Bangladesh University of Engineering & Technology

Course No: ChE 304

Course Name: Chemical Engineering Laboratory- III

Experiment No: 07

Name of the Experiment: Investigation of Liquid-Solid and Gas-

Solid Fluidized Bed

Date of Performance: 20-10-24

Date of Submission: 27-10-24

Partners’ Student ID- Submitted by,

Md. Abdur Rahman
2002072
Student ID- 20020073
2002074
Level- 3, Term- 2
2002075
Dept.- Ch.E.
Group- 03(B1)
Submitted To-
Faisal Ahmed
Lecturer,
Department of Chemical Engineering,
BUET

1
Summary:

This experiment investigated the fluidization characteristics in both liquid-solid and gas-solid
systems, measuring key parameters such as the Richardson-Zaki index (n), terminal settling
velocity (Ut), and minimum fluidization velocity (Umf) in a liquid-solid bed, along with
pressure drop trends and fluidization patterns in a gas-solid bed. In the liquid-solid system,
the experimental values for the Richardson-Zaki index were 3.2903 and 4.1532 for increasing
and decreasing flow rates, respectively. These values were significantly higher than the
theoretical value of 2.635. The terminal settling velocities measured were 42.752 cm/s for
increasing flow and 81.834 cm/s for decreasing flow, both of which deviated notably from the
theoretical value of 16.17 cm/s. These deviations were likely due to irregular particle shapes
and variations in the flow profile. The minimum fluidization velocities were closer to the
theoretical predictions, with experimental values of 2.4623 cm/s and 2.2295 cm/s compared
to a theoretical Umf of 1.644 cm/s. In the gas-solid system, pressure drop increased linearly
with the airflow rate. Distinct fluidization patterns were observed: a bubble regime at 50
L/min, channel flow at 75 L/min, slugging at 100 L/min, and turbulent fluidization at 125
L/min. The variability in experimental results was attributed to non-spherical particle shapes,
limitations of analog equipment, and fluctuations in airflow, highlighting the challenges of
aligning experimental outcomes with theoretical predictions.

1
Methods and Materials:

Apparatus and Setup:

The experiment consisted of two setups: one for solid-liquid fluidization and another for
solid-gas fluidization. Each setup was equipped with pumps, fluid control valves, and
measurement tools, including rotameters. Resin particles were used as the solid phase, with
water serving as the fluidizing liquid and air as the fluidizing gas. A stopwatch and a
weighing scale were utilized to measure the liquid flow rate. Figure 1 illustrates the solid-
liquid fluidization setup, while Figure 2 depicts the arrangement for solid-gas fluidization.

Figure 1: Schematic diagram of experimental setup for solid-liquid fluidized bed

2
Figure 2: Schematic diagram of experimental set-up for solid-gas fluidized bed.

3
Experimental Procedure:

In Part A, which focused on the liquid-solid fluidized bed, we recorded initial measurements,
including bed height, column diameter, and particle size. The experiment commenced by
gradually increasing the water flow rate through a control valve. We made eight observations
at different flow increments. For each observation, we collected water over a specific time
interval and weighed it to determine the flow rate. This process continued until the water flow
was sufficient to cause noticeable entrainment of the resin particles. We then decreased the
flow rate and took another eight readings. In Part B, which involved gas-solid fluidization,
the procedure was divided into two sections: 3D and 2D columns. For the 3D column, we
first recorded the initial bed height, then incrementally increased the airflow while noting the
pressure drops across the bed using a manometer. This was repeated for five observations at
varying gas velocities. For the 2D column, we again recorded the initial bed height and
increased the airflow to observe distinct flow patterns at different velocities. We documented
these fluidization regimes and recorded the maximum bed height for each airflow rate. This
multi-step process allowed us to capture variations in both pressure and flow patterns as the
gas velocity increased.

Observed Data:

Diameter of liquid-solid fluidized bed, D1=5.08 cm

Diameter of gas-solid fluidized bed, D2=15.24 cm
Density of water, ρw =997 kg /m3
Viscosity of water, μw =8.9× 10− 4 Pa ∙ s
Density of particle, ρ p =2500 kg/m3
Initial Bed Height, H=6.9inch=17.526 cm

4
Table 1: Observed data for increasing water flowrate and decreasing water flowrate with
height of the liquid-solid fluidized bed.

Increasing Flowrate Decreasing Flowrate

Observation Mass of Height of Mass of Height of

Number water, m Time, t (s) Bed, H water, m Time, t (s) Bed, H
(kg) (inch) (kg) (inch)

1 1.5 29.84 7.0 4.4 29.56 9.5

2 1.8 29.98 7.2 4.3 29.78 8.9

3 2.0 29.66 7.3 4.0 29.87 8.5

4 2.2 29.59 7.8 3.0 29.77 8.1

5 3.1 30.04 8.4 2.6 29.77 7.9

6 3.5 29.43 8.5 2.0 30.55 7.4

7 4.1 29.96 9.2 1.5 30.49 7.1

8 4.4 29.66 10 1.4 30.85 6.9

Table 2: Observed data of pressure drops with increasing flow rate in the gas-solid fluidized
bed.

Height of manometer fluid (cm of

Observation Flowrate of Gas, H2O)
Number Q̇ (L/min)
Left Right

1 300 87.12 70.36

2 250 86.36 70.1

3 200 86.11 70.36

4 150 86.11 70.87

5 100 86.85 71.12

5
Calculated Data:

Table 3: Calculated data of mass flow rate, superficial velocity and the porosity for both
increasing and decreasing flow rate of the liquid-solid fluidized bed.

Increasing Flowrate Decreasing Flowrate

Mass Superficial Mass Superficial

Observation
flowrate of flowrate of
Number Velocity, U Porosity, ε Velocity, U Porosity, ε
water, ṁ water, ṁ
(kg) (cm/s) (kg) (cm/s)

1 50.268 2.489 0.428 148.849 7.366 0.579

2 60.040 2.971 0.444 144.392 7.145 0.550

3 67.430 3.336 0.452 133.914 6.627 0.529

4 74.349 3.679 0.487 100.773 4.987 0.506

5 103.19 5.106 0.524 87.336 4.322 0.493

6 118.93 5.885 0.529 65.466 3.239 0.459

7 136.85 6.772 0.565 49.196 2.435 0.436

8 148.35 7.341 0.599 45.381 2.246 0.420

6
Table 4: Calculated Data of pressure drop for different flow rates in the gas-solid.

Superficial
Observation Flowrate of Gas, Pressure drop
velocity, U
Number Q̇ (cm3/s) (cm of H2O)
(cm/s)

1 5000 27.41 16.76

2 4167 22.84 16.26

3 3333 18.27 15.75

4 2500 13.71 15.24

5 1667 9.14 15.73

Table 5: Comparison of experimental and theoretical results for minimum fluidization

velocity, terminal settling velocity, and Richardson-Zaki index obtained for liquid-solid
fluidization.

Minimum
Terminal settling
Richardson-Zaki fluidization
Case velocity, Ut
index, n velocity, Umf
(cm/s)
(cm/s)

Increasing 3.290 42.752 1.713

Decreasing 4.153 81.834 2.256

Theoretical 2.635 16.17 1.644

7
Graphical Representation:

Increasing
10
Superficial Velocity, U (cm/s)

f(x) = 42.7524420430793 x^3.29029017568025

R² = 0.969994946460923

0.1
Voidage, ε

Figure 3: Variation of superficial velocity (U) of the fluid with the bed porosity (ε) for the increasing
flow rate of the fluid.

Decreasing
10
Superficial Velocity, U (cm/s)

f(x) = 81.8338782116669 x^4.15316267608947

R² = 0.972594830538625

0.1
Voidage, ε

Figure 4: Variation of superficial velocity (U) of the fluid with the bed porosity (ε) for the decreasing
flow rate of the fluid.

8
 delP vs U
35
Pressure
drop
Δ

0
5 10 15 20 25 30

Superficial velocity,
U (cm/s)

Figure 5: The variation of pressure drop ΔP with the superficial velocity (U) for the gas-solid
fluidized bed

9
Results and Discussion:

Part A: Liquid-Solid Fluidized Bed System

1. Experimental and Theoretical Values

In this section, we conducted an analysis of the fluidization characteristics by calculating key

parameters, including the Richardson-Zaki index (n), terminal settling velocity (Ut), and
minimum fluidization velocity (Umf), for both increasing and decreasing flow rates of water.
The results were subsequently compared with theoretical values, and we observed significant
deviations. These findings are discussed in detail in the following sections.

Richardson-Zaki Index (n)

In the case of the liquid-solid fluidized bed, the experimental Richardson-Zaki indices were
found to be 3.29 for increasing flow and 4.15 for decreasing flow. In contrast, the theoretical
value, calculated under ideal conditions, was significantly lower at 2.635. This discrepancy
between the theoretical and experimental values suggests that, in a real system, the complex
interactions between particles and fluid result in a higher voidage at lower velocities than
what theory predicts. Additionally, factors such as particle shape and non-uniformities likely
contributed to the increased experimental Richardson-Zaki index values, as the non-ideal
packing led to greater resistance and a more dispersed bed structure.

Terminal Settling Velocity (Ut)

The experimental terminal settling velocities measured were 42.752 cm/s for increasing flow
and 81.834 cm/s for decreasing flow. In contrast, the theoretical settling velocity (Ut) was
calculated to be 16.17 cm/s. This significant deviation can largely be attributed to the
theoretical assumption that particles are ideal spheres moving through a uniformly viscous
fluid. However, in reality, the particles had varied shapes and likely experienced uneven
resistance due to irregularities in the flow profile. These factors contributed to the settling
velocities observed in practice being higher than the theoretical values.

10
Minimum Fluidization Velocity (Umf)

The minimum fluidization velocity, Umf, was measured at 2.4623 cm/s for increasing flow
and 2.2295 cm/s for decreasing flow. This is in comparison to a theoretical Umf of 1.644
cm/s. While the obtained values for Umf were relatively close to the theoretical figure, the
slight positive deviation can be attributed to difficulties in measuring bed height due to
particle fluctuations during fluidization. Additionally, minor variations in flow distribution
may have contributed to the differences observed between the experimental and theoretical
Umf values.

2. Voidage and Superficial Velocity Relationship

The experimental relationship observed between superficial velocity and voidage indicated a
positive correlation; specifically, as superficial velocity increased, voidage also increased.
The log-log plot depicting superficial velocity versus voidage revealed a nearly linear
relationship, thereby supporting the validity of the Richardson-Zaki equation within the
parameters of the experiment. However, the data points exhibited minor deviations from a
perfectly linear trend, which can be attributed to factors such as particle irregularities and
non-uniform flow distribution, resulting in some scatter within the data. This observation
suggests that while the Richardson-Zaki model serves as a valuable approximation, actual
systems display complex behaviors that theoretical models may not entirely capture.

Part B: Gas-Solid Fluidized Bed System

1. Pressure Drop Trend

The pressure drop across the gas-solid bed was measured at various air flow rates. As
expected, the pressure drop increased with higher superficial velocity, demonstrating a linear
relationship on the plot. However, slight fluctuations were observed, which can be attributed
to variations in particle density and minor inconsistencies in air flow rates during data
collection. Ideally, the pressure drop should remain constant once fluidization is established,
but small discrepancies in the equipment and measurement process introduced variability.
Additionally, interactions between particles in the bed created a non-uniform pressure
distribution, which deviated from the expected trend.

11
2. Fluidization Patterns at Different Flow Rates

Distinct fluidization patterns emerged as we varied the airflow rates, transitioning through
various fluidization regimes characteristic of gas-solid systems. These observations align with
theoretical fluidization behavior, progressing as follows:

1. Fix Bed Regime: At a low airflow rate of 50 L/min, particles remain in contact with
each other, allowing the structure of the bed to stay stable. However, this stability
continues only until the airflow velocity is increased to a point where the pressure
drop equals the pressure exerted per unit area of the particles.

2. Bubble Regime: At a low airflow rate of 75 L/min, we observed a stable expansion of

the bed, with tiny gas bubbles moving through it. This movement caused predictable
mixing within the particle phase. This initial phase is characterized by mild agitation
and the formation of tiny bubbles, indicating the beginning of fluidization.

12
3. Channel Flow: At a flow rate of 75 L/min, the flow patterns started to diverge as
channels formed between clusters of particles. This indicated aggregative fluidization.
The creation of channels is a key characteristic of non-ideal fluidization, where
particles cluster together, resulting in different sections of the bed fluidizing
separately instead of uniformly.

4. Slugging Regime: Increasing the flow rate to 100 L/min resulted in the formation of
slugs, or larger gas pockets, which lifted sections of the bed. This phenomenon caused
intense mixing and disruption in the bed's structure. Slugging usually occurs when gas
velocity rises, leading to the formation of large, erratic bubbles that expand beyond
individual particles.

13
 5. Turbulent Fluidization: At a flow rate of 125 L/min, the bed transitioned into the
turbulent fluidization regime, characterized by chaotic movement of both particles
and gas. In this state, the gas flow was strong enough to entirely disrupt the bed,
leading to significant interactions between the particles and the air. Although turbulent
behavior typically occurs at higher velocities, it began at a lower flow rate than
theoretical predictions suggested. This discrepancy is likely due to the non-spherical
shapes of the particles, which lowered the threshold for turbulence.

Reason behind Discrepancy:

The experimental results displayed deviations from theoretical predictions due to several
identifiable factors, discussed below:

14
 1. Particle Shape and Uniformity
Theoretical calculations assumed particles were spherical; however, the actual
particles were irregularly shaped. This difference impacts drag forces, settling
velocities, and fluidization behavior, as non-spherical particles experience varying
flow resistances.

2. Measurement Equipment
The instruments used to measure flow rates, bed heights, and pressure drops were
analog and prone to manual errors. For example, an analog scale was used to measure
water flow rates, which introduced sight errors. Using a digital scale could
significantly reduce these errors.

3. Fluctuating Bed Height

During fluidization, particle movements caused the bed height to fluctuate,
particularly in the liquid-solid system. These fluctuations made it challenging to
obtain consistent measurements, leading to discrepancies in the reported values of
Umf and Ut.

4. Air Flow Consistency

In the gas-solid bed, the airflow rate was observed to be inconsistent over time. These
flow variations reduced the stability of the observed fluidization patterns and
increased experimental errors.

Conclusion

15
Although the study faced experimental limitations, it successfully achieved its primary
objectives. The findings confirmed the general trends predicted by the Richardson-Zaki
equation and outlined the progression of fluidization regimes in both liquid-solid and gas-
solid systems. However, the results also emphasized the shortcomings of theoretical models
in fully capturing the complexity of real-world fluidization. Factors such as particle shape and
flow inconsistencies can lead to deviations from predictions. Future research involving
advanced measurement equipment and controlled particle shapes could reduce these error
margins, yielding data that aligns more closely with theoretical predictions and improving the
reliability of fluidization models in practical applications.

Appendix:

Sample Calculation:

Sample calculation for observation 3

Obtained Data:
Diameter of liquid-solid fluidized bed, D1=5.08 cm
Diameter of gas-solid fluidized bed, D2=15.24 cm
Density of water, ρw =997 kg /m3
Viscosity of water, μw =8.9× 10− 4 Pa ∙ s
Density of particle, ρ p =2500 kg/m3
Initial Bed Height, H=6.9inch=17.526 cm
Liquid-solid fluidized bed:
2
π × D1
Cross-sectional area of the column, A1 ¿
4
2
π ×5.08
¿
4
2
¿ 20.27 c m
Increasing Flowrate
Mass of water collected, m = 2.00 kg
Time, t = 29.66 s

16
 m 2× 1000
Mass flow rate of water, ṁ = =
t 29.66
= 67.43 g/s
ṁ
Superficial velocity of water, U =
ρw × A 1
67.43
=
0.997 ×20.27
= 3.336 cm/s
Decreasing Flowrate
Mass of water collected, m = 4.00 kg
Time, t = 29.87 s
m 4 × 1000
Mass flow rate of water, ṁ = =
t 29.87
= 133.914 g/s
ṁ
Superficial velocity of water, U =
ρw × A 1
133.914
=
0.997 ×20.27
= 6.626 cm/s
P of Fluidized Bed:
For a fixed bed of spherical particle, ε o=0.42
Initial Bed Height, H=6.9inch
Theoretical height with no voidage, k =H o ×(1−ε o)
¿ 6.9 ×(1−0.42)
¿ 4.002 inch
k
Voidage for increasing flowrate, εi = 1 -
H
4.002
=1-
7.3
= 0.452
k
Voidage for decreasing flowrate, εd = 1 -
H
4.002
=1-
8.5
= 0.529
Regression Analysis:

17
From the plot of Superficial velocity versus porosity, the parameters of Richardson-Zaki
equation were determined.
The Richardson-Zaki equation is: U = Ut n
Increasing Velocity: U =42.752 ε 3.2903
Richardson-Zaki index, n = 3.2903
Terminal settling velocity, Ut = 42.752 cm/s
Minimum fluidized velocity, Umf = Ut mfn
Umf = 42.752 × 0.423.2903
Umf = 2. 462 cm/s

Decreasing Velocity: U =81.834 ε 4.1532

Richardson-Zaki index, n =4.1532
Terminal settling velocity, Ut = 81.834 cm/s
Minimum fluidized velocity, Umf = Ut mfn
Umf = 81.834× 0.424.1532
Umf = 2.229 cm/s

Computational Analysis for Theoretical values:

Using the MATLAB code provided in Appendix D, the theoretical values are derived by the
help of these following equations:

Ut =
√ 4 × ( ρs− ρw ) × D p × g
3 ×C D × ρw

24
Where, CD = ℜ , when ℜ< 1

24
CD = × (1+0.14 R e 0.7), when 1< ℜ< 1000
ℜ
CD = 0.44 , when ℜ> 1000

Dp× Ut × ρw
Re =
μw
2
Dp
Umf = 0.0055 ׿) × (ρs – ρw) × g × ( )
μw

18
 U mf
ln
n= Ut
ln ε o

The obtained values from the code are:

Terminal settling velocity, Ut = 16.17 cm/s
Minimum fluidized velocity, Umf = 1.644 cm/s
Richardson-Zaki index, n = 2.635

Gas-solid fluidized bed:

2
π × D2
Cross-sectional area of the column, A2 =
4
2
π ×15.24
=
4
= 182.4147 cm2
Air flow rate, Q = 200 L/min
200 × 1000
=
60
= 3333.3 cm3/s

Q
Superficial velocity of air, U =
A2
3333.3
=
182.4147
= 18.273 cm/s

Pressure drop, ∆ P=(86. 11−7 0.36)=15.75 cm of H 2 O

19
 Marking Scheme

Report on

‘Investigation of Liquid-Solid and Gas-Solid Fluidized Bed’

Name: Md. Abdur Rahman

Student ID: 2002073

20
Section and % marks allocated Marks

Summary (10%)

Experimental setup (20%)

Observed data (10%)

Calculated data (10%)

Sample calculation (10%)

Result and discussion (20%)

Quality of tables and figures (10%)

Overall presentation (10%)

Total (100%)

21