See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/225343966

Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Dynamic Heat Transfer

Parameters in Packed Bed

Article in Heat and Mass Transfer · December 2010

DOI: 10.1007/s00231-010-0659-6

CITATIONS READS

20 738

3 authors:

Luiz Mario de Matos Jorge Regina Maria Matos Jorge

Universidade Estadual de Maringá Universidade Federal do Paraná
306 PUBLICATIONS 1,993 CITATIONS 140 PUBLICATIONS 1,129 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Reinaldo Giudici
University of São Paulo
211 PUBLICATIONS 2,861 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Regina Maria Matos Jorge on 01 April 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Heat Mass Transfer (2010) 46:1355–1365
DOI 10.1007/s00231-010-0659-6

ORIGINAL

Experimental and numerical investigation of dynamic heat

transfer parameters in packed bed
Luiz Mario de Matos Jorge •
Regina Maria Matos Jorge • Reinaldo Giudici

Received: 27 November 2009 / Accepted: 2 August 2010 / Published online: 22 August 2010
 Springer-Verlag 2010

Abstract Dynamic experiments in a nonadiabatic packed Cpf Fluid heat capacity (J/kg C)
bed were carried out to evaluate the response to disturbances Cps Solid heat capacity (J/kg C)
in wall temperature and inlet airflow rate and temperature. dp Sphere-equivalent particle diameter (m)
A two-dimensional, pseudo-homogeneous, axially dispersed dt Tube diameter (m)
plug-flow model was numerically solved and used to inter- G Superficial mass flow rate (kg/m2 s)
pret the results. The model parameters were fitted in distinct hw Wall heat transfer coefficient (W/m2 C)
stages: effective radial thermal conductivity (Kr) and wall how Wall heat transfer coefficient with a stagnant fluid
heat transfer coefficient (hw) were estimated from steady- (W/m2 C)
state data and the characteristic packed bed time constant (s) Jo Zeroth-order Bessel function, first kind
from transient data. A new correlation for the Kr in packed J1 First-order Bessel function, first kind
beds of cylindrical particles was proposed. It was experi- Ka Effective axial thermal conductivity (W/m C)
mentally proved that temperature measurements using radi- Kr Effective radial thermal conductivity (W/m C)
ally inserted thermocouples and a ring-shaped sensor were Kro Effective radial thermal conductivity of the bed
not distorted by heat conduction across the thermocouple or with a stagnant fluid (W/m C)
by the thermal inertia effect of the temperature sensors. kf Fluid conductivity (W/m C)
kp Pellet conductivity (W/m C)
List of symbols ks Solid conductivity (W/m C)
Bi Biot number (dimensionless) L Fixed bed length (m)
Bis Solid-wall Biot number (dimensionless) NS Interphase heat transfer group (dimensionless)
Pea Axial Peclet number (dimensionless)
Peaf Axial fluid Peclet number (dimensionless)
L. M. M. Jorge (&) Per Radial Peclet number (dimensionless)
Departamento de Engenharia Quı́mica, Pr Prandtl number (dimensionless)
Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Av. Colombo, R Tube radius (m)
5790 Bloco D90, Maringá, PR CEP 87020-900, Brazil
r Radial position (m)
e-mail: lmmj@deq.uem.br
r* Radial position (dimensionless)
R. M. M. Jorge Re Reynolds number (G dp/l)
Departamento de Engenharia Quı́mica, t Time (s)
Universidade Federal do Paraná, C.P. 19011,
T Temperature (C)
Curitiba, PR CEP 81531-990, Brazil
e-mail: rjorge@ufpr.br To Inlet air temperature (C)
Tw Wall temperature (C)
R. Giudici Tini Fixed bed initial temperature (C)
Departamento de Engenharia Quı́mica,
Tijcalc Calculated temperature (C)
Escola Politécnica da Universidade de São Paulo,
C.P. 61548, São Paulo, SP CEP 05424-970, Brazil Tijexp Experimental temperature (C)
e-mail: rgiudici@usp.br T* Temperature (dimensionless)

123
1356
uc Superficial velocity in the core of the bed (m/s)
uo Average superficial velocity (m/s)
z Axial position (m)
z* Axial position (dimensionless)
Greek symbols
a Significance level (dimensionless)
eb Bed porosity (dimensionless)
ep Particle porosity (dimensionless)
l Fluid viscosity (kg/m s)
h Time (s)
qs Solid density (kg/m3)
s Packed bed time constant (s)
sT Temperature sensor time constant (s)
U Objective function (C2)
1 Introduction
Understanding the thermal phenomena that take place in
fixed beds is essential to model, simulate, design, and
optimize a number of processes, such as packed bed reac-
tors [1], adsorption columns [2], and heat regenerators [3].
While most of the literature on fixed-bed heat transfer deals
with steady-state experiments [4–8], the treatment and
analysis of its dynamic behavior is much less explored
[9–12], especially of nonadiabatic beds. However, the
increasing process control requirements and the growing
interest in transient processes, such as periodically operated
fixed bed reactors and heat regenerators, have motivated the
study of dynamic fixed-bed heat transfer.
In order to study heat transfer dynamics in fixed beds, a
two-dimensional pseudo-homogeneous axially dispersed
plug-flow model was developed. The well-known Danckw-
erts axial boundary conditions of axially dispersed systems,
which were originally obtained by steady-state isothermal
analysis of mass balances of fixed bed reactor [13], have
raised extensive discussion [14–18] about their validity for
steady and transient state processes.
In the present work, Danckwerts axial boundary condi-
tions were assessed for a fixed bed device, and the presented
model allowed for the simulation of the transient response to
disturbances in inlet air temperature and flow rate, and wall
temperature. Following the approach proposed by Clement
and Jorgensen [19], the radial heat transfer parameters were
estimated from steady-state data, whereas the packed-bed
time constant was obtained from transient experiments.
2 Experimental set-up
Figure 1 shows the fixed bed device, which was used in
previous works to determine effective thermal parameters
123
Heat Mass Transfer (2010) 46:1355–1365
Fig. 1 Experimental fixed bed device
for steady state [20, 21], as well as to study the steady
state and dynamic answer of a ring-shaped sensor [22–24].
In the present work, an inlet air heating device and a data
acquisition system (DAS) were used to study the thermal
behavior of the packed bed in transient conditions.
Steady-state and transient thermocouple readings were
recorded by the DAS during the experiment. This DAS was
composed of a personal computer, one data acquisition card
(Model PCL-812PG), and three multiplexer and amplifier
eight-channel boards (Model PCLD-779) manufactured by
Advantech Co., Ltd. All thermocouples (chromel–alumel)
were connected to the PCLD-779 boards, which amplified
the signals and transmitted them to the PCL-812PG card
installed in the personal computer.
The fixed bed device consisted of a two-section 60 mm
internal diameter tube. The thermal section was 400 mm
long and made of steel. The unheated calming section was
a 250 mm long low conductivity PVC tube, connected to
the thermal section by a low conductivity nylon flange.
Both sections were packed with the same kind of cylin-
drical particles (dp = 3.76 mm, ep = 0.57). The radial
temperature profile was assessed at the bed top, at five
distinct radial positions (TR1 to TR5, at positions r/R = 0,
0.27, 0.50, 0.70, and 0.90) with a ring-shaped sensor that
‘‘filtered out’’ angular temperature fluctuations, as descri-
bed by Giudici and Nascimento [22]. The ring-shaped
sensor consisted of a group of four concentric metallic
rings (TR2–TR5) with four thin thermocouples welded to
the rings, supported by three nylon arms, and placed at four
Heat Mass Transfer (2010) 46:1355–1365 1357

different radial positions. Nylon was used to avoid cross that defined r = -R and r = ?R, which served as refer-
thermal conduction. The ring-shaped sensors were made of ence next to the outer edge of the guide tube and made
2 mm copper wire. A fifth small thermocouple (TR1) was possible the measurement of radial temperature profiles in
set at the center of the support. Furthermore, the axial the bed.
profile was measured by nine thermocouples set at the The packing material was an industrial catalyst made of
center of the bed, r/R = 0, (TC0–TC8) and at axial posi- nickel supported on alumina (57% NiO, 43% Al2O2) used
tions z/L = 0, 0.202, 0.316, 0.430, 0.544, 0.658, 0.772, in industrial hydrocarbon steam pre-reforming. The parti-
0.886, and 1.0. All thermocouples were K type and were cles were cylindrical and had average diameter and length
connected to the data acquisition system, which recorded of 3.54 mm and 2.83 mm, respectively. The average bed
the temperature every 10 s. porosity and the standard deviation (0.354 ± 0.00821)
The thermal section was heated by a steam jacket. were determined from 10 independent loadings using the
Uniform wall temperature was checked by thermocouples software Statistica. In each load, bed porosity was deter-
fixed onto the inner wall surface (Tw). Air, the fluid used mined dividing the volume of voids by the total volume of
in the experiments, passed through a valve, a rotameter, the packed bed (pR2L). The volume of voids was obtained
a heating device, and then entered the bottom of the by subtracting the volume occupied by the particles from
calming section. The air temperature at the calming section the total volume, and the volume of particles was calcu-
inlet (To) was measured by a thermocouple welded to a lated dividing the total mass of particles by the particles
small thin circular metal foil placed perpendicularly to the density (2,400 kg/m3).
airflow. During the experimental procedure, the operating vari-
To allow for the radial insertion of thermocouples Tw ables were varied in sequence (Table 1), submitting the bed
and TC1–TC8 through the steam jacket of the thermal to a series of unsteady and steady states (Fig. 2). Firstly, a
section, nine holes were made in the steam jacket, in which 200 NL/min non-heated airflow rate was set (I). The ther-
nine small steel tubes with 0.3 cm internal diameter and mal section was submitted to wall temperature (Tw) dis-
4 cm in length were inserted, equally spaced, positioned on turbance by steam injection at the highest airflow rate
the surface of the inner wall of the thermal section and through the fixed bed device (II). After the steady state was
directed towards the center of the bed (r = 0 cm). These reached, the bed was then submitted to a series of flow rate
guide tubes were welded along their circumference next to
the inner and outer walls of the steam jacket. Additionally, Table 1 Fixed bed device disturbances over time
a 3 mm diameter hole was made in the nylon flange
Period Start (s) End (s) Flow rate (NL/min) Tw (C) To (C)
(Fig. 1), directed to the center of the bed, to allow for the
placement of thermocouple TC0 in the central region I 0 710 200 21 21
(r = 0 cm and z = 0 cm) between the two sections. All II 710 3,870 200 141 24
thermocouples could be placed on the surface of the inner III 3,870 6,930 120 141 24
wall of the heating section (Tw), at the center of the bed IV 6,930 13,090 40 141 24
(TC0–TC8), or at any other intermediate radial position, by V 13,090 17,090 200 141 24
simply sliding them in the guide tubes. To fix the position VI 17,090 22,330 200 141 50
of a given thermocouple in the center of the bed, it was first VII 22,330 26,270 200 141 24
slipped in towards the opposite wall (r = ?30 mm) and a
mark was made on the thermocouple to set the position
adjacent to the outer end of the guide tube (TC1–TC8) or
350
the outer edge of the flange in the case of TC0. Once I II III IV V VI VII
defined this reference point, the thermocouple was slipped 300 Re
200
back and its tip was positioned on the inner surface of the 250
thermal section (r = -30 mm). A new mark was then
T( C), Re

200
made on the thermocouple to set the position adjacent to
120
o

the outer edge of the guide tube. The distance between the 150
Tw
two marks corresponded to the inner diameter of the 100
thermal section. This distance was measured and its mid- 40 NL/min
50
point was marked on the thermocouple. Finally, the ther- To
0
mocouple was positioned in the center of the bed by 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000
inserting it radially until the midpoint mark reached the
Time (s)
outer edge of the guide tube. Additionally, small marks
were made every half centimeter between the two marks Fig. 2 Experimental disturbances

123
1358 Heat Mass Transfer (2010) 46:1355–1365

disturbances (III, IV, V) and, finally, to air temperature as shown by sensitivity analysis. Therefore, the axial effective
disturbances at the inlet (VI, VII). conductivity was estimated using a correlation from literature.

4.1 Radial heat transfer parameters

3 Mathematical model and numerical solution
Kr and hw were estimated with the pseudo-homogeneous
A pseudo-homogeneous two-dimensional axially dispersed two-dimensional axially dispersed static model:
dynamic model was used in the form:    
1 o2 T 1 oT 1 R2 o 2 T R2 oT
      þ þ  ¼0
oT 1 1 o2 T 1 oT 1 R2 o 2 T R2 oT Per or2 r or Pea L2 oz2 dp L oz ð7Þ
¼ þ þ 
oh s Per or2 r or Pea L2 oz2 dp L oz ðz [ 0Þ
ð1Þ This equation was solved simultaneously with a similar
dp oT equation for z* \ 0 for the boundary conditions Eqs. 3, 4,
z ¼ 0 T ¼ T 0 þ ð2Þ
LPea oz and 5, and also:
oT z ! 1 T ! T0 ð8Þ
z ¼ 1 ¼0 ð3Þ
oz oT oT
z ¼ 0; T j0þ ¼ T j0 ; j0þ ¼ j0 ð9Þ
oT oz oz
r ¼ 0 ¼0 ð4Þ
or oT
r ¼ 1 ¼ BiðT  T0 Þ z \0 ð10Þ
oT or
r ¼ 1 ¼ BiðTw  TÞ z [ 0 ð5Þ
or The boundary conditions above are similar to the ones used
h¼0 T ¼ Tini ð6Þ in the dynamic model. The analytical solution for z [ 0
was presented by Dixon et al. [6]:
where Bi = (hwR/Kr), Per = (GCpf dp/Kr), Pea = (GCpf dp/Ka),
r* = r/R, z* = z/L, and s = (1-eb)qsCpsR2/(GCpf dp). X 1
Bi Jo ðbj r Þ 1  Mj
T ¼ 1  2 2
expðzKÞ
Radial and axial coordinates were discretized by double j¼1
Bi þ bj Jo ðbj Þ Mj
orthogonal collocation [25] using seven radial and seven axial Mj þ 1
internal points. Thus, the resulting system of 49 ordinary þ expfz½Mj ð2L  zÞ  zg ð11Þ
Mj  1
differential equations was numerically solved for time using
Gear’s method (subroutine SDRIV2 from Kahaner et al. [26]). where T* = (T - To)/(Tw - To), Mj = [N/P]1/2, K =
The experimental disturbances are shown in Fig. 2. The (1 - MjPea)/(2dp), P = (R2PeaPer), N = 1 ? 4b2j d2p, and
flow rate disturbance was almost instantaneous and was bj are the roots of bJ1(b) - BiJ0(b) = 0.
treated as a simulation step. The wall temperature (Tw) and The three thermal parameters (Pea, Per, and Bi) of this
inlet air temperature (To) disturbances were recorded and model were fitted by minimization of the objective function,
used in the model. To reduce the influence of noise in these Eq. 12, by the least squares method, using Marquardt’s
variables on the model predictions, both Tw and To were nonlinear optimization method [28]:
previously treated with a suitable exponential filter [27]. X
13  2
U¼ Tiexp  Ticalc ð12Þ
i¼1
4 Evaluation of the dynamic model parameters
where Texpi are the axial and radial temperatures experi-
The dynamic model parameters were evaluated using a mentally measured under steady-state conditions, and Tcalci

two-stage strategy like the one presented by Clement and is the temperature calculated by the static model at point i.
Jorgensen [19]. In the first stage, the effective radial conduc- The thirteen measured bed temperatures, Texp i , corre-

tivity (Kr) and the wall-bed heat transfer coefficient (hw) were
estimated by the least squares method based on the profiles
measured in steady state and a static model. In a second stage,
s was estimated by fitting the dynamic model to the temper-
ature profiles in transient experiments by the least squares
method. The fixed bed time constant (s) has no influence on
steady-state temperature profiles. Also, the effective axial
conductivity (Ka) has only a secondary influence on steady
[20] and unsteady states [23] pseudo-homogeneous models,
spond to the radial temperatures at bed top (TR2–TR5) and
the axial temperatures at bed central axis (TC0–TC7, TR1)
under steady-state conditions. Tcalc
i was assessed using the
first 30 terms of the analytical solution, Eq. 11.
4.2 Effective axial thermal conductivity
Due to the low sensitivity of the static and dynamic models
to the Ka parameter, a literature correlation was used for the

123
Heat Mass Transfer (2010) 46:1355–1365 1359

dynamic simulations. Dixon and Cresswell [29] obtained a To minimize the objective function, a one-dimensional
comprehensive relationship for predicting Pea: search applying the golden section method was used
1 1 ð ks =kf Þ (subroutine FMIN, from Kahaner et al. [26]). The fitted
¼ þ n  o2 ð13Þ value of so was 722.6 kg/m2.
Pea Peaf
RePr 1 þ N1S Bi8Bi S
S þ4

where,
5 Results and discussion
1:5ð1  eb Þðdt=dpÞ2
NS ¼  n o
ks 1 0:1 5.1 Quality of the temperature measurements
kf Nufs þ ðkp =kf Þ

In the limit as dt/dp ? ?, Ns ? ? and Eq. 13 takes the The quality of temperature data was evaluated from 21
familiar limiting form: temperature measurements made by the DAS in steady-
state conditions, every 10 s from the moments 3,600,
1 1 ðks =kf Þ
¼ þ ð14Þ 6,650, 12,600, and 16,500 s, corresponding to the end
Pea Peaf RePr
of periods II, III, IV, and V (Table 1), respectively, and
Replacing Peaf by the Edwards and Richardson correlation depicted in Figs. 8 and 9. The mean values, standard
[30] results in the following equation that is valid for high deviations, and confidence intervals (a = 0.05) of these
tube to particle diameter ratios (dt/dp): temperature measurements in steady state were then cal-
culated using the software Statistica and are presented in
1 0:5 ð0:73eb þ ks =kf Þ
¼ þ ð15Þ Table 2.
Pea 1 þ eb 9:7=ðRePrÞ RePr
All thermocouples had standard deviations of the same
Eq. 15 was used to evaluate axial Peclet number (Pea) order of magnitude and analysis of the confidence intervals
with the following values: eb = 0.354 (experimentally reveals that for a significance level of 0.05, temperature
determined); ks/kf = 40 and Pr = 0.72 (air). Then, Ka was measurements showed a maximum deviation of ±0.44C
evaluated from: Ka = GCpf dp/Pea. from the mean temperature, which is considered adequate for
temperature measurements made with type K thermocouples,
4.3 Packed bed time constant whose limit of measurement error is ±2.2C according to
ANSI (American National Standards Institute).
The packed bed time constant (s) can be decomposed into
two factors: one for the bed properties and the other for the 5.2 Thermal inertia and thermocouple fin effect
gas flow rate effect:
s0 A thermocouple radially placed into the bed through a
s¼ ð16Þ heating jacket behaves like a fin. It shows high temperature
G
at the base due to the contact with the heating jacket, which
where so ¼ ð1  eb Þqs Cps R2 =ðdp Cpf Þ: The constant so was
enables heat transfer across the thermocouple to its end.
evaluated by fitting the dynamic model to the experimental
Heat propagates by conduction from the base and dissi-
data under transient conditions, using the least squares criteria:
pates mainly by convection across the thermocouple. If the
X
m X 13 h i2 heat is not completely dissipated at the base, it can reach
U¼ Tijexp  Tijcalc ð17Þ the thermocouple end and affect the temperature (fin
i¼1 j¼1
effect). Both the fin effect and thermal inertia are inherent
where Tijcalc was obtained by numerical solution of the to any material device used to measure temperatures, such
dynamic model for time i and position j and Tijexp from as thermocouples and ring-shaped sensors, and they can
experimental data. affect measurements negatively.

Table 2 Quality of temperature measurements

Time (s) *TC0 (C) *TC4 (C) *TR1 (C) *TR5 (C)

3,600 23.37 ± 0.95 (22.96–23.77) 35.42 ± 0.74 (34.98–35.86) 67.61 ± 1.04 (67.17–68.06) 110.51 ± 0.78 (110.18–110.85)
6,650 23.60 ± 0.86 (23.23–23.97) 45.79 ± 0.59 (45.54–46.05) 82.86 ± 0.93 (82.46–83.25) 117.08 ± 0.91 (116.69–117.47)
12,600 24.95 ± 0.66 (24.74–25.15) 91.69 ± 0.76 (91.46–91.93) 122.63 ± 0.80 (122.38–122.87) 131.08 ± 0.93 (130.79–131.36)
16,500 23.99 ± 0.72 (23.78–24.21) 37.21 ± 0.73 (36.99–37.43) 71.27 ± 0.86 (71.01–71.53) 111.02 ± 0.83 (110.76–111.27)
* Results are presented as mean ± standard deviation (confidence interval)

123
1360 Heat Mass Transfer (2010) 46:1355–1365

While thermal inertia delays temperature measurement 160

and manifests itself only in transient conditions, the fin effect 140 Tw
TC8 58
may occur under both unsteady- and steady-state conditions 120
and is associated with heat conduction through the thermo- 100 TR1

T ( C)
couple. Thus, it can be as large as the temperature differ- 174 Re=290

o
80 290 290
ences between the base and the end of the thermocouple. 290
60
In turn, the thermal inertia of a temperature sensor can
be characterized by its time constant (sT). The temperature 40
To
measurement delay will be directly proportional to the 20
value of sT. Jorge et al. [24] modeled the ring-shaped 0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000
sensor used in this experiment under unsteady-state con-
time (s)
ditions and assessed the ring-shaped sensor time constants
experimentally. They verified that this device behaves as a Fig. 3 Temperature measurements of the ring-shaped sensor and
first order system with time constants varying from 19 to thermocouple on the bed top
40 s, depending on the operating conditions.
The packed bed also shows thermal inertia when sub- 160
mitted to temperature and flow disturbances, given by the 140
packed bed time constant (s). In the case of the distur- 120
bances shown in Fig. 2, s varied from 513 to 2,584 s, 100
depending on the type of disturbance applied. These values
T ( C)
80
are much higher than the ones of the ring-shaped sensor, o
60
indicating that the effect of the ring-shaped sensor thermal Re = 290
inertia on temperature measurements at the bed top may be 40
Re = 174
disregarded, since the ring-shaped sensor thermal response 20
Re = 58
is much faster than that of the bed. 0
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
The fin effect on the ring-shaped sensor can be disre-
r (cm)
garded as well, since the sensor ring support is made of
nylon and have low thermal conductivity. Besides, each of Fig. 4 Influence of Re on the fin effect of radially placed
the rings of the ring-shaped sensor behaves like a lumped thermocouples
parameter system, whose ring temperature is uniform and
represents the average angular temperature in that radial As reported by Mongkhonsi et al. [31], it was also
position [22]. observed that the fin effect tends to shift the symmetry
Thus, the comparison of the temperature measurements point of the temperature radial profile to where the ther-
of the ring-shaped sensor in the bed center (TR1) with that mocouple was inserted. The displacement tends to increase
of the radially inserted TC8 thermocouple under the same as the Reynolds number decreases.
disturbances, as shown in Fig. 2, indicates the magnitude As previously discussed, at the center (r = 0) the fin
of the influence of both the fin effect and the thermal effect can be disregarded, but from the insertion point
inertia on the quality of the thermocouple measurements (r = -3 cm) to near the center, this effect is expressive and
(TC0–TC8). The closer the temperatures TR1 and TC8, these measures must be dismissed in the model validation
the less significant this influence. As observed in Fig. 3, (Fig. 4). Nonetheless, the temperature measurements from
temperature profiles TR1 and TC8 are practically identical, r = 0 to r = ?3 cm were not affected by the fin effect and
which indicates that the temperatures measured by the properly represented the bed thermal behavior.
radially placed thermocouples, TC0–TC8, adequately rep-
resent the bed temperatures at their respective positions. 5.3 Static model
The thermocouple fin effect can only be assessed sepa-
rately from the thermocouple thermal inertia under steady- The solution of the static model (Eq. 11) is given as an
state conditions. Figure 4 shows the temperature profiles infinite series and the number of terms considered in the
for three airflow rates under steady-state conditions. The solution may affect the results. Thoméo and Freire [32]
measurements were taken with thermocouple TC6, which presented the analytical solution of a pseudo-homoge-
was radially inserted through the internal wall (position neous two-dimensional model without dispersion as an
r = -R) and moved at 1 cm intervals along the full infinite series. In almost all the experimental conditions,
internal diameter until the opposite wall was reached, they observed that 10 terms were sufficient and just one
r = R. condition needed 15 terms. However, they used 20 terms,

123
Heat Mass Transfer (2010) 46:1355–1365 1361

(a) 140 gradients increased with the decrease in the airflow and led
Axial profiles in steady-state regime - r/R = 0
120
to an increase in the bed temperature.
The quality of the static model, as well as of the adjusted
100 parameters, may be confirmed by inspecting Table 3. In all
Re= 58
80 conditions explored the sums of squared deviations (U)
T ( C)
o

174 presented the same order of magnitude and the root mean
60 290
square error, RMSE = [U/(n - p)]0.5, remained between
40 1.43 and 1.83C, showing a good fitting of the model to the
20 Experimental experimental data in all operating conditions explored.
Static model For nonlinear models, the best method for computing
0 the asymmetric confidence intervals is the Monte Carlo
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
z/L method [34]. This is also very tedious and is not part of the
scope of this work. A common approximation method to
(b)150 determine the nonlinear confidence intervals is to use
Radial profiles in steady-state regime - z / L = 1
asymptotic standard errors, but this may underestimate the
130 Re= 58 true confidence intervals [35, 36]. The asymptotic standard
pffiffiffiffiffi
errors (SE = vii ) were calculated from the elements (vii)
110
T ( C)

of the main diagonal of the parameter variance–covariance

o

90
174
290
70
50
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
r/R
Fig. 5 Steady-state temperatures and static model predictions
just for precaution. Moreira et al. [33], in their turn,
worked on the analytical solution of various pseudo-
homogeneous two-dimensional models with or without
axial dispersion, in the form of infinite series, and stated
that 10 terms are enough to ensure a good representation
of the model. In the present work, we also found that the
use of 10 terms in the series is sufficient to represent the
analytical solution of the static model. However, as there
was no computational limitation, we used 30 terms in all
simulations.
The temperatures predicted by the fitted static model
were very close to the experimental measures (Fig. 5a, b),
which indicates that the model is suitable for evaluating
Kr and hw. As expected, the radial and axial temperature
matrix, which was numerically evaluated. The asymptotic
confidence interval (CI) of a parameter hi can be calculated
Experimental
using the SE and t-distribution with n - p degrees of
Static model freedom for a confidence level (1 - 0.5a), where n is the
number of data and p is the number of parameters [35]:
0.8 1 - a/2 1 - a/2
[hi - (SE)tn1 - p , hi ? (SE)tn - p ]. Although asymptotic
CIs lack in theoretical reliability, they are computationally
expedient and conceptually appealing [34] and were adopted
in this work with a = 0.05.
According to Table 3, Per increased with increasing
Reynolds number and showed the lowest values of standard
deviations and confidence intervals, indicating that Per is
the parameter with lowest uncertainty. Unlike Per, the
influence of Re on Bi was not evident in the range of
experimental conditions explored and can be neglected
considering the presented confidence intervals. On the
other hand, Pea showed very discrepant values, with the
highest values of standard deviations and confidence
intervals, which means large uncertainty, suggesting that
this parameter has no physical meaning. As commented by
Paterson and Carberry [37] and Dixon et al. [6], although
an axial dispersion term is required to obtain good
estimates of Per and Bi, the pseudo-homogeneous two-
dimensional axially dispersed models predictions are rather

Table 3 Results of the static model fitting

Re *Bi *Per *Pea U (C2) RMSE (oC)

87 3.92 ± 0.61 (2.57 to 5.26) 2.25 ± 0.10 (2.48 to 2.02) 0.52 ± 0.30 (-0.16 to 1.20) 20.38 1.43
145 4.59 ± 0.66 (3.12 to 6.07) 3.53 ± 0.15 (3.87 to 3.18) 1.75 ± 2.71 (-4.31 to 7.81) 33.64 1.83
174 4.29 ± 0.55 (3.06 to 5.52) 3.86 ± 0.15 (4.19 to 3.53) 1.92 ± 3.88 (-6.72 to 10.57) 32.83 1.81
261 4.03 ± 0.41 (3.12 to 4.94) 4.53 ± 0.39 (5.40 to 3.67) 16.50 ± 19.03 (-25.93 to 58.93) 28.71 1.69
290 4.22 ± 0.45 (3.22 to 5.22) 4.74 ± 0.30 (5.40 to 4.08) 26.81 ± 17.36 (0.20 to 53.43) 30.75 1.75
* Results are presented as estimate ± standard deviation (confidence interval)

123
1362 Heat Mass Transfer (2010) 46:1355–1365

1.5 Table 4 Correlations for effective wall-bed heat transfer coefficients

New correlation in cylindrical packings

Equation 18 Correlation Reference

1
Kr (W/m C)

Experimental hw ¼ how þ 0:3262Re Yagui and Kunee [38]

o

Bauer and Schlunder hw ¼ how þ 0:2138Re De Wash and Froment [4]

DeWash and Froment hw ¼ 19:61Re0:33 þ 0:6974Re0:8 Beek [42]
0.5 Yagui and Kunii
hw ¼ 35:82Re0:365 Calderbank and Pogorski [43]

0 Table 5 Correlations for effective radial thermal conductivity in

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 cylindrical packings
Re
Correlation Reference
Fig. 6 Effective radial thermal conductivity versus Reynolds number
3
Kr ¼ Kro þ 2:629  10 Re Bauer and Schlunder [40]
Kr ¼ Kro þ 2:465  103 Re De Wash and Froment [4]
300 3
Kr ¼ Kro þ 2:272  10 Re Yagui and Kunii [38]
250 Kr ¼ Kro þ 3:635  103 Re New correlation—Eq. 29
Calderbank
hw (W/m C)

200 Beek
2o

Equation 19
150 Kr Kro
Yagui and Kunii ¼ þ ARePr ð20Þ
kf kf
100
Experimental hw dp how
50
DeWash and Froment ¼ þ BRePr ð21Þ
kf kf
0
50 100 150 200 250 300 350
These equations have two distinct components: dynamic
Re
contributions, associated with the product RePr, and static
contributions, independent from the airflow and given by
Fig. 7 Effective wall-bed heat transfer coefficient versus Reynolds how kf and Kro kf :
number Tables 4 and 5 present experimental hw and Kr correlations
for cylindrical ceramic packing, which were evaluated for the
insensitive to the value of Pea, leading to Pea estimates experimental conditions of this work: fluid = air, dp/dt =
with wide confidence intervals. Due to this fact Pea values 0.0627. The static contributions how and Kro were evaluated in
were not used to estimate Ka values, which are necessary in two different ways for these correlations:
the dynamic model simulations. • The wall-bed heat transfer coefficient with a stagnant
The Kr and hw values given by the static model fitting fluid (how ¼ 25:53 W/m2  C) was obtained from Yagui
indicate that both parameters show a linear increasing and Kuni’s results [38] for experiments with Celite
behavior with increasing Reynolds number (Figs. 6, 7), in cylinders (0.04 B dp/dt B 0.07). A constant value of 3
agreement with literature data [4, 20, 21]. The effect of for how dp kf in the dp/dt range was obtained;
Reynolds number on the radial parameters can be corre- • The effective thermal conductivities stagnation values
lated by linear fitting: (Kro ) were evaluated using Krupiczka’s equation [39]:
 n
Kr ¼ 0:4931 þ 0:002236Re ðR2 ¼ 0:97Þ ð18Þ Kro ks
¼ ð22Þ
kf kf
hw ¼ 69:85 þ 0:3094Re ðR2 ¼ 0:98Þ ð19Þ
where n is a constant related to the bed porosity (eb)
Both correlations were used in the dynamic model and conductivities of the solid (ks) and fluid (kf) phases of
simulations. the bed:

5.4 Comparison with published correlations n ¼ 0:28  0:757 logðeb Þ  0:057 logðks =kf Þ ð23Þ
In addition, constant A (Eq. 20) was estimated from
Both the effective wall-bed heat transfer coefficient (hw) Bauer and Schlunder’s correlation [40]:
and radial thermal conductivity (Kr) correlations are usu-
ally linear functions of the Reynolds number, according to eb
A ¼ 1:75dp ð24Þ
the expressions below: eb þ ep ð1  eb Þ

123
Heat Mass Transfer (2010) 46:1355–1365 1363

A new correlation for the effective radial conductivity, probably due to the methodology used by most researchers
Eq. 29, was proposed from the simplifications of the to experimentally determine them [44].
Kr(r) correlation for cylindrical particles, as proposed by Figures 6 and 7 compare the experimental values of
Winterberg and Tsotsas [41]: Kr and hw obtained here with those predicted by correla-
  tions in the literature. Both Kr and hw correlated well with
uc
Kr ðrÞ ¼ Kro ðrÞ þ K1 RePr f ðR  rÞkf ð25Þ Re by linear fitting (Eqs. 18, 19). Among the analyzed
uo
correlations, hw estimates (Fig. 7) varied much more than
where Kr (Fig. 6). Beek’s correlation best represented hw experi-
(
Rr
2 mental results, whereas Yagui and Kunii’s correlation
f ðR  rÞ ¼ for 0  R  r  K2 dp ;
K 2 dp ð26Þ tended to be close to the experimental values, but with a
1 for K2 dp \R  r  R certain gap.
  Among the analyzed models, the new correlation,
Re
K2 ¼ 0:4 þ 1:4 exp  ð27Þ Eq. 29, best represented the experimental values of Kr
230
(Fig. 6). All the other conventional models showed similar
K1 ¼ 0:16 ð28Þ behaviors, but with a substantial gap in relation to the
In this Kr(r) correlation, the first term corresponds to the experimental values.
static contribution, Kro ðrÞ, and the second one, to the dynamic
contribution. The Kr(r) behavior was separated in two 5.5 Dynamic model
different regions: a region close to the wall, K2dp \ r \ R,
where large Kr variations occur, and a central region that The dynamic model subjected to the disturbances given in
goes from r = 0 to r = K2dp, where Kr(r) is practically Fig. 2 fitted well the transient experimental data, Figs. 8
constant. and 9. These results show that both the dynamic model
Great velocity and porosity variations occur near the and the adopted methodology to determine the thermal
wall, thus causing significant Kr(r) and temperature varia- parameters are satisfactory.
tions. However, speed and porosity variations are small
in the bed central region, leading to practically constant 140
TR1 Experimental
Kr(r) values. Dynamic model
120
In conventional (pseudo-homogenous) single-phase TC7
models, such as the static and dynamic models used in this 100 TC4
work, plug flow is assumed and all thermal conductivity
T ( C)

80
o

variations close to the bed wall are added to the wall-bed TC3
60
heat transfer coefficient, whereas the effective thermal
40
conductivity of the bed, Kr, is assumed to be constant and TC0
represent the thermal resistance of the packed bed central 20
region. 0
It seems reasonable to admit that the Kr value of the 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000

single-phase model corresponds to the average value of time (s)

Kr(r) in the bed central region (K2dp \ r \ R). Thus, an Fig. 8 Axial temperatures and dynamic model predictions
estimate of the value of Kr was determined applying Eq. 25
to the central region of the bed and assuming for this 140
region:
120
TR5
• Kr(r) practically constant and equal to Kr;
100 TR4
• plug flow: uc =uo ¼ 1;
TR3
T ( C)

• Kro ðrÞ equal to Kro , evaluated at the average packed bed 80

TR2
o

central region temperature. 60

This resulted in the new correlation for Kr: 40

Kr ¼ Kro þ 0:16kf RePr ð29Þ 20 Experimental

Dynamic model
Despite the great number of past investigations, the 0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000
prediction power of the different approaches remains
time (s)
unsatisfactory. Deviations of up two orders of magnitude
in the predicted heat transfer coefficients are common [8], Fig. 9 Radial temperatures and dynamic model predictions

123
1364
The double orthogonal collocation method with seven
radial and seven axial collocation points was sufficient for
dynamic simulation, Figs. 8 and 9. Using orthogonal col-
location in finite elements was unnecessary, since steeper
axial disturbances were not observed, which was due to the
thermal inertia of the heating device used to produce the
inlet temperature disturbance.
It should be noted that the simulations in Figs. 8 and 9
were obtained using Eqs. 18 and 19. This explains why the
steady-state dynamic model predictions seem worse than
those of static model in Fig. 5, since the linear regressions
of Kr and hw incorporate some deviations, while in Fig. 5,
the profiles were individually fitted.
The examination of Figs. 8 and 9 show that the model
responds much faster than the experimental profiles to
disturbances of To, t = 1,709 s, especially immediately
after the disturbance. A possible explanation is the effect of
the calming section thermal inertia, Fig. 1, which is not
contemplated by Danckwertz boundary conditions for
z = 0 (Eq. 2), as used in the dynamic model. This effect
damps the thermal section inlet temperature disturbance.
To account for this effect, the model must include the
calming section in the domain, replacing Danckwerts’
boundary condition at the thermal section inlet (z = 0). As
a simpler solution, the disturbance at To must be replaced
by the value measured at the interface between the two
sections (TC0). Another possibility is to model and simu-
late the heated and unheated sections simultaneously.
6 Conclusions
The pseudo-homogeneous dynamic model has been
successfully used to describe the nonadiabatic fixed-bed
thermal response. Appropriate parameters were obtained in
a two-step procedure: the effective radial conductivity and
wall heat transfer coefficient were estimated from steady-
state data, whereas the packed-bed time constant was given
by transient data analysis.
The double orthogonal collocation method with seven
radial and seven axial collocation points was sufficient for
the dynamic simulation of packed bed heat transfer.
The Danckwerts’ axial boundary conditions used seem
more adequate to simulate the packed bed responses to wall
temperature and gas flow rate disturbances than the inlet air
temperature ones. To overcome this limitation, it is sug-
gested to use the temperature profile measured at the heated
section inlet as the boundary condition or to model and
simulate the heated and unheated sections simultaneously.
In the experimental conditions, neither thermal inertia
nor heat conduction across the thermocouple significantly
influenced the quality of bed temperature measurements.
123
Heat Mass Transfer (2010) 46:1355–1365
The experimental Kr and hw values increased linearly
with increasing Reynolds number. Among the tested cor-
relations, Beek’s correlation [42] best predicted the values
of hw, while Kr experimental values were best predicted by
the new correlation: Kr ¼ Kro þ 0:16Kf RePr.
Acknowledgments The authors gratefully acknowledge financial
support from CAPES—Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal
de Nı́vel Superior (Brası́lia, Brazil) and FAPESP—Fundação de
Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (São Paulo, Brazil).
References
1. Kotanjac ZS, Van Sint Annaland M, Kuipers JAM (2009)
A packed bed membrane reactor for the oxidative dehydrogena-
tion of propane on a Ga2O3/MoO3 based catalyst. Chem Eng Sci
65(1):114–119
2. Rady MA (2009) Experimental and numerical investigations on
the performance of dehumidifying desiccant beds composed of
silica-gel and thermal energy storage particles. Heat Mass Transf
45:545–561
3. Gnesdilov NN, Dobrego KV, Kozlov IM (2007) Parametric study
of recuperative VOC oxidation reactor with porous media. Int J
Heat Mass Transf 50:2787–2794
4. DeWasch AP, Froment GF (1972) Heat transfer in packed beds.
Chem Eng Sci 27:567–576
5. Gunn DJ, Khalid M (1975) Thermal dispersion and wall heat
transfer in packed beds. Chem Eng Sci 30:261–267
6. Dixon AG, Paterson WR, Cresswell DL (1978) Heat transfer in
packed beds of low tube/particle diameter ratio. ACS Symp Ser
65:238–253
7. Thoméo JC, Freire JT (2000) Heat transfer in fixed bed: a model
non-linearity approach. Chem Eng Sci 55:2329–2338
8. Bauer M, Adler R (2003) Novel method for investigation and
evaluation of heat transfer in fixed bed tubular reactors with gas
flow. Heat Mass Transf 39:421–427
9. Wen D, Ding Y (2006) Heat transfer of gas flow through a packed
bed. Chem Eng Sci 61:3532–3542
10. Polesek-Karczewska S (2003) Effective thermal conductivity of
packed beds of spheres in transient heat transfer. Heat Mass
Transf 39:375–380
11. Dixon AG, Cresswell DL (1986) Effective heat transfer param-
eters for transient packed-bed models. AIChE J 32(5):809–819
12. Vortmeyer D, Schaefer RJ (1974) Equivalence of one- and two-
phase models for heat transfer processes in packed beds: one
dimensional theory. Chem Eng Sci 29:485–491
13. Danckwerts PV (1953) Continuous flow systems. Distribution of
residence times. Chem Eng Sci 2:1–13
14. Wehner JF, Wilhelm RH (1956) Boundary conditions of flow
reactor. Chem Eng Sci 6:89–93
15. Pearson JRA (1959) A note on the ‘‘Danckwerts’’ boundary
conditions for continuous flow reactors. Chem Eng Sci 10:
281–284
16. Bischoff KB (1961) A note on boundary conditions for flow
reactors. Chem Eng Sci 16:131–133
17. Van Cauwenberghe AR (1966) Further note on Danckwerts’
boundary conditions for flow reactors. Chem Eng Sci 21:203–205
18. Michelsen ML (1994) The axial dispersion model and orthogonal
collocation. Chem Eng Sci 49(21):3675–3676
19. Clement K, Jorgensen SB (1983) Experimental investigation of
axial and radial thermal dispersion in a packed bed. Chem Eng
Sci 38(6):835–842
Heat Mass Transfer (2010) 46:1355–1365
20. Giudici R (1990) Modelagem de reator de oxidação de etileno:
estudo de parâmetros térmicos e estratégia de diluição de cata-
lisador. DSc thesis, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
21. Jorge LMM (1992) Transferência de calor em reator catalı́tico de
leito fixo. MSc dissertation, Universidade de São Paulo, São
Paulo, Brazil
22. Giudici R, Nascimento CAO (1994) Analysis of a ring-shaped
sensor for use in packed-bed heat transfer studies. Can J Chem
Eng 72:43–49
23. Jorge LMM (1998) Estudo experimental e modelagem matemá-
tica de reator catalı́tico de leito fixo: transferência de calor em
sistemas sem e com reação de reforma a vapor de metano. DSc
thesis, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
24. Jorge LMM, Oliveira GP, Jorge RMM, Giudici R (2003) Time
constants determination and analysis for a ring-shaped tempera-
ture sensor in fixed bed. Acta Sientiarum Technol 25(1):9–15
25. Finlayson BA (1980) Nonlinear analysis in chemical engineering.
McGraw-Hill, NewYork
26. Kahaner D, Moler C, Nash S (1989) Numerical methods and
software. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey
27. Ogunnaike BA, Ray WH (1994) Process dynamics modeling and
control. Oxford University Press, New York
28. Marquardt DW (1963) An algorithm for least squares estimation
of non linear parameters. J Soc Ind Appl Math 11(2):431–441
29. Dixon AG, Cresswell DL (1979) Theoretical prediction of
effective heat transfer parameters in packed beds. AIChE J
25(4):663–676
30. Edwards MF, Richardson JF (1968) Gas dispersion in packed
beds. Chem Eng Sci 23:109–123
31. Mongkhonsi T, López-Isunza HF, Kershenbaum LS (1992) The
distortion of measured temperature profiles in fixed-bed reactors.
Chem Eng Res Des 70:255–264
32. Thoméo JC, Freire JT (2000) Heat transfer in fixed bed: a model
non-linearity approach. Chem Eng Sci 55:2329–2338
View publication stats
1365
33. Moreira MFP, Ferreira MC, Freire JT (2006) Evaluation of
pseudohomogeneous models for heat transfer in packed beds with
gas flow and gas-liquid cocurrent downflow and upflow. Chem
Eng Sci 61:2056–2068
34. Dolan KD, Yang L, Trampel CP (2007) Nonlinear regression
technique to estimate kinetic parameters and confidence intervals
in unsteady-state conduction-heated foods. J Food Eng 80:581–
593
35. VanBoekel MAJS (1996) Statistical aspects of kinetic modeling
for food science problems. J Food Sci 61(3):477–486
36. Johnson ML, Faunt LM (1992) Parameter estimation by least
squares methods. Methods Enzymol 210:1–37
37. Paterson WR, Carberry JJ (1983) Fixed bed catalytic reactor
modelling. Chem Eng Sci 38(1):175–180
38. Wakao N, Kaguei S (1982) Heat and mass transfer in packed
beds. Gordon and Breach Science Publishers Inc., New York
39. Krupiczka R (1967) Analysis of thermal conductivity in granular
materials. Int J Chem Eng 7:122–144
40. Smirnov EI, Muzykantov AV, Kuzmin VA, Kronberg AE,
Zolotarskii IA (2003) Radial heat transfer in packed beds of
spheres, cylinders and Rashig rings. Verification of model with a
linear variation of ker in the vicinity of the wall. Chem Eng J
91:243–248
41. Winterberg M, Tsotsas E (2000) Correlations for effective heat
transport coefficients in beds packed with cylindrical particles.
Chem Eng Sci 55:5937–5943
42. Beek J (1962) Design of packed catalytic reactors. Adv Chem
Eng 3:229–303
43. Calderbank PH, Pogorski LA (1957) Heat transfer in packed
beds. Trans Inst Chem Eng 35:195–207
44. Ziólkowski D, Legawiec B (1987) Remarks upon thermokinetic
parameters of the one- and two-dimensional mathematical mod-
els of heat transfer in a tubular flow apparatus with a packed bed.
Chem Eng Process 21:65–76
123