∆Pbed = 0.

43226

Dp v ′ ρ (6x10−3 ) (0.15923)(997.08)
NRe,p = = = 1 364 782.23
(1 − ε)μ (1 − 0.999219)(0.8937x10−3 )

−3
4Dp v′ ρ 4(6x10 ) (0.15923)(997.08)
NRe,b = = = 909 854.82
6(1−ε)μ 6(1−0.999219)(0.8937x10−3 )

∆Pb Dp ε3 (0.43226) (6x10−3 )(0.999219)3

ƒ= = = 0.5834
3 ρ v′2 ∆L (1 − ϵ) 3(997.08) (0.15923)2 (0.075)(1 − 0.999219)
4. Discussion

The factors that affect fluidization are the pressure difference over filters, median particle
size, and flow regime of fluid and flow rate of outlet air.

Fluidization does not happen in the laminar regime since there would be no current that
adds to the fluidization of the bed. While in the turbulent regime, solid tends to blend quickly in
this manner fluidization happens and the bed segment resembles a fluid in its properties. It can be
found in Figure 4.1 that if the particles are very little, stream in the channels between the particles
will be laminar and the pressure drop over the bed will be relative to the superficial velocity. As
the velocity is bit by bit expanded, the pressure drop increases however the particles don't move
and the bed height continues as before. At a specific velocity, the pressure drop over the bed
balances the force of gravity on the particles or the heaviness of the bed, and any further increment
in velocity makes the particle move.

Figure 4.1 Pressure drop and bed height vs. superficial velocity for a bed of solids

There a lot of possible error that could happen during this experiment. Human error is
possible while taking reading since the reading in the manometer is not clear and some
measurement is not visible. The reading of the height of the bed should be done accurately. A
member of the group with a keen eye should be the one reading the measurement in the manometer.
The measurement of the volumetric flow rate should not be done manually since there would be
inconsistency in the results. Based from the data obtained, there is a deviation of the actual
volumetric flow rate to the theoretical flow rate.
5. Conclusions

Friction Factor vs Reynolds Number

(Bed)
0.5835
Friction Factor

0.583

0.5825

0.582

0.5815
0 200000 400000 600000 800000 1000000
Reynolds Number (Bed)

Figure 5.1 Friction factor vs Reynolds number for fixed bed

Friction Factor vs Reynolds Number

(particles)

0.5835
Friction Factor

0.583
0.5825
0.582
0.5815
0 500000 1000000 1500000
Reynolds Number (Particle)

Figure 5.2 Friction factor vs Reynolds number for particles

 Figure 5.3 Friction factor vs Reynolds number for various nanoparticles’ diameter

Comparing Figure 5.1, 5.2 to 5.3, they differ a lot. In Figure 5.3, it shows the theoretical
graph of the friction factor versus the Reynolds number. As the friction factor decreases, the
Reynolds number increases. They are both inversely proportional to each other. Since there is less
resistance, then the flow of regime increases. However, in the actual experiment, it did not coincide
with the theoretical graph. All actual values deviate to the theoretical value. The values obtained
are not accurate due to errors. Such as there should be no bubbles present in the hose of the
manometer, the reading of the bed height and manually getting the actual volumetric flow rate.
There would be inconsistencies in the results due to these errors.

As the bed height is further increased, the superficial velocity increases. It can be seen in
the data the trend of both bed height and superficial velocity. It can be concluded that the bed
height and the superficial velocity is directly proportional to each other.
6. Recommendations

There a lot of possible error that could happen during this experiment. Human error is
possible while taking reading of the pressure since there are instances where the pressure fluctuates
from time to time. The reading of the height of the bed should be done accurately. A member of
the group with a keen eye should be the one reading the measurement.

A better equipment should be available in the experiment since the equipment is prone to
error. The measurement of the volumetric flow rate should not be done manually since there would
be inconsistency in the results.

REFERENCES

[1] Geankoplis, C.J. (1993). Transport Processes and Unit Operations. 3rd Edition. Englewood
Cliffs, New Jersey. Prentice-Hall International, Inc.

[2] Coulson, J.M. & Richardson, J.F. (2002). Particle Technology and Separation Processes.
5th Edition. Wildwood Avenue, Woburn, MA. Butterworth-Heinemann.

[3] J. March, Advanced Organic Chemistry, 4th ed., John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York,
1992.

[4] B. M. Trost and I. Fleming, eds., Comprehensive Organic Synthesis: Selectivity, Strategy
and Efficiency in Modern Organic Chemistry, Vol. 1−9,

[5] Zumdahl, S., Zumdahl, S. (2012). Chemistry: An Atoms First Approach, 2nd edition.
Boston, MA: Cengage Learning Inc.