: w w w . e l s e v i e r . c o m / l o c a t e / c e s

Numerical investigation of gas-solid heat transfer in rotating fluidized beds in a static

geometry
Axel de Broqueville, Juray De Wilde
Materials and Process Engineering Department (IMAP), Universit catholique de Louvain, Raumur, Place Sainte Barbe 2, B-1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Article history: Gassolid heat transfer in rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry is theoretically and numerically
Received 30 November 2007 investigated. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations of the particle bed temperature response
Received in revised form 5 October 2008 to a step change in the fluidization gas temperature are presented to illustrate the gassolid heat transfer
Accepted 7 November 2008
characteristics. A comparison with conventional fluidized beds is made. Rotating fluidized beds in a static
Available online 25 November 2008
geometry can operate at centrifugal forces multiple times gravity, allowing increased gassolid slip veloc-
Keywords: ities and resulting gassolid heat transfer coefficients. The high ratio of the cylindrically shaped particle
Fluidization bed width to height allows a further increase of the specific fluidization gas flow rates. The higher
Rotating fluidized bed specific fluidization gas flow rates and increased gassolid slip velocities drastically increase the rate of
Gassolid heat transfer gassolid heat transfer in rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry. Furthermore, both the centrifugal
Process intensification force and the counteracting radial gassolid drag force being influenced by the fluidization gas flow rate
in a similar way, rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry offer extreme flexibility with respect to the
fluidization gas flow rate and the related cooling or heating. Finally, the uniformity of the particle bed
temperature is improved by the tangential fluidization and resulting rotational motion of the particle bed.
2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Although conventional, i.e. gravitational fluidized beds are rec-
ognized for their excellent heat transfer characteristics and the flu-
idization gas can be used as the cooling or heating medium for the
particle bed, the gassolid heat transfer coefficient is always lim-
ited by the gassolid slip velocities at which conventional fluidized
beds can be operated. A high gassolid slip velocity is reflected in
a high gassolid drag force and particle entrainment from the flu-
idized bed occurs when the gassolid slip velocity becomes too high.
The gassolid slip velocity limitation in conventional fluidized beds
as such prevents dense operation at high gas velocities and process
intensification. The gassolid slip velocity also limits the fluidization
gas flow rate in conventional fluidized beds. The specific fluidization
gas flow rate, that is, the fluidization gas flow rate per unit mass
or volume particle bed, is furthermore limited by the particle bed
width-to-height-ratio, which is rather low in conventional fluidized
beds.
From the above, it follows that gassolid heat transfer may still
be the limiting step when using conventional fluidized bed reac-
tors. Such a gassolid heat transfer limitation may, for example,
Corresponding author. Tel.: +32 10 47 8193; fax: +32 10 47 4028.
E-mail address: Juray.DeWilde@UCLouvain.be (J. De Wilde).
prevent the utilization of more active catalysts for highly en-
dothermic or exothermic heterogeneous catalytic reactions. Similar
limitations may be encountered with gassolid mass transfer. The
limitations of conventional fluidized beds are directly related to the
role of earth gravity in their operation. Rotating fluidized beds in a
static geometry (de Broqueville, 2004; De Wilde and de Broqueville,
2007) offer the potential of overcoming the limitations of conven-
tional fluidized beds, both with respect to the gassolid heat transfer
coefficient and with respect to the (specific) fluidization gas flow
rate. In rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry, the fluidization
gas is injected tangentially in the fluidization chamber via multiple
gas inlet slots in its outer cylindrical wall (Fig. 1). The tangentially
injected fluidization gas fluidizes the particles tangentially and gen-
erates the rotating motion of the cylindrically shaped particle bed.
The resulting centrifugal force is counteracted by a radially inwards
gassolid drag force. The latter is generated by forcing the fluidiza-
tion gas to leave the fluidization chamber via a chimney, centrally
positioned in the fluidization chamber. Radial fluidization of the ro-
tating particle bed can as such be introduced, but is not essential to
take fully advantage of fluidization in a centrifugal field in rotating
fluidized beds in a static geometry (De Wilde and de Broqueville,
2008a).
Rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry overcome the chal-
lenges of conventional rotating fluidized beds. In conventional
rotating fluidized beds, the fluidization chamber is rotated fast

0009-2509/$ - see front matter 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ces.2008.11.009
 A. de Broqueville, J. De Wilde / Chemical Engineering Science 64 (2009) 1232 -- 1248 1233

gas geometry and to make a comparison with conventional fluidized

gas
inlet bed technology. Both a theoretical evaluation and 2D computational
inlet
fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations are presented.

2. Hydrodynamic characteristics of rotating fluidized beds in a

gas
inlet static geometry

gas In rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry, the fluidization gas

inlet flow rate affects the centrifugal force and the radial gassolid drag
force in a similar way. Indeed, assuming a solid body type rotational
motion of the particle bed, the centrifugal acceleration is given by
chimney
outlet c = 2 r, (1)
(gas)
gas
where r is the radial distance from the center of the fluidization
inlet
chamber. The average particle bed rotational speed (in radians per
gas second) can be estimated from
inlet
G n sgs
= , (2)
r g  (R Rf ) L

gas where G is the fluidization gas flow rate, n is the average num-
inlet gas
ber of rotations made by the fluidization gas in the particle bedi.e.
inlet
where the gassolid momentum transfer takes place, sgs is the tan-
gential gassolid slip factor, r is the average radial distance of the
solids solids particle bed to the center of the fluidization chamber, g  is the av-
outlet inlet erage particle bed void fraction, R is the outer fluidization chamber
radius, Rf is the particle bed freeboard radius, and L is the fluidiza-
Fig. 1. The concept of a rotating fluidized bed in a static geometry.
tion chamber length. A derivation of Eq. (2) is given in Appendix A.
In case the fluidization chamber is completely filled with particles,
around its axis of symmetry by means of a motor to generate a the particle bed freeboard radius Rf equals the chimney radius Rc .
centrifugal force and the fluidization gas is introduced radially via As demonstrated in De Wilde and de Broqueville (2007), the average
the outer cylindrical wall of the fluidization chamber (Fan et al., number of rotations made by the fluidization gas in the particle bed
1985; Chen, 1987; Qian et al., 2001; Watano et al., 2003; Quevedo n is mainly determined by the number of gas inlet slots. In fact,
et al., 2005). Typically, the challenges of conventional rotating flu- most of the fluidization gas injected via a given gas inlet slot will
idized beds are related to the rotating geometry and include the use be pushed towards the central chimney of the fluidization chamber
of a rotating seal and mechanical vibrations. Most advantages of any when approaching the following gas inlet slot, resulting in minimal
rotating fluidized bed technology are related to the use of the cen- mixing between gases injected via successive gas inlet slots. Hence
trifugal force in the fluidized bed operation. The centrifugal force is
an additional operating variable and can be multiple times gravity, n [number of gas inlet slots]1 . (3)
allowing, for example, higher gassolid slip velocities, dense opera-
The tangential gassolid slip factor sgs is defined as
tion at high fluidization gas velocities, a more uniform fluidized bed
operation, and the fluidization of particles that cannot be fluidized vt 
in conventional fluidized beds, in particular cohesive 1G-Geldart C- sgs = (4)
ut 
type particles (Qian et al., 2001; Watano et al., 2003; Quevedo et al.,
2005). As a result of the higher gassolid slip velocities, gassolid and is mainly determined by the shear due to particleparticle and
heat transfer is expected to be much more efficient in rotating flu- particlewall collisions. The average radial distance of the particle
idized beds than in conventional fluidized beds, that is, the gassolid bed to the center of the fluidization chamber r is calculated from
heat transfer coefficient is expected to be significantly higher. Fur- R + Rf
thermore, the combination of the higher allowable gassolid slip r = (5)
2
velocities and the high ratio of the particle bed width (in the
tangential direction) to height (in the radial direction) of the Eq. (2) can be reformulated as
cylindrically shaped particle bed allows significantly higher spe- 2 G n sgs 2 G n sgs 2 n sgs
cific fluidization gas flow rates in rotating fluidized beds than in = = = , (6)
g  (R2 R2f ) L particle bed
Vg tres 
conventional fluidized beds. Rotating fluidized beds in a static ge-
ometry are expected to offer two additional and technology specific particle bed
advantages for gassolid heat transfer. The first advantage results with Vg the volume taken by the gas in the particle bed
from the rotational motion of the particle bed, imposing tangential and tres  the average gas phase residence time in the particle bed.
mixing. The latter is expected to improve the particle bed tempera- Applying Eqs. (1)(6), the local weight of the rotating particle bed
ture uniformity. The second advantage is related to the flexibility in in the centrifugal field per unit volume fluidization chamber wc is
the fluidization gas flow rate and possible heating and cooling of the given by
particle bed via the fluidization gas. The flexibility with respect to 2
the fluidization gas flow rate in the operation of rotating fluidized 2 G n s gs
wc = s s r (7)
beds in a static geometry is explained in more detail in the next particle bed
Vg
paragraph.
The present paper aims to investigate numerically the gassolid To a certain extent, the assumptions taken in Eqs. (1)(7) will be
heat transfer characteristics of rotating fluidized beds in a static validated via the CFD simulations presented further in this work,
1234 A. de Broqueville, J. De Wilde / Chemical Engineering Science 64 (2009) 1232 -- 1248
that is, (i) particle bed uniformity, (ii) a solid body type rotational
motion of the particle bed, (iii) an average number of rotations of
the fluidization gas in the particle bed close to inversely proportional
with the number of gas inlet slots and minimal mixing between
gases injected via successive gas inlet slots in the particle bed, (iv) a
nearly constant tangential gassolid slip factor.
Assuming a negligible radial solids velocity, the radial gassolid
drag force can be calculated from
(ur vr ) ur , (8)
with the drag coefficient  given by (Ergun, 1952; Wen and Yu, 1966)
2s g s g
 = 150 + 1.75 |u v| for g < 0.80 (9)
g (dp s )2 dp s
3 g s
 = CD g |u v|2.65 for g  0.80 (10)
4 dp s g
Using
|u v|g g dp s
Rep = , (11)
g
CD in Eq. (10) can be formulated as
24
CD = (1 + 0.15Re0.687
p ) if Rep  1000 (12)
Rep
CD = 0.44 if Rep > 1000 (13)
The tangentially averaged interstitial radial gas phase velocity ur 
can be calculated from
G Remf =
ur  = (14)
2 r L g 
and logically depends on the fluidization gas flow rate G and on the
radial position r in the fluidization chamber.
For solids volume fractions below 0.2 and sufficiently high parti-
cle Reynolds number Rep , the radially inwards gassolid drag force
is roughly proportional to the square of the (interstitial) radial gas
phase velocity and, assuming that the average solids volume fraction
in the particle bed is not much affected by the fluidization gas veloc-
ity, to the square of the fluidization gas flow rate. For solids volume
fractions above 0.2 and/or sufficiently low particle Reynolds num-
ber or in case the particles are radially not fluidized forming a sort
of rotating packed particle bed, the radially inwards gassolid drag
force is roughly proportional to the radial gas phase velocity, rather
than to its square, and, hence, proportional to the fluidization gas
flow rate, rather than to its square. Comparing the dependence on
the fluidization gas flow rate of the centrifugal force (Eq. (7)) and the
counteracting radial gassolid drag force (Eqs. (8)(14)) shows that
in rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry, the radial bed expan-
sion is either not much influenced by the fluidization gas flow rate,
i.e. for solids volume fractions below 0.2 and sufficiently high Rep , or
inversely influenced by the fluidization gas flow rate, i.e. for solids
volume fractions above 0.2 and/or sufficiently low Rep , in which case
the particle bed contracts with increasing fluidization gas flow rate.
Furthermore, Eqs. (7)(14) learn that the centrifugal force and the
radial gassolid drag force are inversely affected by the radial po-
sition in the fluidization chamber, leading to the phenomenon of
layered fluidization, also observed in conventional rotating fluidized
beds (Fan et al., 1985; Chen, 1987). The above was experimentally
demonstrated by De Wilde and de Broqueville (2007) and can be il-
lustrated by the behavior of the minimum fluidization velocity and
the terminal velocity of the particles. Extending the standard expres-
sion from the earth gravity field (Froment and Bischoff, 1990) to a
centrifugal field, the terminal velocity of the particles is given by


 4c dp (s g )
u term
= , (15)
3g CD
with c the centrifugal acceleration. For Rep below 1000, CD can, for
example, be calculated from Eq. (12), whereas for Rep larger than
1000, Eq. (13) can be used. One of the essential characteristics of
rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry is, however, that with
increasing fluidization gas velocity, the centrifugal acceleration and,
hence, the terminal velocity of the particles, also increases. In fact,
applying Eqs. (1) and (6) to Eq. (15) and accounting for their assump-
tions, at sufficiently high Rep , the terminal velocity of the particles
is seen to be proportional to the fluidization gas flow rate and to the
square root of the radial distance from the center of the fluidization
chamber:


2 G r n sgs  4dp (s g )
u term
=  , (16)
particle bed
Vg 3g CD
the proportionality factor depending on the gas and solid phase prop-
erties and the fluidization chamber geometry and design.
An expression for the minimum fluidization velocity in rotating
fluidized beds in a static geometry can be obtained by extending the
expression of Wen and Yu (1966) for gravitational fluidized beds:
Remf g
umf = , (17)
dp g
with
C12 + C2 Ar C1 (18)
and
d3p g (s g )c
Ar = (19)
2g
In Eq. (18), C1 = 33.7 and C2 = 0.0408.
Eqs. (1) and (6) can be substituted in Eq. (19) to obtain
2
d3p g (s g )r 2  G n s gs
Ar = (20)
2g Vg
particle bed
From Eqs. (17), (18) and (20), the minimum fluidization velocity umf
is seen to increase with the fluidization gas flow rate G and with the
radial distance from the center of the fluidization chamber r.
As an example, Fig. 2 shows the behavior of the minimum flu-
idization velocity, the terminal velocity of the particles and the ra-
dial fluidization gas velocity as a function of the fluidization gas flow
rate (Fig. 2(a)) and as a function of the radial position in the fluidiza-
tion chamber (Fig. 2(b)) for the fluidization chamber design and the
type of particles simulated further in this work (Table 3), calculated
using Eqs. (1)(20). An average particle bed solids volume fraction
s  of 0.4, an average number of rotations of the fluidization gas in
1
the particle bed n of 0.042 = 24 , and a tangential gassolid slip fac-
gs
tor s  of 0.7 are assumed in Fig. 2. The value of n of 0.042 allows
no mixing or overlap between gases injected via successive gas inlet
slots. Indeed, in the absence of mixing between gases injected via
successive gas inlet slots, the fluidization gas injected via a given gas
inlet slot is allowed to cover a (360 /number of gas inlet slots) = 15
section. The values used and the previously mentioned model as-
sumptions will, to a certain extent, be validated via the CFD simula-
tions presented further in this work. As seen from Fig. 2, the radial
 A. de Broqueville, J. De Wilde / Chemical Engineering Science 64 (2009) 1232 -- 1248 1235

urad V = 0.01135 m3 0.03

160 uterm r = 0.18 m Solids loading = 11.35 kg
umf grav
u term = 5.23 m/s
urad
140 uterm r = 0.12 m 0.025
umf
urad

Gas phase residence time [s]

120 uterm r = 0.08 m
Velocity [m/s] umf 0.02
residence time [s]
100

0.015
80

60
0.01

40
0.005
20

0 0
1500 2500 3500 4500 5500 6500 7500 8500 9500
Fluidization gas flow rate [m3/h]

120 V = 0.01135 m3
urad Solids loading = 11.35 kg
uterm G = 3000 m3/h grav
umf uterm = 5.23m/s
100 urad
uterm G = 7000 m3/h
umf
80
Velocity [m/s]

60

40

20

0
0.08 0.09 0.1 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.18
Radial distance fromthe center of the fluidization chamber [m]

Fig. 2. Calculated minimum fluidization velocity, terminal velocity of the particles, radial gas phase velocity, and gas phase residence time in a rotating fluidized bed in a
static geometry according to Eqs. (14), (16), (17), (18) and (20): (a) as a function of the fluidization gas flow rate; (b) as a function of the radial position in the fluidization
chamber. Conditions: L = 0.135 m, s  = 0.4, n = 0.042 = 24
1
, sgs  = 0.7. Other conditions: see Table 3.

fluidization gas velocity in the rotating fluidized bed in a static ge-
ometry can be expected to be between the minimum fluidization
velocity and the terminal velocity of the particles in the centrifugal
field, both over a broad fluidization gas flow rate range and at any
radial position in the fluidization chamber. The phenomenon of lay-
ered fluidization is clearly illustrated in Fig. 2(b), showing that, for
the given conditions (Table 3) and under the assumptions taken, at
fluidization gas flow rates below 3000 m3 /h, the radial gas velocity
approaches the terminal velocity of the particles in the vicinity of
the fluidization chamber chimney (r = 0.08 m). The fluidization gas
flow rate, both affecting the tangential and the radial velocity of the
fluidization gas in rotating fluidized bed in a static geometry, affects
as such and in a similar way as well the minimum fluidization ve-
locity, the terminal velocity of the particles, and the radial velocity
of the fluidization gas in the fluidization chamber (Fig. 2(a)). As a re-
sult, for a given proper design of a rotating fluidized bed in a static
geometry, the fluidization gas flow rate can be increased without
proportionally increasing the radial bed expansion and the particle
entrainment by the fluidization gas to the chimney. In fact, Fig. 2
shows that under the assumptions of Eqs. (1)(6), the terminal ve-
locity of the particles in the centrifugal field generated can be more
strongly affected by the fluidization gas flow rate than the radial
gas phase velocity. The flexibility with respect to the fluidization gas
flow rate is an important feature of rotating fluidized beds in a static
geometry and was experimentally demonstrated by De Wilde and de
Broqueville (2008a). It will be confirmed by the CFD simulations pre-
sented further in this work. A comparison with the terminal velocity
of the particles in the earth gravitational field (5.23 m/s) shows that
1236 A. de Broqueville, J. De Wilde / Chemical Engineering Science 64 (2009) 1232 -- 1248

in rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry, terminal velocities of Table 1

Balance equations.
the particles one to several orders of magnitude higher than in con-
ventional fluidized beds can be generated, allowing proportionally Gas phase mass balance
higher gassolid slip velocities.
j j
Fig. 2(a) also shows the gas phase residence time in the fluidiza- (  ) + (g g u) = 0 (25)
jt g g jr
tion chamber. The relatively higher fluidization gas flow rates that
can be used in rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry allow gas Solid phase mass balance
phase residence times and, hence, gassolid contact times one to sev-
j j
eral orders of magnitude lower than in conventional fluidized beds, (  ) + (s s v) = 0 (26)
jt s s jr
suggesting the use of rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry
for very fast heterogeneous reactions. Considering either endother- Gas phase momentum balance
mic or exothermic reactions, high reaction rates are possible if the 
j j j 2 j
heat of reaction can be either sufficiently fast provided or removed (  u) + (g g uu) = P + g k (g sg ) (u v) + g g g (27)
jt g g jr jr 3 jr
to or from the locus of reaction. Using a fluidized bed, internal heat
transfer limitations, that is, within the often porous particles, can,

    T 
for example, be reduced by decreasing the size of the particles, pro- 2 j j j
with sg =
g  u I + (g + tg ) u + u (28)
vided that this does not affect the quality of the fluidization. As was 3 g jr jr jr
shown by Qian et al. (2001) and Watano et al. (2003), the quality of
fluidization can be maintained with smaller particles when fluidiz- Solid phase momentum balance
ing in a centrifugal field, as is the case in rotating fluidized beds in a j j j j
static geometry. When fluidizing in a centrifugal field, a shift in the (  v) + (s s vv) = Ps (s ss ) + (u v) + s s g (29)
jt s s jr jr jr
Geldart classification occurs, allowing to fluidize even micro- and
nano-scale particles in a sufficiently strong centrifugal field (Quevedo
    T 
et al., 2005). External heat transfer, that is, the gassolid heat transfer 2 j j j
with ss =
s  v I + (s ) v + v (30)
3 s jr jr jr
coefficient, is strongly related to the gassolid slip velocity. There-
fore, as follows from Fig. 2, fluidization in a centrifugal field is po-
Gas phase energy balance
tentially particularly advantageous for gassolid heat transfer.

j j j t jTg
(  (e + k + qg )) + (g g u(eg + k + qg )) g ( + )
3. Description of gassolid heat transfer jt g g g jr jr jr

j 2 j 
= P+ g k u (g sg u) ((u u)(v v))
jr 3 jr 2
The gassolid heat transfer can be described by (Froment and +g g g u s s as hgs (Tg Ts ) (31)
Bischoff, 1990)
Solid phase energy balance
Qgs = as hgs (Tg Tss )s s , (21) 
j j j jTs
(  (e + qs )) + (s s v(es + qs )) s s
where as is the external particle surface area available per unit mass jt s s s jr jr jr
j j 
particles and hgs is the gassolid heat transfer coefficient. In Eq. = (Ps v) (s ss v) + ((u u)(v v))+s s g v+s s as hgs (Tg Ts ) (32)
jr jr 2
(21), Tss is the temperature at the external surface of the solid par-
ticles. Assuming that internal heat transfer limitations can be ne- Gas phase k-equation
glected, Tss equals the solid phase temperature Ts . The gassolid heat  

  T 
transfer coefficient can be calculated from the jH -factor and the gas j j j g +tg jk j j
(  k)+ (g g uk)= g + g tg u + u
phase Prandtl number Prg = cp,g g / g (Schlunder, 1978; Froment jt g g jr jr k jr jr jr

and Bischoff, 1990): j
: u g g  (33)
jr
flux
cp,g Gsup
hgs = jH (22)
2/3
Prg Gas phase -equation
 
flux j j j g + tg j
In Eq. (22), Gsup is the apparent superficial gas phase mass flux: (   ) + (g g u) = g
jt g g jr jr  jr


  T   
flux  j j j 2
Gsup = g g (u v) (23) +C1 g tg u + u : u C2 g g
k jr jr jr k
(34)
For gravitational fluidized beds, a correlation for the jH -factor was
derived by Balakrishnan and Pei (1975), which is extended to flu- Granular temperature transport equation
idization in a centrifugal field as   
3 j j j j
(  ) + (s s v) = s  (Ps I + s ss )

0.25 2 jt s s jr jr jr
dp c (s g )2s 
j

jH = 0.043 (24) : v  + (q12 3) (35)
(g u)2 g jr

4. CFD simulation model

The gassolid flow is described using the EulerianEulerian ap-

proach (Anderson and Jackson, 1967) and the kinetic theory of gran- phase is assumed to be incompressible. The constitutive equations
ular flow (KTGF) (Jenkins and Savage, 1983; Gidaspow, 1994). The for the solid phase physico-chemical properties, summarized in
basic model is summarized in Table 1 and consists of the balance Table 2, are obtained via the KTGF (Jenkins and Savage, 1983;
equations for mass, momentum and energy for each phase. The gas Gidaspow, 1994) and are related to the granular temperature for
 A. de Broqueville, J. De Wilde / Chemical Engineering Science 64 (2009) 1232 -- 1248 1237

Table 2 At the high gas velocities investigated, the flow is expected to be

Constitutive equations.
turbulent and a Reynolds-averaged approach is taken. Effects of tur-
Solid phase density bulence are accounted for via a k-type approach for the gas phase
(Launder and Spalding, 1974). The gas phase turbulence model was
sp = C te (36)
seen to have only a minor effect on the calculated behavior of the
Radial distribution function dense gassolid flows considered. The solid phase turbulence, inter-
actions between the gas and solid phase turbulence and other sub-
1 + 2.5000s + 4.59042s + 4.5154393s
g = 1 + 4s
 0.67802 (37) grid-scale effects, as for example the effect of clustering on gassolid
s 3 momentum transfer (Agrawal et al., 2001; Zhang and VanderHeyden,
1
s,max
2002; De Wilde, 2005), are not accounted for by lack of reliable tur-
bulence or sub-grid-scale models. Rotating fluidized beds in a static
Solid phase pressure
geometry were, however, shown to offer an improved particle bed
Ps = [1 + 2(1 + e)s g]s sp  (38) uniformity compared to conventional fluidized beds (De Wilde and
de Broqueville, 2007, 2008a,b) and, hence, clustering and bubbling
Solid phase bulk viscosity are of somewhat less importance, although still not completely neg-
 ligible. The grid independency of the simulation results was verified.
4 

s = s sp dp g(1 + e) (39) At solid bounding walls, the no-slip condition is imposed for the
3 
gas phase, whereas partial slip with a specularity coefficient of 0.2
Solid phase shear viscosity is allowed for the solid phase. Standard wall functions are used for


the turbulence related variables.
8 (1 + e) 8
1+ s g 1+ s g
5 2 5
s = cs + ks (40)
s g 5. CFD simulation conditions
Collisional part solid phase shear viscosity
A conventional fluidized bed and a rotating fluidized bed in a

4  static geometry are simulated in 2D. The solids (mass) loading in
cs = s sp dp g(1 + e) (41) both fluidization chambers is chosen to be equal. The particle bed
5 
width-to-height-ratio is between 0.5 and 1 in the simulations of
Kinetic part solid phase shear viscosity the conventional fluidized bed and about 16 in the simulations of the
 rotating fluidized bed in a static geometry. The fluidization chamber
5 m  and particle characteristics used for the simulations are summarized
ks = 1.01600 (42)
16 d2p 
in Table 3.
The simulations occur in two phases. In a first phase, the fully
Granular temperature conductivity
developed flow pattern at the chosen fluidization gas flow rate is



12 (1 + e) 12 calculated. During the first phase of the simulations, the fluidization
1+ s g 1+ s g
5 2 5 gas is fed at the same temperature as the particle bed, i.e. 300 K. As

=
+
c k
(43)
s g
such, gassolid heat transfer does not play a role in the first phase
Collisional part granular temperature conductivity
of the simulations. The second phase of the simulations starts from

the fully developed flow pattern and calculates the response of the
 particle bed temperature to a step change in the fluidization gas

= 2s sp dp g(1 + e)
c
(44)
 temperature. At time t0 , the inlet fluidization gas temperature is
increased to 400 K. Logically, gassolid heat transfer plays a crucial
Kinetic part granular temperature conductivity role in the second phase of the simulations.
 It should be stressed that the fluidization gas velocities and the
75 m 

k = 1.02513 (45) specific fluidization gas flow rates used in the simulation of the con-
64 d2p 
ventional fluidized bed and in the simulation of the rotating fluidized
Granular temperature dissipation by inelastic particleparticle collisions bed in a static geometry are not equal. As shown in the previous
paragraph, both technologies allow very different fluidization gas

1 

4  2 j velocities and specific fluidization gas flow rates and to take fully
 = 3(1 e2 )2s sp g v
dp  jr
Gas phase turbulent kinematic viscosity (PrandtlKolmogorov)
k2
tg = C

which an additional balance equation is solved (Table 1). A resti-
tution coefficient of 0.9 is used for particleparticle collisions.
Gassolid mass transfer is not considered in the present work.
Gassolid momentum transfer is described by a drag force and the
distribution of the gas phase pressure gradient over the phases ac-
cording to their volume fraction. Finally, a gassolid heat transfer
term (Eqs. (21)(24)) appears in the gas and solid phase energy
equations.
(46)
advantage of rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry, higher flu-
idization gas velocities and specific fluidization gas flow rates must
be used. The aim of the present work being to illustrate the potential
of rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry with respect to im-
(47) proving the gassolid heat transfer, the conventional fluidized bed
behavior is simulated at fluidization gas velocities up to values where
solids entrainment from the particle bed freeboard becomes signif-
icant, i.e. fluidization gas velocities close to the terminal velocity of
the particles. For the rotating fluidized bed in a static geometry, on
the other hand, the situation and in particular the concept of termi-
nal velocity of the particles was shown to be more complex. When
increasing the fluidization gas velocity in rotating fluidized beds in
a static geometry, the terminal velocity of the particles is more than
proportionally increased (Fig. 2). Hence, the fluidization gas velocity
in rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry can be varied over a
very broad range. The present work only aiming to illustrate the po-
tential of rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry with respect to
1238 A. de Broqueville, J. De Wilde / Chemical Engineering Science 64 (2009) 1232 -- 1248

Table 3
Fluidization chamber characteristics and operating conditions.

Conventional fluidized bed Rotating fluidized bed in a static geometry

Gas distribution chamber / Outer diameter (m): 54 102

Number of gas inlets: 12
Gas inlet width (m): 3.5 102
Fluidization chamber Width (m): 15 102 Outer diameter (m) 36 102
Height (m): 50 102 Number of tangential gas inlet slots: 24
Number of gas inlets: 7 Gas inlet slot width (m): 2.3 103
Gas inlet width (m): 2 103 Number of solids inlets: 24
Solids inlet slot width (m): 5 103
Chimney / Diameter (m): 12 13 102
Number of outlet slots: 1
Outlet slot width (m): 8 102
Solid particles Diameter (m): 700 106
Density (kg/m3 ): 2500
Restitution coefficient for particleparticle collisions (e): 0.9
Specularity coefficient for particlewall collisions (): 0.2
Initial temperature (K): 300

Mass in the fluidization chamber (kg/mlength fluid. chamber ): 33.75 Mass fed to the fluidization chamber (kg/mlength fluid. chamber ): 33.75

Fed during first 5.63 s of the simulation
Fluidization gas Flow rate Flow rate
(m3 /(h mlength fluid. chamber )) (m3 /(h mlength fluid. chamber )):
(a) 195 (a) 29 800
(b) 540 (b) 59 600
(c) 1080
Temperature (K): 300 400 at time t0

1600 G = 3000 m3/h

1600 G = 7000 m3/h
G = 10000 m3/h
Gas-solid heat transfer coefficient

1400 hgs: r = 0.12 m

Gas-solid heat transfer coefficient

hgs: r = 0.10 m 1400

1200 hgs: r = 0.07 m
1200
[J / (m2s K)]

1000 1000
[J / (m2s K)]

800 800 V = 0.01135 m3

Solids loading = 11.35 kg
600 600 grav
hgs = 123 J/(m2 s K )
V = 0.01135 m3
400 Solids loading = 11.35 kg 400
grav
hgs = 123 J/(m2 s K)
200 200

0 0
1500 2500 3500 4500 5500 6500 7500 8500 9500 0.08 0.09 0.1 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.18
Fluidization gas flow rate [m3/h] Radial distance from the center of the fluidization chamber [m]

Fig. 3. Calculated gassolid heat transfer coefficient in a rotating fluidized bed in a static geometry according to Eqs. (14) and (21)(24): (a) as a function of the fluidization
gas flow rate; (b) as a function of the radial position in the fluidization chamber. Conditions: L = 0.135 m, s  = 0.4, n = 0.042 = 24
1
, sgs  = 0.7. Other conditions: see Table 3.

gassolid heat transfer, two different fluidization gas velocities sig- filled with particles, a particle bed solids volume fraction s  of 0.4,
nificantly higher than those used with the conventional fluidized bed an average number of rotations of the fluidization gas in the particle
1
are used in the simulations of the rotating fluidized bed in a static bed n of 0.042 = 24 , a tangential gassolid slip factor sgs  of 0.7,
geometry. The fluidization gas velocities chosen in the simulations and a tangential gassolid slip velocity that is small compared to the
of the rotating fluidized bed in a static geometry are in the range of radial gassolid slip velocity. As mentioned before (Section 2, dis-
the theoretical Figs. 2 and 3, but are far from a possible limit. cussion on Fig. 2), the model assumptions and parameters used will,
to a certain extent, be validated via the CFD simulations presented
6. Theoretical evaluation of the gassolid heat transfer further in this work. In rotating fluidized beds in a static geome-
coefficient in rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry try, the gassolid heat transfer coefficient is seen to increase nearly
proportionally with the fluidization gas flow rate (Fig. 3(a)). This is
Based on the simplified reactor model for rotating fluidized beds mainly due to the increasing radial gassolid slip velocity with in-
in a static geometry Eqs. (1)(6) and the heat transfer formulation creasing fluidization gas flow rate (Eqs. (22) and (23)). The increase
Eqs. (21)(24), the heat transfer coefficient of a rotating fluidized of the centrifugal force in the rotating particle bed with increasing
bed in a static geometry as a function of the fluidization gas flow fluidization gas flow rate, characteristic for rotating fluidized beds
rate can be estimated. Fig. 3 shows, for the fluidization chamber de- in a static geometry (De Wilde and de Broqueville, 2007), plays a
sign and the type of particles simulated (Table 3), the results of such crucial role in the flexibility in the gassolid slip velocities at which
a simplified analysis, assuming a fluidization chamber completely rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry can be operated without
 A. de Broqueville, J. De Wilde / Chemical Engineering Science 64 (2009) 1232 -- 1248
too much radial bed expansion and, hence, in the flexibility towards
the gassolid heat transfer coefficient. Fig. 3(b) shows that in rotat-
ing fluidized beds in a static geometry, the gassolid heat transfer
coefficient is expected to increase with decreasing radial distance
from the center of the fluidization chamber, i.e. when going from
the outer cylindrical wall of the fluidization chamber towards the
chimney. This is mainly due to the increase in the radial gas phase
velocity with decreasing radial distance from the center of the flu-
idization chamber (Eq. (14)) and may be advantageous as the tem-
perature difference between the fluidization gas and the particles in
the rotating particle bed ((Tg Ts ) in Eq. (21)) is expected to be the
most pronounced near the outer cylindrical wall of the fluidization
chamber where the fluidization gas is fed and the least pronounced
near the chimney where the fluidization gas leaves the fluidization
chamber.
A comparison of some theoretical gassolid heat transfer coeffi-
cients in rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry (Fig. 3(a)) with
the maximum gassolid heat transfer coefficient that can be ob-
tained in conventional fluidized beds, calculated based on the ter-
minal velocity of the particles in the earth gravitational field, shows
that in rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry, an increase of the
gassolid heat transfer coefficient with one order of magnitude can
be easily achieved. An improvement with multiple orders of mag-
nitude is possible at even higher fluidization gas flow rates than
those in Fig. 3. Figs. 2 and 3 confirm that rotating fluidized beds in a
static geometry can be operated at much lower gas phase residence
times in the particle bed and much higher gassolid slip velocities
and gassolid heat transfer coefficients than conventional fluidized
beds. This makes rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry partic-
ularly suited for use with fast and highly endothermic or exother-
mic reactions or for process intensification. The theoretical analysis
of the hydrodynamic characteristics (Fig. 2) and the gassolid heat
Fig. 4. Snap-shot of the solids volume fraction in a conventional fluidized bed at a fluidization gas flow rate of: (a) 195 m3 /(h mlength
(c) 1080 m3 /(h mlength fluid. chamber ). Conditions: see Table 3.
1239
transfer (Fig. 3) in rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry will
be demonstrated and to a certain extent validated by the CFD sim-
ulations presented hereafter.
7. CFD simulation results and discussion
Figs. 4 and 5 show snap-shots of the simulated solids volume
fraction at different fluidization gas velocities in, respectively, the
conventional fluidized bed and the rotating fluidized bed in a static
geometry. The simulation conditions are summarized in Table 3. As
expected, in the conventional fluidized bed, bubble formation is be-
coming more pronounced with increasing fluidization gas velocity
(Fig. 4). Furthermore, with increasing fluidization gas velocity, the
radial bed expansion is significant. In the rotating fluidized bed in a
static geometry (Fig. 5), bubble formation is much less pronounced,
despite the much higher fluidization gas velocities. Fluidization in a
centrifugal field was reported to result in a more uniform fluidized
bed operation with less bubble formation (Qian et al., 2001; Watano
et al., 2003; Quevedo et al., 2005). Some preferential channels or
routes of the fluidization gas through the rotating particle bed are
observed (Fig. 5), reflected in somewhat denser and somewhat less
dense regions in the particle bed. Averaged over the cycle time of
the rotating particle bed, however, all particles in the particle bed
come into contact with roughly the same amount of fluidization gas
as a result of the constant rotational motion of the particle bed. This
will be shown to have an important impact on the particle bed tem-
perature uniformity in rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry.
The preferential fluidization gas channels through the rotating par-
ticle bed may be initiated by the deceleration and accumulation of
particles upstream and the acceleration of particles downstream of a
given gas inlet slot (De Wilde and de Broqueville, 2007). Depending
on the fluidization chamber design and the operating conditions,
fluid. chamber ); (b) 540 m3 /(h mlength fluid. chamber );
1240 A. de Broqueville, J. De Wilde / Chemical Engineering Science 64 (2009) 1232 -- 1248

Fig. 5. Snap-shot of the solids volume fraction in a rotating fluidized bed in a static geometry at a fluidization gas flow rate of: (a) 29 800 m3 /(h mlength fluid. chamber ); (b)
59 600 m3 /(h mlength fluid. chamber ). Conditions: see Table 3.
 A. de Broqueville, J. De Wilde / Chemical Engineering Science 64 (2009) 1232 -- 1248 1241

Fig. 6. Snap-shot of the (a) gas phase velocity colored by its magnitude (values shown limited to 30 m/s); (b) solid phase velocity colored by its magnitude, in a rotating
fluidized bed in a static geometry at a fluidization gas flow rate of 29 800 m3 /(h mlength fluid. chamber ). Conditions: see Table 3. Particle bed position: see Fig. 6(b).

different configurations of somewhat denser and somewhat less
dense regions in the rotating particle bed can be formed.
The radial bed expansion is found to be much less pronounced
in the rotating fluidized bed in a static geometry (Fig. 5) than in
the conventional fluidized bed (Fig. 4), in agreement with the the-
oretical characteristics of rotating fluidized beds in a static geom-
etry (Fig. 2). This allows to operate the rotating fluidized bed in
a static geometry at very high fluidization gas velocities, without
significant entrainment of particles by the fluidization gas to the
chimney (Fig. 5).
The CFD simulations of the rotating fluidized bed in a static ge-
ometry allow to get an improved insight in the hydrodynamic be-
havior and allow to a certain extent validation of the assumptions
taken for the theoretical model development presented in Section 2,
that is, (i) particle bed uniformity, (ii) a solid body type rotational
motion of the particle bed, (iii) an average number of rotations of
1242 A. de Broqueville, J. De Wilde / Chemical Engineering Science 64 (2009) 1232 -- 1248

Fig. 7. Snap-shot of the (a) particle bed rotational speed (rad s1 ); (b) tangential gassolid slip factor sgs (Eq. (4)), in a rotating fluidized bed in a static geometry at a
fluidization gas flow rate of 29 800 m3 /(h mlength fluid. chamber ). Conditions: see Table 3.

the fluidization gas in the particle bed close to inversely propor-
tional with the number of gas inlet slots and minimal mixing be-
tween gases injected via successive gas inlet slots in the particle
bed, (iv) a nearly constant tangential gassolid slip factor. The ca-
pability of generating a dense particle bed at high fluidization gas
velocities and improved particle bed uniformity was experimentally
demonstrated by De Wilde and de Broqueville (2007, 2008a,b) and
is confirmed by the present CFD simulations (e.g. Fig. 5(a)), where
an average particle bed solids volume fraction s  close to 0.4 is ob-
served. Figs. 6(a) and (b) show snap-shots of, respectively, the gas
and solid phase velocities, colored by their magnitude. To be able to
focus on the behavior in the major part of the particle bed, only gas
phase velocities up to 30 m/s are shown, implying that the behavior
in the immediate vicinity of the tangential gas inlet slots cannot be
 A. de Broqueville, J. De Wilde / Chemical Engineering Science 64 (2009) 1232 -- 1248 1243

312 312

Particle bed temperature [K]

Particle bed temperature [K]

310 310
h = 10cm h = 10cm
t=2s t=4s
308 h = 5cm 308 h = 5cm

306 306

304 304

302 302

300 300

-0.08 -0.04 0 0.04 0.08 -0.08 -0.04 0 0.04 0.08

Position (width) [m] Position (width) [m]

312 312
Particle bed temperature [K]

h = 10cm

Particle bed temperature [K]

310 t=6s 310
h = 5cm
308 308

306 306

304 304

302 302 h = 10cm

h = 5cm
300 300 t = 10 s

-0.08 -0.04 0 0.04 0.08 -0.08 -0.04 0 0.04 0.08

Position (width) [m] Position (width) [m]

Fig. 8. Response of the particle bed temperature in a conventional fluidized bed to a step change in the fluidization gas temperature from 300 to 400 K at time t0 = 0 s.
Particle bed temperature as a function of the position (width) and at two different heights in the fluidization chamber shown at different moments in time. Fluidization gas
flow rate of 195 m3 /(h mlength fluid. chamber ). Conditions: see Table 3.

seen in Fig. 6(a). The fluidization gas, which is injected tangentially
at very high velocities in the fluidization chamber, is seen to quickly
undergo tangential deceleration at contact with the particles in the
particle bed. Radially, the gas is accelerated as it moves towards the
particle bed freeboard. This results in a quite sharply curved flow
path of the fluidization gas through the particle bed. Furthermore,
gas injected via a given gas inlet slot is deflected radially inwards im-
mediately upstream of the next gas inlet slot. Fig. 6(a) confirms the
inverse relation between the number of gas inlet slots and the av-
erage number of rotations of the fluidization gas in the particle bed,
as well as minimal mixing between gases injected via successive gas
inlet slots, at least inside the particle bed. In the simulations pre-
sented, gases injected via successive gas inlet slots are mixed in the
gas zone between the particle bed freeboard and the chimney. This is
because in the simulations presented, the chimney is equipped with
only one outlet slot (Table 3 and Fig. 6(a)). Hence, gases injected via
the different gas inlet slots accumulate in the gas zone between the
particle bed freeboard and the chimney before being able to leave
the fluidization chamber via the chimney outlet slot. This accumu-
lation of fluidization gas results in increasing gas velocities and can
be seen in Fig. 6(a), although only partially due to the limitation of
the gas velocities shown to maximum 30 m/s. For the simplified re-
actor model Eqs. (1)(6), focusing on gassolid momentum transfer,
that is, within the particle bed, the mixing between gases injected
via successive gas inlet slots and the gas phase flow path in the gas
zone between the particle bed freeboard and the chimney are of
minor importance. In case mixing between gases injected via suc-
cessive gas inlets has to be completely avoided, a chimney with
multiple outlet slots can be used (De Wilde and de Broqueville,
2008a,b). Fig. 6(b) clearly illustrates that the particles are not able to
follow the gas phase flow path, as a result of inertia/the centrifugal
force. Fig. 7(a) shows the particle bed rotational speed  (rad s1 )
and demonstrates a close to solid body type of rotational motion of
the particle bed,  varying between 46 and 55 rad s1 . In general,
the particle bed rotational speed is seen to increase slightly when
approaching the particle bed freeboard. Fig. 7(b), finally, shows that
the tangential gassolid slip factor sgs has a somewhat more com-
plex behavior than the constant value assumed in the theoretical
model (Eqs. (1)(6)). Whereas in the major part of the particle bed,
sgs varies between 0.7 and 1.0, a particular behavior is observed im-
mediately upstream of the gas inlet slots and downstream of the
chimney outlet slot, where sgs becomes larger than one, and in the
vicinity of the outer cylindrical wall of the fluidization chamber,
where sgs becomes smaller than 0.7. Immediately upstream of a gas
inlet slot, the gas flow is deflected radially inwards. The particle bed
inertia prevents that the particles follow completely the gas phase
motion, resulting in locally higher tangential solids than gas veloci-
ties. Downstream of the chimney outlet slot, a zone exists in which
the sense of the gas phase rotational motion is inverted (Fig. 6(a)).
The particle bed inertia again results in higher tangential solids than
gas velocities and, hence, sgs values larger than one. With multiple
chimney outlet slots, inversion of the gas phase rotational motion
in the vicinity of the chimney outlet slots can, however, be avoided
(De Wilde and de Broqueville, 2008a,b). The lower values of sgs in
the vicinity of the outer wall of the fluidization chamber are due to
the particlewall shear. Figs. 57 show that the assumptions used in
1244 A. de Broqueville, J. De Wilde / Chemical Engineering Science 64 (2009) 1232 -- 1248

310 310

Particle bed temperature [K]

Particle bed temperature [K]
308 h = 10cm 308 h = 10cm
h = 5cm t=2s h = 5cm t=4s
306 306

304 304

302 302

300 300

-0.08 -0.04 0 0.04 0.08 -0.08 -0.04 0 0.04 0.08

Position (width) [m] Position (width) [m]

310 310

Particle bed temperature [K]

h = 10cm
Particle bed temperature [K]

h = 5cm t=6s
308 308

306 306

304 304

302 302 h = 10cm t = 10 s

h = 5cm

300 300

-0.08 -0.04 0 0.04 0.08 -0.08 -0.04 0 0.04 0.08

Position (width) [m] Position (width) [m]

Fig. 9. Response of the particle bed temperature in a conventional fluidized bed to a step change in the fluidization gas temperature from 300 to 400 K at time t0 = 0 s.
Particle bed temperature as a function of the position (width) and at two different heights in the fluidization chamber shown at different moments in time. Fluidization gas
flow rate of 540 m3 /(h mlength fluid. chamber ). Conditions: see Table 3.

the theoretical model Eqs. (1)(6) are reasonable. Using approximate
values of the mean variables obtained from the CFD simulations
1
(Figs. 5(a), 6, 7), i.e. G/L=29 800 (m2 /h), n= 24 , sgs =0.8, r=0.15 (m),
and (R Rf ) = 0.06 (m), in the theoretical model equation (2) gives a
particle bed rotational speed estimation of

29 800 m2 1 0.8
=
3600 s 24 0.15 (m rad1 ) 0.06 (m)
which is close to the value obtained from the CFD simulations
1 ature as the fluidization gas velocity increases (Figs. 9 and 10).
(Fig. 7(a)). It should be remarked that n = 24 reflects the absence
of overlap between gases injected via successive gas inlet slots, gas
injected via a given gas inlet slot occupying a theoretical 15 sector
in the particle bed.
The response of the particle bed temperature to the step change
in the fluidization gas temperature from 300 to 400 K at time t0 is
shown in Figs. 810 and in Figs. 11 and 12, respectively, for the con-
ventional fluidized bed at three different fluidization gas velocities
and for the rotating fluidized bed in a static geometry at two dif-
ferent fluidization gas velocities. For the conventional fluidized bed,
the particle bed temperature profile over the width of the fluidiza-
tion chamber is shown at two different heights in the fluidization
chamber. For the rotating fluidized bed in a static geometry, the par-
ticle bed temperature profile over the tangential position in the flu-
idization chamber is shown at two different radial positions in the
fluidization chamber. This representation allows a straightforward
comparison between the conventional fluidized bed and the rotating
fluidized bed in a static geometry.
At low fluidization gas velocities, mixing in the conventional flu-
idized bed is limited (Fig. 4). This is reflected in poor particle bed tem-
perature uniformity (Fig. 8). As the fluidization gas velocity increases
and bubbling grows in importance (Fig. 4), the mixing and the par-
ticle bed temperature uniformity in the conventional fluidized bed
improve significantly (Figs. 9 and 10). Furthermore, as expected, in
the conventional fluidized bed in the bubbling regime, the gassolid
= 51.10 rad s1 ,
heat transfer coefficient is seen to increase with increasing fluidiza-
tion gas velocity. This is reflected in a faster response of the particle
bed temperature to the step change in the fluidization gas temper-
At the fluidization gas velocities investigated, the rotating flu-
idized bed in a static geometry shows excellent particle bed tem-
perature uniformity (Figs. 11 and 12). The particle bed temperature
uniformity is even better than in the bubbling conventional fluidized
bed (Figs. 9 and 10). As bubbles are nearly absent in the rotating
fluidized bed in a static geometry (Fig. 5), the particle bed tempera-
ture uniformity is mainly explained by the rotational motion of the
particle bed, imposing tangential mixing in the particle bed. Addi-
tionally, both the radial fluidization and the vigorous motion of the
rotating particle bed, with successive deceleration and acceleration
zones (Fig. 5), introduce radial mixing in the rotating fluidized bed
in a static geometry, further improving the particle bed temperature
uniformity. As expected from Eqs. (21) to (24), the gassolid heat
transfer coefficient is on average much higher in the rotating flu-
idized bed in a static geometry than in the conventional fluidized
bed. This is reflected in a much faster response of the particle bed
temperature to the step change in the fluidization gas temperature
 A. de Broqueville, J. De Wilde / Chemical Engineering Science 64 (2009) 1232 -- 1248 1245

318 318
Particle bed temperature [K]

Particle bed temperature [K]

h = 10cm h = 10cm
h = 5cm t=2s t=4s
h = 5cm
314 314

310 310

306 306

302 302

-0.08 -0.04 0 0.04 0.08 -0.08 -0.04 0 0.04 0.08

Position (width) [m] Position (width) [m]
Particle bed temperature [K]

h = 10cm

Particle bed temperature [K]

318 t=6s 318
h = 5cm

314 314

310 310

h = 10cm
306 306 t = 10 s
h = 5cm

302 302

-0.08 -0.04 0 0.04 0.08 -0.08 -0.04 0 0.04 0.08

Position (width) [m] Position (width) [m]

Fig. 10. Response of the particle bed temperature in a conventional fluidized bed to a step change in the fluidization gas temperature from 300 to 400 K at time t0 = 0 s.
Particle bed temperature as a function of the position (width) and at two different heights in the fluidization chamber shown at different moments in time. Fluidization gas
flow rate of 1080 m3 /(h mlength fluid. chamber ). Conditions: see Table 3.

h = 1 cm h = 1 cm
Particle bed temperature [K]

Particle bed temperature [K]

370 370
h = 2 cm h = 2 cm
t=1s t=2s

350 350

330 330

310 310
-0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2
Position (tangential) [m] Position (tangential) [m]
Particle bed temperature [K]

Particle bed temperature [K]

370 370

350 350

330 330
h = 1 cm h = 1 cm
h = 2 cm t=4s h = 2 cm t=6s

310 310
-0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2
Position (tangential) [m] Position (tangential) [m]
Fig. 11. Response of the particle bed temperature in a rotating fluidized bed in a static geometry to a step change in the fluidization gas temperature from 300 to 400 K at
time t0 = 0 s. Particle bed temperature as a function of the tangential position and at two different radial positions in the fluidization chamber shown at different moments
in time. Fluidization gas flow rate of 29 800 m3 /(h mlength fluid. chamber ). Conditions: see Table 3.
1246 A. de Broqueville, J. De Wilde / Chemical Engineering Science 64 (2009) 1232 -- 1248

Particle bed temperature [K]

Particle bed temperature [K]
370 370

350 350

330 h = 1 cm 330 h = 1 cm
h = 2 cm t=2s h = 2 cm t=3s

310 310
-0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2
Position (tangential) [m] Position (tangential) [m]

Fig. 12. Response of the particle bed temperature in a rotating fluidized bed in a static geometry to a step change in the fluidization gas temperature from 300 to 400 K at
time t0 = 0 s. Particle bed temperature as a function of the tangential position and at two different radial positions in the fluidization chamber shown at different moments
in time. Fluidization gas flow rate of 59 600 m3 /(h mlength fluid. chamber ). Conditions: see Table 3.

Rotating fluidized bed in a static geometry

Fluidization gas flowrate:
400
59600 m3/ (hm length fluid. chamber) Fluidization gas inlet temperature
390 29800 m3/ (hm length fluid. chamber)
Average particle bed temperature [K]

380

370

360

350

340 Conventional fluidized bed

Fluidization gas flow rate:
330
1080 m3/ (hm length fluid. chamber)
320 540 m3/ (hm length fluid. chamber)

310

300
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Time [s]

Fig. 13. Response of the average particle bed temperature to a step change in the fluidization gas temperature from 300 to 400 K at time t0 = 0 s. Comparison of a conventional
fluidized bed and a rotating fluidized bed in a static geometry. Conventional fluidized bed: fluidization gas flow rate of 540 and 1080 m3 /(h mlength fluid. chamber ); rotating
fluidized bed in a static geometry: fluidization gas flow rate of 29 800 and 59 600 m3 /(h mlength fluid. chamber ). Conditions: see Table 3.

in the rotating fluidized bed in a static geometry (Figs. 11 and 12) be easily one order of magnitude faster in rotating fluidized beds
than in the conventional fluidized bed (Figs. 9 and 10). The higher in a static geometry than in conventional fluidized beds. This is due
gassolid heat transfer coefficient is mainly due to the higher (ra- to the higher ratio of the particle bed width to height and the
dial) gassolid slip velocities at which the rotating fluidized bed in higher gassolid slip velocities and resulting higher specific fluidiza-
a static geometry can be operated (Fig. 2). Furthermore, energy can tion gas flow rates. It should again be emphasized that higher flu-
be more rapidly supplied to or removed from the particle bed by the idization gas velocities than those used in the simulations of the
higher specific fluidization gas flow rates in the rotating fluidized rotating fluidized bed in a static geometry presented (Figs. 1113)
bed in a static geometry than in the conventional fluidized bed. can be safely used, further improving the average gassolid heat
A direct comparison between the conventional fluidized bed and transfer coefficient and increasing the rate of gassolid heat trans-
the rotating fluidized bed in a static geometry with respect to the fer. The improvement in gassolid heat transfer observed from the
response of the average particle bed temperature to the step change CFD simulations (Fig. 13) corresponds quite well with the theoretical
in the fluidization gas temperature is shown in Fig. 13 for the differ- predictions (Fig. 3). Furthermore, the CFD simulations demonstrate
ent fluidization gas flow rates investigated. The average particle bed the features of rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry with re-
temperature response curves (Fig. 13) logically have to flatten out spect to flexibility in the fluidization gas flow rate and with respect
gradually as the particle bed temperature approaches the fluidiza- to the particle bed temperature uniformity. As such, the CFD sim-
tion gas temperature, the driving force for gassolid heat transfer ulations confirm the potential of rotating fluidized beds in a static
becoming smaller (Eq. (21)). Fig. 13 clearly demonstrates that the geometry for use with fast and highly endothermic or exothermic
heat transfer between the fluidization gas and the particle bed can reactions.
 A. de Broqueville, J. De Wilde / Chemical Engineering Science 64 (2009) 1232 -- 1248 1247

8. Conclusions r radial distance from the center of the fluidization cham-

ber, m
Gassolid heat transfer in rotating fluidized beds in a static ge- r position vector
ometry is theoretically and numerically investigated. In rotating flu- R outer fluidization chamber radius, m
idized beds in a static geometry, both the centrifugal force and the Rc chimney radius, m
radial gassolid drag force are influenced by the fluidization gas flow Rf particle bed freeboard radius, m
rate in a similar way. This allows to operate rotating fluidized beds in s viscous stress tensor, kg m1 s2
a static geometry over a very broad fluidization gas flow rate range sgs tangential gassolid slip factor
and offers increased flexibility with respect to cooling or heating via t time, s
the fluidization gas. In particular, rotating fluidized beds in a static T temperature, K
geometry can be operated in dense regime at fluidization gas ve- u gas phase velocity, m s1
locities and, hence, gassolid slip velocities much higher than those v solid phase velocity, m s1
in conventional fluidized beds, resulting in a significant increase of V volume of the fluidization chamber, m3
the gassolid heat transfer coefficient. Intensification by one order
of magnitude can be easily achieved. Furthermore, rotating fluidized Greek letters
beds have a particle bed width-to-height-ratio much higher than
 drag coefficient, kg m3 s1
conventional fluidized beds. In combination with higher allowable
 dissipation of kinetic fluctuation energy by inelastic
gassolid slip velocities, the latter allows to operate rotating flu-
particleparticle collisions, kg m1
r s
3
idized beds in a static geometry at specific fluidization gas flow rates
 dissipation of turbulent kinetic energy of the gas phase,
drastically higher than conventional fluidized beds. Hence, rotating
m2r s3
fluidized beds in a static geometry offer the potential of drastically
g gas phase volume fraction, dimensionless
increasing the rate at which heat can be supplied to or removed from
s solids volume fraction, dimensionless
the particle bed by the fluidization gas.
 granular temperature, J kg1
Two-dimensional CFD simulations of the response of the particle
granular temperature conductivity, kg m1 s1
bed temperature to a step change in the fluidization gas tempera-
conductivity, W m1 K1
ture confirm the theoretically predicted significantly higher allow-
 viscosity, Pa s
able fluidization gas velocities and resulting gassolid heat transfer
 density, kg m3
coefficients in rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry compared
 sphericity factor, dimensionless
to conventional fluidized beds. Furthermore, as a result of the rota-
 angular velocity, rad s1
tional motion of the particle bed and the combined radial-tangential
fluidization, the particle bed temperature is shown to be much more Subscript/superscript
uniform in rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry than in con-
ventional fluidized beds. centr centrifugal
The combination of higher particle bed width-to-height-ratios g gas phase
and increased fluidization gas velocities and resulting increased spe- p particle
cific fluidization gas flow rates and increased gassolid heat trans- s solid phase
fer coefficients make rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry r radial
potentially interesting for use with fast and highly endothermic or rad radial
exothermic reactions. res residence
t tangential

Acknowledgment
Notation
The authors would like to thank Thomas Lescot for his help with
the CFD simulations.
as external particle surface area per unit mass particle,
m2 /kg solid
c centrifugal acceleration, m s2 Appendix A. Theoretical model Eq. (2) derivation
cp,g gas phase specific heat capacity, J/(kg K)
d diameter, m The particle bed rotational motion is generated by the fluidization
e restitution coefficient for particleparticle collisions gas. The particle bed rotational speed  is assumed to be equal to the
eg gas phase internal energy, J kg1 average gas phase rotational speed g multiplied with a tangential
es solid phase internal energy, J kg1 gassolid slip factor sgs (Eq. (4)) which is assumed constant. Hence,
G fluidization gas flow rate, m3 s1
hgs gassolid heat transfer coefficient, J/(m2 s K)  = g sgs (A.1)
jH j-factor for heat transfer
k gas phase turbulent kinetic energy, J kg1 The average gas phase rotational speed is related to the average
L length of the fluidization chamber, m tangential gas phase velocity in the particle bed and the average
n average number of rotations of the fluidization gas in radius of the particle bed:
the particle bed
2ut 
P gas phase pressure, Pa g = (A.2)
Ps solid phase pressure, Pa 2r
qg gas phase kinetic energy, J kg1
The average tangential gas phase velocity in the particle bed can
qs solid phase kinetic energy, J kg1 be estimated from the average tangential gas flow rate through the
Qgs gassolid heat transfer, J/(s m3reactor ) particle bed and the surface area available for the tangential motion
1248 A. de Broqueville, J. De Wilde / Chemical Engineering Science 64 (2009) 1232 -- 1248

of the gas in the particle bed:
Gt 
ut  = (A.3)
St
The average tangential gas flow rate Gt  can be expressed in terms
of the total fluidization gas flow rate G and the average number of
rotations of the fluidization gas in the particle bed n:
Gt  = G n (A.4)
The surface area available for the tangential motion of the gas in the
particle bed St is given by
St = g  (R Rf ) L (A.5)
Combining Eqs. (A.1)(A.5) gives Eq. (2).
References
Agrawal, K., Loezos, P.N., Syamlal, M., Sundaresan, S., 2001. The role of meso-scale
structures in rapid gassolid flows. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 445, 151185.
Anderson, T., Jackson, R., 1967. A fluid mechanical description of fluidized beds.
Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Fundamentals 6, 527539.
Balakrishnan, A.R., Pei, D.C.T., 1975. Fluid-particle heat transfer in gas fluidized beds.
Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering 53, 231233.
Chen, Y.-M., 1987. Fundamentals of a centrifugal fluidized bed. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 33
(5), 722728.
de Broqueville, A., 2004. Catalytic polymerization process in a vertical rotating
fluidized bed: Belgian Patent 2004/0186, Internat. Classif.: B01J C08F B01F;
publication number: 1015976A3.
De Wilde, J., 2005. Reformulating and quantifying the generalized added mass in
filtered gassolid flow models. Physics of Fluids 17 (11), 113304.
De Wilde, J., de Broqueville, A., 2007. Rotating fluidized beds in a static geometry:
experimental proof of concept. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 53 (4), 793810.
De Wilde, J., de Broqueville, A., 2008a. Experimental study of fluidization of 1G-
Geldart D-type particles in a rotating fluidized bed with a rotating chimney.
A.I.Ch.E. Journal 54 (8), 20292044.
De Wilde, J., de Broqueville, A., 2008b. Experimental investigation of a rotating
fluidized bed in a static geometry. Powder Technology 183 (3), 426435.
Ergun, S., 1952. Fluid flow through packed columns. Chemical Engineering Progress
48, 8994.
Fan, L.T., Chang, C.C., Yu, Y.S., Takahashi, T., Tanaka, Z., 1985. Incipient fluidization
condition for a centrifugal fluidized bed. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 31 (6), 9991009.
Froment, G.F., Bischoff, K.B., 1990. Chemical Reactor Analysis and Design, second ed.
Wiley Series in Chemical Engineering.
Gidaspow, D., 1994. Multiphase Flow and Fluidization: Continuum and Kinetic Theory
Descriptions. Academic Press, New York.
Jenkins, J.T., Savage, S.B., 1983. A theory for the rapid flow of identical, smooth,
nearly elastic, spherical-particles. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 130, 187202.
Launder, B.E., Spalding, D.B., 1974. The numerical computation of turbulent flows.
Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 3 (2), 269289.
Qian, G.-H., Bagyi, I., Burdick, I.W., Pfeffer, R., Shaw, H., Stevens, J.G., 2001. Gassolid
fluidization in a centrifugal field. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 47 (5), 10221034.
Quevedo, J.A., Nakamura, H., Shen, Y., Dave, R.N., Pfeffer, R., 2005. Fluidization of
nanoparticles in a rotating fluidized bed. In: Proceedings of A.I.Ch.E. Annual
Meeting 2005, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Schlunder, E.U., 1978. Transport phenomena in packed bed reactors. In: Luss, D.,
Weekman, V.W. (Eds.), Chemical Reaction Engineering ReviewsHouston, A.C.S.
Symposium Series 72, Washington, DC, pp. 110161.
Watano, S., Imada, Y., Hamada, K., Wakamatsu, Y., Tanabe, Y., Dave, R.N., Pfeffer,
R., 2003. Microgranulation of fine powders by a novel rotating fluidized bed
granulator. Powder Technology 131 (23), 250255.
Wen, Y.C., Yu, Y.H., 1966. Mechanics of fluidization. Chemical Engineering Progress
Symposium Series 62 (62), 100111.
Zhang, D.Z., VanderHeyden, W.B., 2002. The effects of mesoscale structures on the
macroscopic momentum equations for two-phase flows. International Journal
of Multiphase Flow 28 (5), 805822.