Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
110
International Journal of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering 5:2 2011
and heat transfer coefficients. They assumed that the internal II.MATHEMATICAL MODELING
resistance does not control the mass and energy transfer To formulate the suggested model, a quasi-one dimensional
between solid particles and air. They found that, in the low situation has been considered. The model is concerned with
range of air flow rates; the pressure drop under drying the two-phase flow of gas and particles through a vertical
conditions is higher than that under transport conditions. An pipe. The model which was developed by Hamed [20] has
opposite effect was observed at higher velocities. However, been modified and used here based on the following
the model was not verified with experimental results. assumptions:
Narimatsu et al. [13] investigated numerically and x The flow is one-dimensional and steady.
experimentally the drying process of porous alumina and solid x The particles are spherical in shape.
glass particles in a vertical dryer. The model was for one-
x The gas phase is mixture of water vapor and dry
dimensional incompressible flow and the internal resistance
air.
did not control the heat and mass transfer. Dry solids were
x All particles interaction is ignored in the model.
used in heat transfer experiments, and the measurements of
This implies that any mass, heat or momentum
heat transfer coefficient indicted that the maximum value of
transfer between particles is insignificant to the
heat transfer coefficient occurred at the velocity of minimum
transfer between individual particles and the gas
pressure drop. Furthermore, it was noticed that the
stream.
morphology of particles (porous or non porous) did not
x The model assumes that the solid will be conveyed
influence in the air temperature profiles.
as discrete particles and that heat and mass transfer
Fyhr and Rasmuson [14-15] presented a more complex
occur from individual particles.
model for a pneumatic dryer considering a distribution of
particle sizes for steam drying of wood chips. The model A. Governing Equations
includes a comprehensive two-dimensional model for single Based on the above mentioned assumptions the governing
particle drying of single wood ship and one-dimensional plug equations for the gas and dispersed phases are derived
flow was assumed. The irregular movement and the non according to the basic laws of fluid mechanics as follows:
spherical shape of the wood ships were accounted by - The mass balance equation for the gas phase may be
measuring drag and heat transfer coefficients. To validate the written as:
model, measurements of the temperature and pressure profiles d
as well as the final moisture content were carried out, and the (D g U g u g A ) S mass (1)
dx
predictions agreed well with the experimental results.
Unlike the above studies, which were performed in a - The momentum equation for the gas phase can be
vertical upward pneumatic dryer, Alvarez et al. [16] have expressed as:
studied numerically and experimentally the drying process in d dP
a vertical downward pneumatic dryer. The model was for non (D g U g u g2 A ) A D g U g gA
dx dx (2)
shrinkage spherical particle and steady state one-dimensional
Fwg S mom S mass u d
flow. Some experimental works on the pneumatic dryer were
given also,by [17-19]. - The total energy equation for the gas phase can be written
The present paper concerns with a one-dimensional model as:
for a pneumatic drying of porous particles. The model
d ª § u g2 · º
formulations are similar to that of Levy and Borde [9] but the D U
« g g g ¨ g
u A H ¸ » Qwall
dx ¨ 2 ¸¹ ¼»
present model allows for higher temperature. The mass ¬« © (3)
transfer process was obtained by the comprehensive single
§ u d2 ·
particle model described by Radford [8]. The model of Levy D g U g u g A g S mass ¨ H wv ¸ S energy
and Borde [9] assumes that the drying process stops and © 2 ¹
particle break-up occurs if the saturation pressure inside the
Where, Smass, Smom and Senergy are mass, momentum
wet core is greater than the ambient pressure. The gas pressure
in the pneumatic drying process is around atmospheric and energy coupling source terms, respectively.
pressure, therefore, according to their assumption, particle - The equation of motion for a particle in a gas is given by:
break-up may be occurred if the temperature inside the wet
du d2 3U g C D
core exceeds 100oC at any point within the duct. Also, it is
important to notice that the difference between the present dx 2 Ud d p
u g ud u g ud
model and that of Radford [8] is that Radford's model assumes (4)
constant pressure along the duct and neglects the velocity § Ug · ud ud
2 g ¨ 1 ¸f p
difference between the two phases.
© Ud ¹ d
111
International Journal of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering 5:2 2011
where, CD is the drag coefficient and it is calculated as given the gas phase was estimated by,
in [21] as: f
Fwg Sd pipe U g (D g u g ) 2 (11)
2
24
CD Re p d 1 The friction factor, f, can be calculated from the well-
Re p
known Blasius formula. In addition, the friction factor
24 between particles and the wall of the pipe as in [22] is,
1 Re p d 400
Re 0p.646 fp 1.0503Frp1.831 (12)
112
International Journal of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering 5:2 2011
Excel 2003 is used to generate the size distribution using x De Brandt correlation [1, 9]
the built in function NORMSDIST. The obtained distribution, The correlation was developed for a pneumatic dryer.
shown in Fig. 1, is then fed to the computer program.
Nu 0.16 Re1p.3 Pr 0.667 (20)
TABLE I PROPERTIES OF THE PARTICULATE SOLID [8]
x Debrand correlation [23]
Property Value for alumina
The correlation was developed for a pneumatic dryer.
Average particle diameter, dp 0.0001 m
Nu 0.035 Re1p.15 Pr 0.333 (21)
Diameter of smallest pores in 7×10-9 m
solid, dmin x Baeyens et al. correlation [1]
External solid surface area, Aso 333 m2/kg dry solids
The correlation was developed for a large scale pneumatic
Internal solid surface area, Apore 6×104 m2/kg dry dryer.
solids
Nu 0.15 Re p (22)
Density of solid material, ȡs 3700 kg/m3
Density of average particle, ȡsa 1600 kg/m3 x Modified Ranz-Marshall correlation [9]
Heat capacity of dry solid, Cps, 6.954-0.2803T --0.25 The correlation was developed for single droplet/wet
as function of temperature (K) 11.604T-0.15 kJ/kg.K particle and it takes into account the resistance of the liquid
vapor around the particle to the heat transfer by spalding
6E+5 number, B.
2 0.6 Re 0p.5 Pr 0.333
Nu (23)
Number of pores of size d pore
1 B 0.7
4E+5
C pwv Tg T p
B (24)
H fg
x Modified Weber correlation [5]
2E+5
An additional term proportional to Re0.8
p was added to
Ranz-Marshall correlation to account for turbulent flow.
0E+0
Nu
2 0.5 Re 0p.5 0.06 Re 0p.8 Pr 0.333 (25)
0.0E+0 1.0E-8 2.0E-8 3.0E-8 4.0E-8
Pore diameter, d pore (m)
The heat exchange per unit length between the
surroundings and the gas phase, Qwall, may be given as;
Fig. 1 Pore size distribution in an individual alumina particle
Qwall Sd pipe h pipe Tg Twall (26)
113
International Journal of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering 5:2 2011
114
International Journal of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering 5:2 2011
the pores will initially be at the rate given by Eq. (32) but with Ug P / R gT g (42)
reduced evaporation area (circular area instead of
hemispherical area) and without the effect of surface tension Where,
on the vapor pressure [8]. Equation (32) can be rewritten to Rg /M g ; M g
y H 2o M H 2o 1 y H 2o M da (43)
describe the current situation as follow:
2 - Heat capacity of the gas stream
o hm FSd pore N pore § M w p vo M w p vg ·
md 4 ¨ ¸ (38) C pg m wv C pwv 1 m wv C pda (44)
4 ¨ T T g ¸
© d ¹
- Viscosity of gas stream
The evaporation rate form pores of diameter less than dmen will
continue to be described by Eq. (38) until the value of Pg
y H 2O P wv 1 y H 2O P da (45)
evaporation rate given by Eq. (33) or Eq. (36) is less than that
estimated by Eq. (38). - Thermal conductivity of gas stream
Evaporation mechanism 5. The equation for calculating the kg mwv k wv 1 mwv k da (46)
log-mean pressure of non-H2O gas, PB,lm, contains an implicit
assumption that the vapor pressure at the surface from which - Heat capacity of the dispersed phase
evaporation is occurring, pvo, is less than the total gas X 1
pressure, P. If the particle temperature is increased to a value C pd C pw C ps (47)
at which the vapor pressure is greater than the total ambient 1 X 1 X
pressure, then this assumption will be invalidated. At this The effect of temperature on the physical properties
condition, the evaporation rate will be controlled by the of water vapor and dry air is calculated from formula given in
friction force. By assuming laminar flow of water vapor [25].
through the pores, the evaporation rate from pores of diameter
dpore will be given by [8]; III. NUMERICAL METHOD
4
o SU wv d N pore F The system of equations (1-6) with the help of auxiliary
md5
pore
p vo P (39) and supplementary equations is solved numerically using the
128P wv 'Z conservative variable formulation for the gas phase [26] and
The above five mechanisms describe the evaporation rate the fourth order Rounge-Kutta method is used for the
during the second drying stage (falling-rate period). The dispersed phase. The conservative variable formulation is a
appropriate evaporation mechanism to any specific pore will cell by cell iterative procedure in which the gas phase
depends upon the prevailing condition at the time under variables are specified at the cell inlet and that at the cell exit
consideration. The selection of the drying mechanism must be are sought. The average values of the gas phase variables are
established for each pore at the prevailing conditions. then used to calculate the solid phase velocity and
Therefore, this aspect will be discussed in a later section of temperature. The source terms are then evaluated and new
this paper. flow variables at the cell exit can be calculated. The procedure
is continued until the gas velocity no longer changes with
H. Supplementary Equations continued iteration. Once the solution is obtained for one cell,
In order to solve the above set of equations several the exit conditions are taken as the starting condition for the
supplementary equations, definitions and empirical adjacent cell and the procedure is repeated. More details about
correlations are required. These will be presented the application of conservative variable formulation for single
subsequently. It should be noted that both the gas and solid phase and two-phase flows can be found in [26].
phases are mixtures and hence their thermodynamic properties The mass transfer mechanisms obviously explained can
are calculated using the mixture theory. be used to determine the evaporation from free surface water
- The volume fraction equation through the evaporation from the smallest pores in the porous
Dg Dd 1 (40) particles. The evaporation rate from individual particle must
be calculated for each iteration of the conservative variable
- Mass and mole fraction of water vapor in the gas stream formulation procedure. During the falling-rate period, the
o evaporation rate mechanisms cannot be distributed absolutely
m wv mwv M da and must be established for each pore diameter under each set
mwv ; y H 2O (41)
o
m wv m da
o
mwv M da 1 mwv M H 2O of conditions existing at the current iteration. Figure 2 depicts
this aspect as it considered in the present model.
Where, Mda and M H 2 O are molecular weight of dry air
and water vapor, respectively. IV. MODEL VALIDATION
- Density of gas stream The present model was firstly validated against pneumatic
The mole fraction of water vapor is used together with the transport data (without heat or mass transfer). Hariu and
ideal gas equation to calculate the density of the gas phase as Molstad [27] measured the pressure drop in a vertical glass
follow: tube as a function of the solid mass flow rate. The same
vertical tube, the same solid particles and the same initial
115
International Journal of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering 5:2 2011
conditions are used to simulate the pressure drop in the Gidaspow [28]. The predicted pressure drop using the
present study. In the present model as well as Arastoopour and correlation of Konno and Saito, reported in [1], is also
Gidaspow model [28], the initial void fraction or the initial presented in the figure. The figure indicates that the present
solid velocity is needed. Because these values were not model predicts the linear dependence of pressure drop with
measured by Hariu and Molstad [27], the inlet gas void solid mass flow rate very well compared with that of [28]. The
fraction was assumed to be 0.955 in both simulations. correlation of Konno and Saito predicts the linear variation of
Figure 3 presents the comparison between the present pressure drop with solid mass flow rate but with higher values
predictions, the measured pressure drop by Hariu and Molstad than the experimentally observed and presently predicted.
[27] and the numerical predictions of Arastoopour and
Fig. 2 A flowchart indicating distribution of evaporation mechanisms according to the prevailing conditions.
116
International Journal of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering 5:2 2011
2500 200
Experimental, Ref. [27]
Numerical, Ref. [28] Experimental Ref. [29]
Present Prediction 160
80
1000
40
500 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
x/L
a. polystyrene
0 200
0 7 14 21 28 35
Solid mass flow rate (kg/hr) Solid velocity (m/s) Experimental Ref. [29]
Fig. 3 Comparison between predicted pressure drop in a pneumatic 160 Prediction, d p = 20 P m
conveying tube and published numerical and experimental results
Prediction, d p = 140 P m
120
For more validation of the present model,
comparisons are carried out for high-speed gas-solid flow
(choked flow). Mobbs et al. [29] measured the solid velocity 80
for three types of solid particles in a brass pipe of Ǭ in (0.022
m) diameter and 148 ft (45.11 m) long. The conditions for the
comparison are given in Table 2. Because the particles used in 40
the experiment have a range of size, simulations are carried 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
x/L
out for the largest and the smallest particles. Figure 4 shows
b. silica
the comparison between the present predictions and the
120
measured solid velocity for the three types of solid particles. It Experimental Ref. [29]
can be seen from the figure that for the cases involving
polystyrene-air suspension, the agreement between the Prediction, d p = 178 P m
Solid velocity (m/s)
117
International Journal of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering 5:2 2011
The model is then validated against pneumatic conveying content by about 5% and 20%, respectively. The figure shows
dryer data. The experimental data of Radford [8] are selected also that the De Brandt correlation [1, 9] predicts the
for validation purpose. The conditions of the test cases are temperature profile fairly well while it over-predicts the solid
given in Table 3. The pipe diameter and length are 0.2 and 6 moisture content by about 40%. On the other hand, Frantz [8]
m, respectively. Because the inlet void fraction or the solid and Debrand [23] correlations give very poor results. Since
velocity is needed in the present model, the inlet solid velocity the correlation of Baeyens et al. [1] gives the best predictions,
was assumed to be 0.2 of the inlet gas velocity. this correlation is used in the present study to calculate the
heat and mass transfer coefficients.
Several Nusselt number correlations are tested in the
present study. Figure 5 presents comparisons between the Figure 6 shows comparisons between the present
present predictions using different correlations and the predictions using Baeyens et al. correlation and the
experimental data given by previous investigations. It can be experimental results of Radford (1997) under different
seen from the figure that the correlation of Baeyens et al. [1] conditions. From this figure it can be seen that the present
gives the best agreement with experimental data. The outlet model predicts the gas temperature and solid water content
gas temperature and the outlet solid moisture content was very well. The figure shows also that the surface moisture is
under-predicted by about 4% and 0.6 %, respectively, when removed in the first few millimeters of the conveying duct.
this correlation was applied. The modified Ranz-Marshall This can be attributed to the high inlet gas temperature and the
correlation [9] and the modified Weber correlation [5] are in high slip velocity between phases at this region.
acceptable agreement with the experimental data. They under-
predict the outlet temperature and the outlet solid moisture
900 0.45
Experimental
Modified Weber 0.40
800
X (kg water/kg dry solid)
Debrand
Frantz 0.35
Gas temperature (k)
400 0.15
300 0.10
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0
Distance along the dryer (m) Distance along the dryer (m)
Fig. 5 Comparison between different heat and ass transfer correlations and experimental data (case 1)
118
International Journal of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering 5:2 2011
119
International Journal of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering 5:2 2011
[19] and Saravnan et al. [31] reported that the drying rate decreases) with increasing gas mass flow rate because the
decreases as the inlet gas velocity increases. In the present effect of increased heat and mass transfer on drying rate
study, the drying rate increases (the solid moisture content outweighs that of reduced particle residence time.
60 35
50 Tgi = 800 k 30
40 Tgi = 1200 k 25
30 20
20 15
10 10
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Distance along the dryer (m) Distance along the dryer (m)
a- Gas velocity b- Solid velocity
1200 350
300
340
1000
Solid temperature (K)
gas temperature (K)
330 290
800 0.00 0.01 0.02
320
600
310
400
300
200 290
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Distance along the dryer (m) Distance along the dryer (m)
c- Gas temperature d- Solid temperature
0.25 0.40
0.35
mwv (kg water/kg dry air)
0.20
0.30
0.25
0.15
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.10
0.05 0.05
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Distance along the dryer (m) Distance along the dryer (m)
e- Gas water content d- Solid water content
Fig. 7 Effect of inlet gas temperature, Tgi, on the axial distribution of velocities, temperatures and water content along the
dryer for both phases
120
International Journal of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering 5:2 2011
80 50
30
20
20
10 10
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Distance along the dryer (m) Distance along the dryer (m)
a- Gas velocity b- Solid velocity
800 360
350
700
Solid temperature (K)
gas temperature (K)
340
600 330
500 320
310
400
300
300 290
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Distance along the dryer (m) Distance along the dryer (m)
c- Gas temperature d- Solid temperature
0.16 0.40
0.35
mwv (kg water/kg dry air)
0.30
0.12
0.25
0.20
0.08
0.15
0.10
0.04 0.05
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Distance along the dryer (m) Distance along the dryer (m)
e- Gas water content f- Gas water content
o
Fig. 8 Effect of air mass flow rate, mair , on the axial distribution of velocities, temperatures and water content along the dryer for
both phases
Figure 9 presents the effect of solid mass flow rate on Qualitative similar observations are reported by Saravanan et
the velocities, temperatures and moisture contents for both al. [31]. As the gas temperature decreases the gas density
phases. As the solid mass flow rate increases the solids holdup increases which in turn resulting in a decrease of both solid
increases, resulting in an increased quantity of moisture in the and gas velocities, as shown in Fig. 9a and b.
system. This enhances the saturation of the drying gas, as The present model as well as any other two-fluid
shown in Fig. 9e, and decreases the gas temperature, as shown model requires the definitions of the inlet parameters. The
in Fig. 9c. As a result, the driving force for heat and mass solids velocity or the solids void fraction is essential to
transfer decreased, which eventually decreases the drying rate. calculate the gas phase void fraction and velocity by means of
121
International Journal of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering 5:2 2011
40 30
ms= 0.15 kg/s
35 25
25 15
20 10
15 5
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Distance along the dryer (m) Distance along the dryer (m)
700
Solid temperature (K)
gas temperature (K)
320
600
310
500
300
400
300 290
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Distance along the dryer (m) Distance along the dryer (m)
0.35
0.16
0.30
0.12
0.25
0.08
0.20
0.04 0.15
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Distance along the dryer (m) Distance along the dryer (m)
void fraction equation, Eq. (40), and the gas phase continuity for both phases is presented in Fig. 10. It can be seen from this
equation, respectively. The inlet solids velocity and the inlet figure that the inlet solid velocity contributed in predicting the
solid void fraction are related by means of the solid phase other properties of pneumatic conveying dryer. It also proves
continuity equation. However, these parameters are not the necessity of measuring the void fraction or solid velocity
usually measured. The effect of inlet slip coefficient, Svo = in any experimental analysis.
udi/ugi, on the velocities, temperatures and moisture contents
122
International Journal of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering 5:2 2011
40 25
Svo= 0.1
35 20
30 Svo= 0.3 15
25 10
20 5
15 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Distance along the dryer (m) Distance along the dryer (m)
a- Gas velocity b- Solid velocity
800 330
700 320
Solid temperature (K)
gas temperature (K)
600 310
500 300
400 290
300 280
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Distance along the dryer (m) Distance along the dryer (m)
c- Gas temperature d- Solid temperature
0.16 0.40
mwv (kg water/kg dry air)
0.35
0.12
0.30
0.08
0.25
0.04 0.20
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Distance along the dryer (m) Distance along the dryer (m)
e- Gas water content f- Solid water content
Fig. 10 Effect of inlet velocity slip coefficient, Svo, on the axial distribution of velocities, temperatures and water content along the
dryer for both phases.
123
International Journal of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering 5:2 2011
the gas mass flow rate increased, while it was decreased as the H 2O Water vapor
solid mass flow rate was increased. Moreover, the model can i Inlet
be used to calculate the length of the drying tube for specific s Solid material
outlet solids moisture content. w Water
wv Water vapor
NOMENCLATURE
REFERENCES
A Pipe cross-sectional area [m2] [1] Baeyens J., Gauwbergen D. V. and Vinckier I., 1995, "Pneumatic
Cp Specific heat [J/kg.K] Drying: the Use of Large-Scale Data in a Design Procedure", Powder
CD Drag coefficient [-] Tech., Vol. 83, pp. 139-148.
[2] Borde I. and Levy A., 2006, "Pneumatic and Flash Drying", in
dpipe Pipe diameter [m] Handbook of Industrial Drying, 3rd Ed., (Mujumdar A. S. Ed.), CRC
dp Particle diameter [m] Press, New York.
dpore Pore diameter [m] [3] Moyers C. G. and Baldwin G. W., 1997, "Psychrometry, Evaporative
Cooling, and Solids Drying", in Perry’s Chemical Engineers’ Handbook,
Dv diffusivity of water in air [m2/s] 7th Ed. (Eds. Robert H. Perry R. H., Green D. W. and Maloney J. O.),
g Gravity acceleration [m/s2] McGraw-Hill, Inc.
h Heat transfer coefficient [W/m2.K] [4] Thorpe G.R., Wint A. and Coggan G.C., 1973, "The Mathematical
Modelling of Industrial Pneumatic Driers", Transactions of the
H Enthalpy [J/kg] Institution of Chemical Engineers, Vol. 51, pp. 339–348.
Hfg Latent heat of evaporation [J/kg] [5] Kemp I. C., Bahu R. E. and Pasley H. S., 1994, "Model Development
hm mass transfer Coefficient [m/s] and Experimental Studies of Vertical Pneumatic Conveying Dryers",
Drying Tech., Vol. 12, pp. 1323-1340.
k Thermal conductivity [W/m.s]
[6] Kemp I. C and Oakley D. E., 1997, "Simulation and Scale-up of
m Mass fraction [-] Pneumatic Conveying and Cascading Rotary Dryers", Drying Tech.,
M Molecular weight [kg/kmol] Vol. 15, pp. 1699-1710.
mp Mass of single wet particle [kg] [7] Kemp I. C., Oakley D. E. and Bahu R. E., 1991, "Computational Fluid
Dynamics Modelling of Vertical Pneumatic Conveying Dryers", Powder
o
Tech., Vol. 65, pp. 477-484.
md Evaporation rate from single particle [kg/s] [8] Radford R. D., 1997, "A Model of Particulate Drying in Pneumatic
o Conveying Systems", Powder Tech., Vol. 93, pp. 109-126.
mdi Evaporation rate by mechanism i [kg/s] [9] Levy A. and Borde I., 1999, "Steady State One Dimensional Flow Model
for a Pneumatic Dryer", Chem. Eng. Processing, Vol. 38, pp. 121-130.
P Total gas pressure [N/m2] [10] Skuratovsky I., Levy A. and Borde I., 2003, "Two-Fluid Two-
Pvg Partial pressure of water vapor in gas stream Dimensional Model for Pneumatic Drying", Drying Tech., Vol. 21, pp.
1645-1668.
[N/m2] [11] Skuratovsky I., Levy A. and Borde I., 2005, "Two-Dimensional
pvo water vapor pressure at Td [N/m2] Numerical Simulations of the Pneumatic Drying in Vertical pipes",
R Gas constant [J/kg.K] Chem. Eng. Processing, Vol. 44, pp. 187-192.
[12] Pelegrina A. H. and Crapiste G. H., 2001, "Modelling the Pneumatic
T Temperature [K] Drying of Food Particles", J. Food Eng., Vol. 48, pp. 301-310.
Sv0 Ratio between solid velocity and gas velocity [13] Narimatsu C. P., Ferreira M. C. and Feire J. T., 2007, "Drying of Coarse
(ud/ug) Particles in a Vertical Pneumatic Conveyor", Drying Tech., Vol. 25, pp.
291-302.
td Residence time [s] [14] Fyhr C. and Rasmuson A., 1997, "Mathematical Model of Pneumatic
u Velocity [m/s] Conveying Dryer", AICHE Journal, Vol. 43, pp. 2889-2902.
VL Molar volume of water [m3/kmol] [15] Fyhr C. and Rasmuson A., 1997, "Steam Drying of Wood Ships in
Pneumatic Conveying Dryers", Drying Tech., Vol. 15, pp. 1775-1785.
x Axial distance along the dryer [m]
[16] Alvarez P. I., Vega R. and Blasco R., 2005, "Cocurrent Downflow
X Solid phase moisture content [kg/kg dry solid] Fluidized Bed Dryer: Experimental Equipment and Modeling", Drying
y Mole fraction [-] Tech., Vol. 23, pp. 1435-1449.
[17] NamKung W. and Cho M., 2004, "Pneumatic Drying of Iron Ore
particles in a Vertical tube", Drying Tech., Vol. 22, pp. 877-891.
GREEK LETTERS [18] Kaensup W., Kulwong S. and Wongwises S., 2006, "A Small-Scale
Į Void fraction [-] Pneumatic Conveying Dryer of Rough Rice", Drying Tech., Vol. 24, pp.
ȡ Density [kg/m3] 105-113.
[19] Kaensup W., Kulwong S. and Wongwises S., 2006, "Comparison of
ȝ Viscosity [kg/m.s] Drying Kinetics of Paddy Using a Pneumatic Dryer with and without a
Universal gas constant [J/kmol.K] Cyclone", Drying Tech., Vol. 24, pp. 1039-1045.
[20] Hamed M. H., 2005," Choked Gas-Solid Two-Phase Flow in Pipes", J.
ı Standard deviation [m]
Eng. Applied Science, Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, Vol.
ıt Surface tension [N/m] 52, pp. 961-980.
Ȥ Surface area shape factor (Sphericity) [21] Kladas, D. D. and Deorgiou, D. P., 1993, "A Relative Examination of
Subscripts CD–Re Relationships used in Particle Trajectory Calculations", Trans.
of ASME, J. of Fluids Engineering, Vol. 115, pp. 162-165.
cr Critical [22] Han, T., A. Levy, and Y. Peng, 2000, "Model for Dilute Gas-Particle
d Dispersed phase Flow in Constant-Area Lance with Heating and Friction ", Powder
da Dry air Technology, Vol. 112, pp. 283-288.
[23] Debrand S., 1974, "Heat Transfer during a Flash Drying Process", Ind.
g Gas phase Eng. Chem., Process Des. Develop., Vol. 13, pp. 396-404.
124
International Journal of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering 5:2 2011
125