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

net/publication/239246613

Application of Computational Fluid Dynamics for Simulation of Drying

Processes: A Review

Article in Drying Technology · March 2010

DOI: 10.1080/07373930903517458

CITATIONS READS
119 1,868

2 authors:

Tarek J. Jamaleddine Madhumita B Ray

The University of Western Ontario The University of Western Ontario
12 PUBLICATIONS 230 CITATIONS 142 PUBLICATIONS 4,577 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Madhumita B Ray on 28 April 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Drying Technology, 28: 120–154, 2010
Copyright # 2010 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 0737-3937 print=1532-2300 online
DOI: 10.1080/07373930903517458
Application of Computational Fluid Dynamics for Simulation
of Drying Processes: A Review
Tarek Jamaleddine and Madhumita B. Ray
Department of Chemical and Biochemical Engineering, The University of Western Ontario,
London, Ontario, Canada
In recent years, computational fluid dynamics (CFD) has been
used increasingly to improve process design capabilities in many
industrial applications, including industrial drying processes. Drying
of food and beverage products, industrial and municipal wastewater
sludge, and other manufacturing and environmental products is done
regularly in order to enhance the quality and life span of these pro-
ducts and to facilitate their use, storage, and transportation. With
recent advancements in mathematical techniques and computer
hardware, CFD has been found to be successful in predicting the
drying phenomenon in various types of industrial dryers, which uti-
lize all forms of drying operations including spray, freeze, and ther-
mal drying techniques. The CFD solutions are being used to
optimize and develop equipment and processing strategies in the dry-
ing industry, replacing expensive and time-consuming experimenta-
tions. However, a comprehensive review on the application of CFD
for the design, study, and evaluation of industrial dryers is not yet
available. A comprehensive review of the current literature on the
use of CFD models in both industrial and lab-scale drying applica-
tions is presented in this article. The use of Eulerian-Eulerian and
Eulerian-Lagrangian models in the study of the drying kinetics for
gas–solid multiphase flow systems is fully discussed. Merits and
disadvantages of using various CFD models in the design of indus-
trial dryers are illustrated and the scope of their applicability is also
discussed.
Keywords CFD models; Dryers; Eulerian-Eulerian; Eulerian-
Lagrangian; Granular temperature; Hydrodynamics
INTRODUCTION
With the advance in technology and the high demands
for large quantities of various industrial products, innova-
tive drying technologies and sophisticated drying equip-
ment emerged and remain to be in a developmental stage
due to the ever increasing presence of new feedstock and
wetted industrial products. During the past few decades,
considerable efforts have been made to understand some
of the chemical and physical changes that occur during
the drying operation and to develop new methods for pre-
venting undesirable quality losses. It is estimated that
Correspondence: Madhumita B. Ray, Department of Chemi-
cal and Biochemical Engineering, The University of Western
Ontario, Thomas Engineering Building, Room 477, London,
Ontario N6A 5B9, Canada; E-mail: mray@eng.uwo.ca
120
nearly 250 U.S. patents and 80 European patents related
to drying are issued each year.[1] Currently, the method
of drying does not end at the food processing industry
but extends to a broad range of applications in the chemi-
cal, biochemical, pharmaceutical, and agricultural sectors.
The drying of various materials at different conditions
in a wide variety of industrial and technological applica-
tions is a necessary step either to obtain products that serve
our daily needs or to facilitate and enhance some of the
chemical reactions conducted in many engineering pro-
cesses or make them environmentally safe. Drying pro-
cesses consume large amounts of energy and any
improvement in existing dryer design and reduction in cost
will be immensely beneficial for the industry. A summary of
cost associated with the drying of various food products in
France is presented by Bimbenet et al.[2]
Drying is inherently a cross- and multidisciplinary area
because it requires optimal fusion of transport phenomena
and materials science because the objective of drying is not
only to supply heat and remove moisture from the material
but to produce a dehydrated product of specific quality.[1]
There are two main modes of drying used in the heat dry-
ing or pelletization processes; namely, direct and indirect
modes. Each mode of drying has its merits and disadvan-
tages and the choice of dryer design and drying method
varies according to the nature of the material to be
handled, the final form of the product, and the operating
and capital cost of the drying process.
DRYER CLASSIFICATION
The two main types of dryers, direct and indirect, are
classified according to the method of heat delivery to the
material being dried. As its name implies, in direct dryers,
the feed material is brought into direct contact with the
heated air stream as it travels to the exit of the dryer.
Examples of some of the direct thermal drying systems
most commonly used in the industry are flash, rotary, belt,
fluidized bed, spouted bed, spray, tray, impinging jet, and
pulse combustion dryers (Table 1). A brief description of
these dryers is provided below, and a comprehensive review
is provided in Mujumdar.[1]
 A REVIEW: APPLICATION OF COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS 121

TABLE 1
Direct drying systems
Flash (Pneumatic= (1) Inlet temperature range: 200–1400
F Agricultural products, fish products, dairy
Convective) (100–650
C) products, starch, flour, proteins, distillery
(2) High thermal efficiency waste
(3) Ability to handle continuous operation
Rotary (1) Inlet temperature range: 750–950
F Powders, cakes, granules, flakes, pastes, gels,
(399–510
C) slurries
(2) Ability to handle continuous operation
Belt (1) Ability to handle wet material with surface Granular, fibrous, preformed, extruded wet
and bound moisture materials
(2) Characterized by uniform gentle drying
(3) Low power demand
(4) High thermal efficiency
Fluidized Bed (1) High thermal efficiency Chemicals, carbohydrates, sludge, beverage
products, ceramics, pharmaceuticals,
healthcare
Spouted Bed (1) Controlled residence time Coarse products (grain), pastes, slurries,
(2) Good mixing heat-sensitive solids, coating operations,
(3) Minimum attrition granular agglomeration operations
Spray (1) Can handle heat-sensitive, non-sensitive, Agrochemical, biotechnology products, fine
and heat-resistance fluids and heavy chemicals, dairy products,
(2) Produce dry material of controllable dyestuffs, mineral concentrates to
particle size, shape, form, and moisture pharmaceuticals, whey, coffee, tea, yeast
content
(3) Can handle the drying process without the
risk of explosion or fire
(4) High installation Cost
(5) Low thermal efficiency
Impinging Jet (1) Complex fabrication and high air-handling Materials in the form of continuous sheets
costs (tissue paper, photographic film, coated
(2) Not recommended for heat-sensitive paper, textiles), large thin sheets (lumber,
material veneer, carpets), coarse granules (cat or
(3) Recommended for removal of unbound dog foods)
moisture
Pulse Combustion (1) Ability to increase productivity Chemical and Pharmaceutical products,
(2) Ability to reduce pollutant emissions food, polymers, granular material
(3) Significant fuel savings

In flash dryers (also known as pneumatic dryers or con-
vective dryers), the removal of free moisture from the solid
particles is accomplished. Drying takes place in a matter of
seconds, with wet material being dispersed into a stream of
heated gas (usually air), which conveys it through a drying
duct. Many of the largest dryers in the world are flash
dryers. Rotary dryers have been used to dry products in
many industries including food, chemical, mineral, and
polymer. A broad range of feed materials including pow-
ders, cakes, granules, flakes, pastes, gels, and slurries can
be processed. For slurries, pastes, or sticky materials,
back-mixing of the wet feed with a portion of dry product
to produce a suitable conditioned material is usually
performed. In belt dryers, hot air is passed through the
moving porous bed of the wet material. The moisture is
transferred from the wet particles to the hot air. The
material becomes progressively dry as it traverses along
the length of the belt dryer. Belt dryers are suitable for
granular, fibrous, preformed, and extruded wet materials.
They can handle wet material with both surface and bound
moisture. They are characterized by uniform gentle drying
ability with low power demand and high energy efficiency.
The fluidized bed dryer, also a direct dryer, is designed
to dry products as they float on a cushion of air or gas.
Particles with high initial moisture content require a higher
minimum fluidization velocity than a similar bed of dry
122 JAMALEDDINE AND RAY
particles. Due to cohesive forces exerted by wetted surfaces,
only the top layer of the bed of solids is a fluidized bed. The
bottom layers may remain stationary during the initial
stage of drying when the solids are quite wet.[3] Another
direct dryer is the spouted bed dryer (SBD), widely applied
for drying of granular products that are too coarse to be
readily fluidized (e.g., grains). Due to the short residence
time in the spout, SBDs can be used to dry heat-sensitive
solids, such as foods, pharmaceuticals, and plastics, as well
for both constant and falling rate drying periods. Using
inert solids as the bed materials, SBDs have been used suc-
cessfully to dry pastes, slurries, and heat-sensitive materi-
als.[4] Spray drying is characterized by a suspended
particle processing (SPP) technique that utilizes liquid
atomization to create droplets that are dried to individual
particles when moved in a hot gaseous drying medium,
usually air. It is a one-step continuous unit processing
operation. It has become one of the most important meth-
ods for drying fluid food in the chemical industry for its
versatility, safety, and controlled operation. Impinging jet
dryers of various configurations are commonly used in
numerous industrial drying operations involving rapid dry-
ing of materials in the form of continuous sheets (e.g.,
tissue paper, photographic film, coated paper, and textiles)
or relatively large thin sheets (e.g., veneer, lumber, and car-
pets) or even beds of coarse granules (e.g., cat or dog food).
Because of their complex fabrication and high air-handling
costs (due to the high nozzle pressure drop and high recycle
ratio needed to achieve reasonable thermal efficiencies),
impingement dryers are recommended only (or primarily)
to remove unbound moisture.[5] In the pulse combustion
dryer, combustion and heat release processes vary period-
ically in time. Such periodic combustion of a liquid or gas-
eous fuel creates pressure, velocity, and, to a certain extent,
temperature waves. These waves affect the momentum and
heat and mass transfer rates, which finally result in
enhanced rates of such processes as liquid dispersion or
moisture evaporation.[6]
In indirect dryers, the wet feed is dried by means of con-
ductive heat transfer from direct contact with a hot surface.
Examples of some industrial dryers that follow this method
of drying are the paddle, tray, hollow-flight, multiple-effect
evaporation, and disc dryers. These dryers (except the tray
dryer) have a common geometry characterized by a rotat-
ing agitator in the center of a stationary horizontal vessel.
The outer shell of the dryer is a jacketed shell with a heat
transfer medium (typically steam) passing through it to
conduct heat. The wet material is either pumped or con-
veyed into the vessel. The centrifugal action of a high-
speed rotor=paddle assembly delumps and conveys the
product material from the inlet to the exit of the dryer
where it is discharged tangentially as a dispersed curtain
of free-flowing solids. The main advantage of these systems
lies in the absence of oxygen in the drying chamber. This
characteristic eliminates the chance of combustion within
the system. The isolated system also allows for essentially
no emissions. The moisture removed from the wet material
is collected as steam and removed from the dryer using a
blower. Indirect dryers are suitable for processing an entire
range of feed except liquids. These dryers are also charac-
terized by high heat transfer coefficients resulting in high
evaporation capacity with the possibility of controlling
the drying rate if partial drying is desired.
It is apparent that many different types of dryer design
and modes of drying make it difficult designing these
units. Despite the industrial importance of the drying
processes, their operation is still mostly based on empirical
rules and experimental techniques. Typically, a full-scale
design and optimization is necessary but not always feas-
ible. An alternative theoretical approach for predicting the
behavior of a drying system on a small-scale model can be
beneficial.
A widely acceptable and emerging technique for numeri-
cal simulations of such systems is computational fluid
dynamics (CFD). It has been proven as an effective compu-
tational tool for predicting the flow behavior and mass
transfer phenomena occurring in multicomponent systems
with one or more phases. In a recent paper by Mujumdar
and Wu,[7] the authors emphasized the need for
cost-effective solutions that can push innovation and crea-
tivity in drying equipments and showed that a CFD
approach can be one of these solutions. The collective
effort of their research work along with other researchers
in the drying industry using mathematical modeling for
the simulation of the drying mechanism in commercial
dryers demonstrated the CFD capabilities and usefulness
for the design and understanding of drying equipment.
Some of the early works on using CFD in dryer design will
be discussed in later sections.[8–26]
In the following section, a brief introduction to CFD is
provided. Different numerical methods such as the finite
element, finite difference, and finite volume along with their
advantages and disadvantages are discussed. The Eulerian-
Eulerian and Eulerian-Lagrangian formulations are fully
discussed along with their merits and shortcomings.
COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS
The CFD techniques used to study and solve complex
engineering applications includes fluid flow and heat and
mass transfer problems. Norton and Sun[27] showed that
in the food industry alone, the trend of using CFD models
to optimize and develop equipment and processing strate-
gies has grown exponentially in recent years (Fig. 1). In
their review paper on the application of CFD in the food
processing industries, Xia and Sun[28] discussed CFD in
drying, sterilization, refrigeration, and mixing. Merits of
using CFD and available commercial CFD packages were
 A REVIEW: APPLICATION OF COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS
FIG. 1. Published peer-reviewed papers with CFD applications in the
food industry.
discussed in detail. Future trends of using CFD
applications were also outlined.
Furthermore, Lee, Sheng-Yi (Fluent Inc.) and Grace,
W.R. and Company Columbia (Maryland; Computational
Fluid Dynamics Helps Solve Web Stability Problem in
Industrial Dryer, Fluent News, 1999)[29] studied the web
stability problem in an air flotation dryer using CFD mod-
els to analyze the air flow and determine the effect of differ-
ent nozzle configurations on the flow pattern. Fluent Inc.
(Flow Modeling for the Food and Beverage Industry,
Fluent News, 2000)[30] discussed the importance and recent
advances in using CFD models for the food refrigeration,
dies and extrusions, HVAC and clean rooms, storage and
packaging, pouring and filling, baking, cooking and frying,
coating, dipping and enrobing, blending and mixing,
pasteurization and sterilization, aseptic processing and
packaging, etc. In another article, Massah and Oshinowo
of Fluent Inc. (Advanced Gas-Solid Multiphase Flow
Models offer Significant Process Improvements, Fluent
News, 2000)[30] discussed the major advancements in the
use of CFD models for the gas–solid multiphase flow, in
particular, those related to fluidized bed, risers, dilute
pneumatic transport lines, and flow through a hopper
and precipitators. They concluded that recent advances in
modeling methods have dramatically improved process
design capabilities involving gas–solid interaction for a
wide range of industrial applications.
The preceding discussion indicates that CFD is poten-
tially a powerful tool for dryer design, allowing better
handling and understanding of the design process in com-
parison to experimentation. However, due to the complex
phenomena in drying processes, the application of CFD
123
encounters many difficulties, especially when gas turbu-
lence is present. A reliable model can only be possible when
correct boundary and initial conditions are implemented
along with a meaningful description of the physical prob-
lem. Thus, the development of a CFD model should
involve an accurate and physical definition of the variables
to be determined; choice of the mathematical equations
and numerical methods, boundary and initial conditions;
and applicable empirical correlations.
In order to simulate the physical processes occurring in
the drying chamber, Navier-Stokes equations are solved
numerically in an iterative scheme due to the coupling
between the velocity and pressure fields. Additional trans-
port equations are considered for turbulence, and in the
case of granular flow, solid settling and granular tem-
perature equations are also considered. With this set of
equations, the system can be described in two- and three-
dimensional forms conforming to the actual physical shape
of the system. However, these techniques encounter long
computation times and divergence problems. For this
reason, the computational model is often simplified by redu-
cing the dimensionality and difficulty of the model. If the
model shows some symmetry as in the case of a circular
geometry, it can be modeled along the plane of symmetry.
Several mathematical formulations are used for the
representation of the governing equations. Some of the
well-known and widely used models are the Eulerian-
Eulerian or two-fluid models (interpenetrating continuum)
and Eulerian-Lagrangian or the discrete particle models. In
order to cast these formulations in a programmable form
compatible with a machine language, the computational
domain is divided into cells (mesh) over which the mass
balances are calculated. This discretization step is accom-
plished by the application of either one of the following
discretization methods: finite element, finite difference, or
finite volume. The linearized algebraic equations are then
solved for each grid or cell in the computational domain
using available linear equation solvers such as Gauss-Seidel
or Gaussian elimination methods.
It is a common practice to check and test the quality of
the mesh in the model simply because it has a pronounced
influence on the accuracy of the numerical simulation and
the time taken by a model to achieve convergence. Ulti-
mately, seeking an optimum mesh that enhances the
convergence criteria and reduces time and computational
effort is recommended. In practice, and for most compu-
tational applications, local residual errors between con-
secutive iterations for the dependent variables are
investigated. In the case of high residual values, it is then
recommended to modify the model input or refine the
mesh properties to minimize these errors in order to attain
a converged solution for the numerical simulation.
A decision on whether the Eulerian-Eulerian or
Eulerian-Lagrangian formulation of the governing
124 JAMALEDDINE AND RAY
equations is to be used should be made prior to the numeri-
cal solution, simply because each formulation has its
limitations and constraints. Numerical predictions
obtained from each formulation are not identical, and the
choice of a convenient formulation for a specific model
relies on whether a dense or dilute system is being con-
sidered and the objectives of the numerical study. For
instance, in the case of a dense system, the Eulerian-
Lagrangian formulation appears more convenient if the
trajectories of the particles are to be tracked. However, this
approach is computationally expensive and time consum-
ing and requires powerful and high-speed computers. On
the contrary, a Eulerian-Eulerian formulation can handle
both dense and dilute systems; however, it cannot predict
the local behavior of particles in the flow field. But before
we turn our attention to the merits and shortcomings of
each approach and to the extent of their applicability, it
is worth to give a brief definition for each and to explain
the way physical systems are being described with these
formulations.
Eulerian-Lagrangian Formulation for Granular Flow
The theory behind the Eulerian approach is based on the
macroscopic balance equations of mass, momentum, and
energy for both phases. Eulerian models treat the particle
and the gas phase as two interpenetrating continuous
media[31] and assume that both phases are occupying every
point of the computational domain. The gas phase is called
the primary or continuous phase and the solid phase is
called the granular or dispersed phase. Both phases are
represented by their volume fractions and are linked
through the drag force in the momentum equation as given
by Wen and Yu’s[32] correlation for a dilute system,
Ergun’s[33] correlation for a dense system, and Gidaspow
et al.,[34] which is a combination of both correlations for
fluctuating systems. An averaging technique for the field
variables such as the gas and solid velocities, solid volume
fraction, and solid granular temperature is adopted. The
kinetic theory for granular flow (KTGF; discussed later)
is used to derive constitutive relations based on empirical
information to describe the interparticle interaction and
to close the set of conservation equations (see Appendix).
On the other hand, Lagrangian models, or discrete par-
ticle models, are derived by applying Newton’s law of
motion for the particulate phase. This approach leads to
the ability of computing the trajectory (path) and motion
of individual particles. The interactions between the parti-
cles are described by either a potential force (soft particle
dynamics)[35] or by collision dynamics (hard particle
dynamics).[36] In this approach, the fluid phase is treated
separately by solving a set of time-averaged Navier-Stokes
equations, whereas the dispersed phase is solved by track-
ing a large number of particles, bubbles, or droplets
through the calculated flow field. By computing the
temporal development of a sufficiently large sample of
particles, ensemble average quantities describing system
performance can be evaluated.
Furthermore, using the Lagrangian approach, the dis-
persed phase can exchange mass, momentum, and energy
with the fluid phase through a source term added to the
conservation equations. These equations also account for
the changes in volume fraction of each phase. As each indi-
vidual particle moves through the flow field, its trajectory,
mass, and heat transfer calculations are obtained from a
force balance along with an updated local conditions of
the continuous phase. Thus, external forces acting on the
solid particle such as aerodynamic, gravitational, buoy-
ancy, and contact due to collisions between the particles
themselves and between the particles and the pipe wall
can be calculated simultaneously with the particle motion
using local parameters of gas and solids.
Although the form of the Eulerian momentum equation
can be derived from its Lagrangian equivalent by averaging
over the particle phase, each model has its advantages and
disadvantages depending on the objective of the study and
the type of system used. With this and the above definitions
in mind, we now turn our attention to discuss the merits
and shortcomings of each formulation.
Merits and Shortcomings of Each Approach
Some of the advantages and disadvantages of the
Eulerian and Lagrangian formulations are discussed in this
section. Examples of their use for actual physical systems
are also provided to facilitate and enhance our understand-
ing of the subject and to direct the reader to the appropri-
ate formulation for the problem at hand.
For modeling spray dryers, coal and liquid fuel combus-
tion, and particle-laden flows, the Lagrangian description
of the governing equations is more suitable because these
systems are considered dilute; that is, they are characterized
by low concentration of particles with solid volume frac-
tion on the order of 102 or less. This characteristic of par-
ticles density allows the tracking of particles trajectories
(computed by applying Newton’s second law of motion
to each particle) at different locations in the computational
domain because computational effort can be handled with
the available computing hardware. This is the main distinc-
tive advantage of this technique over the Eulerian formu-
lation. This in turn provides the opportunity to evaluate
interactions between particles, fluids, and boundaries at
the microscopic level using local flow parameters and gas
properties, which is difficult to achieve using a continuum
or steady-state model. The total number of particles is trac-
table from a computational point of view and modeling
particle–particle and particle–wall interactions can be
achieved with a great success. These models can apply
any interparticle forces (cohesive or van der Waals, electro-
static, and capillary) and, in principle, any particle shape
 A REVIEW: APPLICATION OF COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS
and size. Finally, Lagrangian models are less prone to
numerical diffusion errors, more stable for flows with large
particle velocity gradients, and readily applied to polydis-
persed particle systems.[37] Therefore, Lagrangian models
are suited to study the phenomena of segregation, fragmen-
tation, or agglomeration.[38]
Some of the drawbacks of the Lagrangian approach are
the large memory requirements and long computation time
taken by the iterative process to converge. In addition,
Lagrangian models are only applicable to small size sys-
tems as in the case of dilute systems; thus, in concentrated
systems with significant particle–fluid and particle–particle
interaction, model formulations are inadequate due to a
lack of fundamental understanding of the interaction and
the reliance on empirical information. Finally, Lagrangian
models do not seem to be applicable in systems where
lubrication forces (shear and pressure forces exerted on
the fluid–particle surface due to viscous shearing of fluid
layers with each other) are considered.
On the other hand, the Eulerian approach is more
appropriate for modeling particle suspension, circulating
fluidized beds, risers, and bubble columns. Therefore, it
enables the computation of dense phase systems and is
regarded as the only feasible approach for performing
parametric investigation and scale-up design studies of
these systems. In principle, the Eulerian description is
favored by a high concentration of the particle phase.
Through rigorous definitions of the averaging procedures,
it offers a formal methodology for developing numerical
methods dealing with direct and indirect particle interac-
tion and fluid turbulence.[37]
One of the shortcomings of the Eulerian models is the
assumption of monosized particles. Another shortcoming
is the average technique used by the Eulerian models to
represent field variables such as particle volume fraction,
momentum, rotation, and orientation. Hence, details of
the individual collisions are averaged and removed from
the field equations. The most commonly adopted Eulerian
models have problems close to the wall region where parti-
cles change directions due to interaction with the wall
materials. An example of a limitation of Eulerian model
in comparison to the Lagrangian model is in the descrip-
tion of erosion pattern provided by Johansen and Laux.[38]
In conclusion, both models inherit deficiencies due to
insufficient understanding of the complex particle–particle
and particle–fluid interactions that develop in turbulent
flow and the mathematical complexities of representing
these phenomena even as averages. However, the useful-
ness of both approaches for the design and optimization
of various units such as dryers, chemical reactors, and flui-
dized beds cannot be denied.
In the next section, commonly used discretization meth-
ods for transforming the Eulerian and Lagrangian formu-
lations of the governing equations (ordinary and partial
125
differential equations or ODE and PDE) into algebraic
equations that can be easily handled by linear equation
solvers are discussed. The objective is to orient the readers
to their extent of applicability and difficulty level.
Discretization Methods
It was previously mentioned that the governing equa-
tions used to represent multiphase flow systems need to
be shaped in a form compatible with numerical algorithms
if these equations are to be solved numerically. Note that
the nature of the governing equations is either nonlinear
ODE or PDE depending on the formulation used and the
assumptions implemented for their formulation. Because
no direct methods are available for solving these types of
equations, an alternative (approximate solutions) would
be to transform them into simpler forms that are less math-
ematically and numerically complex. This can be achieved
using one of the commonly used discretization techniques:
finite difference, finite volume, and finite element.
A finite difference discretization (FDD) is based upon
the differential form of the PDE to be solved. Each deriva-
tive is replaced with an approximate difference formula
(backward, central, and forward difference) that can gener-
ally be derived from a Taylor series expansion. The compu-
tational domain is usually divided into hexahedral cells
(grid), and the solution is then obtained at each nodal
point. The FDD is easier to understand when the physical
grid is Cartesian, but through the use of curvilinear trans-
forms, the method can be extended to domains that are not
easily represented by brick-shaped elements. The discreti-
zation technique results in a system of equations for the
solution variables at nodal points.[39]
A finite volume discretization (FVD) is based upon
dividing the computational domain into small geometrical
volumes or cells that numerically define the region of inter-
est. The integral form of the conservation equations of
mass, momentum, and energy are solved for each control
volume in addition to constitutive equations describing tur-
bulence, chemical reactions, transport of particles, and
radiation. Consequently, the quality of the solution in the
computational domain depends to a large extent on the
size, shape, and placement of the control volumes. Other
factors that are equally important and also contribute to
the quality of the solution are the boundary conditions at
the inlet and outlet of the domain as well as the wall
boundary conditions.[40]
Finally, a finite element discretization (FED) is based
upon a piecewise representation of the solution in terms
of specified basis functions. The FED uses a more general
approach than the FDD and FVD, both of which are types
of the FED. Its generality makes it suitable to be used for
complex domains and geometrically challenging problem.
With the FED technique, the computational domain is
divided into smaller domains (thus finite elements) and
126 JAMALEDDINE AND RAY
the solution in each element is constructed from the basis
functions. The actual equations that are solved are typi-
cally obtained by restating the conservation equations in
weak form: the field variables are written in terms of the
basis functions and the equation is multiplied by appropri-
ate test functions and then integrated over an element. A
system of equations is obtained (usually for nodal values)
that must be solved to obtain a solution.[41,42]
The basic advantage of the FVD over FDD is its ability
to solve for the solution variables without the need for
structured mesh, and the effort to convert the given mesh
into structured numerical grid internally is completely
avoided. As with FDD, the resulting approximate solution
is discrete, but the variables are typically placed at cell
centers rather than at nodal points. In cases where field
variables are to be estimated at nonstorage locations, an
interpolation technique is followed.
Comparison of the three methods is difficult, primarily
due to the many variations. Both FVD and FDD provide
discrete solutions, whereas FED provides a continuous
(up to a point) solution. Both FVD and FDD are generally
considered easier to program than FED because the latter
approximates continuous quantities as a set of quantities
at discrete points (mathematically involved and challeng-
ing), whereas the FVD calculates the values of the
conserved variables averaged across the volume using
averaging techniques, and the FDD extrapolates a finite
amount of data in an attempt to find a general term. The
decision regarding which method to use should be based
on a fundamental understanding of the physical model
under consideration along with a solid understanding of
the capabilities of each of the three mentioned computa-
tional techniques.
The foregoing discussion of the governing equation
formulation applies to a single-phase flow. To extend its
applicability to multiphase flows such as gas–solid flow in
fluidized bed and pneumatic transport systems (pneumatic
dryers), solids viscosities and stresses need to be addressed.
The governing equations satisfying single-phase flow will
not be sufficient for flows where interparticle interactions
are present. These interactions can be in the form of colli-
sion or contact between adjacent particles in dilute phase
systems and dense packing systems, respectively. In the for-
mer, particles stresses and viscosities play a crucial role in
the overall velocity and concentration distribution in the
physical domain. The main crucial factor attributed to this
random distribution of particles in these systems is the gas
phase turbulence. In cases where particles are light and
small, turbulence eddies dominate the particles movement
and the interstitial gas acts as a buffer that prevents colli-
sion between particles. However, in the case of heavy and
large diameter particles, on the order of 150 mm and higher,
particle inertia is sufficient to carry them easily through the
intervening gas film, and interactions occur by direct
collision. Therefore, solids viscosities and stresses cannot
be neglected, and the single-phase fundamental equations
need to be extended to account for the secondary phase
interaction.
Kinetic Theory for Granular Flow
The fundamental problem encountered in modeling the
hydrodynamic behavior of industrial systems with fast flui-
dization regimes such as in the case of flows in vertical
pneumatic dryers is the motion of the multiphase compo-
nents and the complex physical phenomena occurring in
them. These characteristics add a great deal of difficulty
to the fundamental understanding of these systems and
to the complexity of the numerical technique used to
predict their flow patterns.
As previously mentioned, in dilute two-phase gas–solid
systems where particles are light and small in size, the inter-
action of the particles and the gas is restricted to a mutual
drag force, whose value depends on the concentration of
the particles and the difference between the local average
values of the velocities of the gas and particle phases. For
larger and heavier particles, however, direct particle colli-
sion dominates the velocity and concentration distribution
inside the physical chamber. Because the gas phase adheres
to the wall surface, the no-slip condition, the gas-phase
velocity profile takes a parabolic form for fully developed
regimes with maximum velocity on the axis of the pipe.
Due to the mutual drag force between the gas and solid
phases, particle velocity is greatly affected and random
component of particle motion appears. The particle velo-
city fluctuations then generate an effective pressure in the
particle phase, together with an effective viscosity, which
resists shearing of the particle assembly.
In order to incorporate these parameters into the Navier-
Stokes equations, their values will have to be estimated
because no direct measurement techniques are available.
Therefore, to eliminate the need for using estimated values,
a granular temperature equation is introduced. This
equation is based on the KTGF, which is an analogy to
the kinetic theory of dense gases presented by Chapman
and Cowling.[43] In this theory, the usual thermal tempera-
ture is replaced by a granular flow temperature for which
a different equation is derived using the methods of kinetic
theory. This granular flow temperature is a measure of the
particle velocity fluctuations defined as the root mean square
of the
fluctuating
 component of particles velocity
h ¼ 13 n 2s . Because the solid-phase stress and viscosity
depend on the magnitude of these particle-velocity
  fluctua-
tions, a balance of the granular energy 32 h associated with
these particle-velocity fluctuations is required to supplement
the continuity and momentum balance for both phases. The
granular temperature equation is shown in the Appendix.
The analogy between the kinetic theory of gases and
that for granular flow can be further explained as follows.
 A REVIEW: APPLICATION OF COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS
When individual particles have low internal energy and are
fairly stationary relative to each other, they act like a solid.
However, when a form of minimum driving energy is fed
into the system, as by shaking, such that the particles are
not in constant contact with each other, they are said to
be in a fluidized state and enter a liquid-like state. If the
granular material is driven harder such that contacts
between the particles become highly infrequent, the mate-
rial enters a gaseous-like state. Thus is the analogy of the
kinetic theory of gases to that of KTGF. When multiphase
flow is considered, a granular temperature equation is
added to the governing equations to account for the
particles viscosity and stresses induced due to interparticle
interaction.
In the following, pioneering papers in the hydrodynamic
modeling of flows in risers using the KTGF models are illu-
strated and discussed. The goal is to provide the reader
with an idea of the nature of these models and their method
of application.
Hydrodynamic Modeling Using KTGF
The application of KTGF methods to study the flow
pattern of granular materials in fluidized beds has been
extensively studied in the literature. Sinclair and Jackson[44]
were among the earliest pioneers who used the KTGF to
study the origin of lateral segregation of particles for a fully
developed flow in vertical pipes. Earlier experimental
observations for gas–particle flow in horizontal and verti-
cal pipes showed nonuniform distribution of particles
across the cross-sectional area. In horizontal-pipe flow, this
observation should be clear and expected because the influ-
ence of gravitational forces causes this nonuniformity in
the pipe; however, it was not clear why and to what extent
this observation is valid in the case of flow in vertical pipes.
That was the driving force for Sinclair and Jackson’s[44]
theoretical investigation. More precisely, their objective
was to determine whether collective effects due to interac-
tions between particles are alone capable of accounting
qualitatively for the rather complex behavior and the lat-
eral segregation of particles in these systems. By incorpor-
ating perfectly elastic (restitution coefficient, e ¼ 1) and
inelastic (e < 1) collisions between particles and for inelastic
particle–wall collision (wall restitution coefficient, ew ¼ 0.9)
as physically encountered in flows of mineral particles on
the order of 150 mm in diameter in a 3-cm-diameter vertical
pipe, they came to the conclusion that collective effects due
to interactions between particles are capable of generating
the sort of segregation of particles and gas observed in
practice. In their analysis, they constructed a mathematical
model for fully developed flows in vertical pipes taking into
account this particle-phase interaction and neglecting the
effect of the gas-phase turbulence.
Ding and Gidaspow[45] and Tsuo and Gidaspow[46] were
the first to predict the core-annular flow regime using
127
transient two-phase flow equations and the KTGF. They
studied the flow regime of a dense phase in circulating flu-
idized beds (CFB) using the two-fluid Eulerian approach
and the FDM. They argued that for small values of the
solid viscosity for bubbling fluidized beds, difficulties
encountered with the granular flow theories can be simpli-
fied by assuming an effective viscosity coefficient for the
solid phase on the order of 0.509 and 0.704 Pa  s for 520
and 76 mm particles, respectively. These values were pre-
viously reported by Gidaspow et al.[47] based on measure-
ments done at the Illinois Institute of Technology and at
the Institute of Gas Technology in circulating fluidized
beds. They observed a core-annular type of flow with a
dilute region in the center of the pipe and a dense region
close to the wall. They further observed a less dense region
corresponding to solid volume fraction less than 1% in the
top section of the pipe and a denser region corresponding
to 10% in the bottom section at the pipe inlet. Cluster
formation was observed close to the wall region, which
moved downward at solid terminal velocities below inlet
gas superficial velocities. They concluded that a one-
dimensional representation of the flow field can overesti-
mate the slip velocities between the gas and solid phases.
They further added that cluster formation and reversed
particle movement cannot be predicted using a one-
dimensional assumption. In their numerical model, the
authors used a more realistic particle-to-wall boundary
condition from Soo,[48] who speculated that fine particles
stick to the wall, whereas large particles may rotate along
the wall surface. Their study is particularly valuable
because it uses the continuity and Navier-Stokes equations
for the two phases and the granular temperature energy
equation.
Pita and Sundaresan[49] carried out a scale-up study on
the model proposed by Sinclair and Jackson[44] and vali-
dated their findings with experimental data. It was found
that the model predicted some of the experimental data
in an almost quantitative fashion. They argued that
Sinclair and Jackson’s[44] model showed an unrealistic
degree of sensitivity to the inelasticity of the particle–
particle collision in the case of a large diameter pipe
primarily due to an incomplete formulation of the granular
temperature equation and the elimination of the effect of
gas turbulence on the particle phase. They proposed the
addition of a sink term (3bsgh) in the granular tempera-
ture equation to account for the energy exchange between
the fluid and solid particles where bsg represent the drag
function between the phases and h is the granular tempera-
ture. This term was previously developed by Ding and
Gidaspow[45] in their study of a bubbling fluidized bed
using the KTGF.
Louge et al.[50] analyzed a dilute, steady, fully developed
flow of relatively large-diameter particles in a turbulent gas
in the context of a vertical pipe. Their model is similar to
128 JAMALEDDINE AND RAY
that used by Sinclair and Jackson;[44] however, it has an
additional turbulent model to describe the interaction
between the gas and particle phases. They suggested that
turbulent gas eddies affect the lateral segregation of solids,
which might not be solely due to interparticle collision.
Although they were able to solve the complete equation
for the collisional theory without omitting certain terms,
no solid segregation was predicted. Note that their model
is only valid for very dilute flow (<0.5%) and cannot be
extended to dense flow in order to examine the effect of tur-
bulence gas eddies on the lateral segregation of solids; thus,
further investigation is still needed to verify their claim.
Pita and Sundaresan[51] argued that transient integration
of the governing equations as done by Ding and
Gidaspow[45] and Tsuo and Gidaspow[46] requires large
computational times and hence is not practical to carry
out a large number of simulations over a wide range of
operating conditions. Moreover, because their simulations
were only two-dimensional, the statistical data on fluctua-
tions gathered from these simulations cannot be compared
with experimental data, thus limiting the usefulness of the
transient results. Accordingly, they computed a steady,
developing flow of gas–particle suspensions in vertical
pipes. Their aim was to examine the entrance and exit
effects, evolution of internal recirculation, and some
scale-up issues associated with gas–solid flows in risers.
Three different inlet configurations were examined:
uniform inlet, core-annulus flow, and circumferential gas
injection at the bottom of the riser. A continuation con-
dition at the exit was used for the granular temperature
and solid volume fraction in conformity to those assumed
by Ding and Gidaspow.[45] At the wall, the normal velocity
components for the gas and solid phases were set to zero.
Two additional conditions were implemented, a shear
stress balance at the wall for the particle phase specified
by a specularity coefficient / and a granular energy balance
specified by wall restitution coefficient ew as proposed by
Sinclair and Jackson[44] and Pita and Sundaresan.[49]
Although they argued that inelastic particle collision would
cause dramatic changes to the lateral segregation of parti-
cles in the cross section of the riser and damp-out the
fluctuation motion of solids near the wall in the fully
developed region (downflow of solids disappeared because
granular temperature was lowered, which is the driving
force for segregation of particles toward the wall), a
perfectly elastic particle–particle collision was used in
agreement to their earlier model[49] because it agreed
remarkably well with experimental data. It was shown that
the circumferential gas injection case drastically reduced
the degree of recirculation (segregation of particles to the
wall occurred more slowly in this case), a phenomenon
considered desirable in reactor applications. It is worth
mentioning that although the numerical study was not vali-
dated against experimental data, and steady-state analysis
is not entirely realistic for a gas–solid riser flow, it can be
taken as a qualitative view of the flow pattern in such riser
configurations.
Nieuwland et al.[52] carried out a similar analysis to that
of Louge et al.[50] and modeled turbulence on macroscopic
level by using a modified Prandtl mixing length model
because no other theory was available that can model the
interaction between the gas-phase eddies and the solid
phase. To model the influence of particle–particle collision
(e ¼ 1), the KTGF was used. For model validation pur-
poses, a cold-flow CFB was employed in which sand was
transported with air as fluidizing agent. A comparison
between their computational and experimental results
revealed a satisfactory degree of agreement; however, the
model slightly underpredicts the lateral segregation and
yields an axial solids velocity profile with a more pronoun-
ced parabolic shape in comparison with the experimental
observation.
Mathiesen et al.[53] and Neri and Gidaspow[54]
developed numerical models to predict the dynamic beha-
vior of risers based on a Eulerian description of the phases
and the KTGF for particles interaction. Experimental data
were also used to validate the computational results. In the
former, one gas phase and N number of solids phases were
simulated to provide a realistic description of particle size
distribution in gas–solid systems. Each solid phase was
characterized by diameter, form factor, and restitution
coefficient. The granular temperature and momentum
equations were solved for each phase. The gas-phase tur-
bulence was modeled by the subgrid scale (SGS) model
proposed by Deardorff.[59] Their computational study
showed discrepancies between the computed and experi-
mental data; the result of what they claim to be due to a
2D geometrical simulation compared to the more realistic
physical 3D geometry, and the insufficient input of non-
uniform particle size distribution. A larger number of
particle size and solid-phase distributions were proposed
by their study to accurately predict the radial segregation
of particles and particle velocity.
In Deardorf,[59] three types of hydrodynamic models
were developed: the viscosity model, the kinetic theory
model with and without gas turbulence, and the k  e
model. The influence of inlet conditions on the flow pattern
was investigated by incorporating different inlet solid
volume fraction, velocity profiles of both phases, and the
feeding mode of the solid. The effect of cohesive forces
due to surface charge of small diameter particles (75 mm
and less) was also investigated, as well as the influence of
wall restitution coefficient. Their study confirmed the abil-
ity of the kinetic theory model in predicting the flow regime
reasonably well in agreement with the experimental obser-
vations for gas–solid flow in risers.
Van Wachem et al.[55] extended the above studies to
incorporate the effect of various drag coefficient
 A REVIEW: APPLICATION OF COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS
correlation, solids shear viscosity, solids thermal conduc-
tivities, and radial distribution function on the flow hydro-
dynamic of dense CFB with the KTGF for particle
interaction. It was found that frictional stresses can influ-
ence the hydrodynamic prediction substantially and that
retaining the granular dissipation and generation terms in
the granular temperature equation reduces the computa-
tional effort by 20% without considerable influence on
the final solution results. The significance of the choice of
drag models was emphasized because it influences the pre-
dicted bed expansion and the solids concentration in the
dense-phase regions of the bed. Finally, the influence of
various solids thermal conductivities and radial distri-
bution function was shown to be insignificant.
Benyahia et al.[56] have successfully simulated large
risers using a commercial code by Fluent Inc. A two-
dimensional, transient, isothermal flow was considered
for the numerical simulation. The two-fluid model incor-
porating the KTGF was applied to determine the solid
pressure and viscosity. Flow profiles for the axial pressure
drop in the riser, solid flux, solid volume fraction, and tur-
bulence parameters due to gas velocity were determined.
Computational results were compared to experimental
findings of Knowlton et al.[57] for the solid concentration,
solid flux, and axial distribution of pressure at 3.9 m away
from the riser inlet. They found that inlet and outlet config-
urations have significant effects on the overall gas and solid
flow patterns and cluster formations in the riser. However,
the effect of initial conditions tended to disappear after
several seconds of simulation. They also pointed out that
the discrepancy between the calculated and experimental
values of the particle density close to the region of the wall
was due to the value of the restitution coefficient used in
the simulation in addition to the assumption of a mono-
sized particle size and the existence of cohesive and par-
ticle–particle and the particle–wall electrostatic forces.
Ibsen et al.[58] simulated a scaled CFB boiler of rec-
tangular riser configuration. They compared their numeri-
cal results (three-dimensional analysis) based on a
multiphase Eulerian approach (FLOTRACS-MP-3D) and
the KTGF with their lab-scale experimental values. Their
goal was to simulate a scaled model and compare findings
obtained from two- and three-dimensional analyses.
Experimental results of pressure drop and velocity profiles
in the riser section were measured using pressure taps and
laser Doppler anemometry (LDA). The gas-phase turbu-
lence model adopted was based on the subgrid scale
(SGS) model proposed by Deardorf.[59] The technique is
a large eddy simulation (LES) that eliminates the need
for additional equations to solve for the turbulent dissi-
pation rate e and kinetic energy k terms and employs
Boussinesq hypothesis[63] for evaluating the turbulent
stresses. In this model, the effective viscosity of the gas
phase is comprised of laminar and turbulent terms where
129
the later is calculated from the contribution of the particles
deformation rate and a turbulent constant set to be equal
to 0.079. They concluded that three-dimensional simula-
tions are superior to two-dimensional simulations in com-
parison to the experimental findings. However, even with
grid refinement, a grid-independent solution was not
possible for the three-dimensional analysis, an indication
of the complexity of the flow and difficulty in successfully
evaluating this flow in a 3D analysis.
Hidayat and Rasmuson[60] investigated the influence of
initial conditions and bend radius on the pressure drop
and flow pattern in the riser section of a U-bend pneumatic
transport system. Fluent 6.0 commercial code by Fluent
Inc. was used for the numerical investigation. Single- and
multiphase flow simulations were investigated using the
Eulerian-Eulerian multiphase flow approach with segre-
gated solver. The influence of U-bend configuration on
the slip velocity between the phases was examined using
different bend radius ratios. It was concluded that for the
case of a single-phase flow, the inlet gas velocity has a
strong influence on the total pressure drop in the system,
whereas the bend radius ratio affects both the velocity
and pressure drop profiles in the system. For multiphase
flow, the U-bend configuration showed three effects: an
increase in the slip velocity between the phases, an accumu-
lation of particles along the outer walls of the U-bend, and
an increase in the total pressure drop of the system.
Because high pressure drop is not favorable in pneumatic
transport systems, their study can show an optimum inlet
velocity and bend radius ratio for a better dispersion of
solid particles and low overall system pressure drop. They
also pointed out that the k  e realizable turbulent model
provided by the software gave the best predictions for the
flow variables in comparison to the other k  e models
for the multiphase simulation, whereas it fell short behind
the Reynolds stress turbulent model in the case of a
single-phase flow. Similarly, Lee et al.[61] conducted a
numerical study using the Eulerian-Eulerian model and
the KTGF to simulate the flow pattern and solid-phase
concentration profile of granular materials Geldart class
D (2600-mm-diameter polypropylene beads) and C
(500-mm-diameter glass beads) in a 90
bend. Two equa-
tions were added to account for each phase’s turbulence
with a no-slip boundary condition for each phase with a
modified wall function to account for various wall-
roughness estimates. The multiphase flow was set to enter
the horizontal section of the pipe passing through the 90

bend and then continue vertically upward in the vertical
section of the pipe. Their aim was to investigate the
post-bend velocity distribution and particle concentration
profiles in response to dilute- and dense-phase inlet
conditions. The computational data using Fluent were
validated with experimental observations using three
noninvasive instruments for predicting velocity and
130 JAMALEDDINE AND RAY

concentration distribution: electrical capacitance tomogra-
phy (ECT), particle image velocimetry (PIV), and phase
Doppler particle analysis (PDPA). It was found that for
both dilute- and dense-phase flow inlet condition, both
polypropylene and glass beads show a continuous annulus
flow structure in the vertical section of the pipe. In the
dilute phase, Geldart class D particles favored the forma-
tion of moving dunes in the horizontal conveying section
in comparison to choking for Geldart class B solids at
low superficial gas velocities. Both class particles, however,
showed higher concentration (settling) at the bottom
region of the horizontal pipe due to gravitational forces.
At the bend region, both solids showed a high rate of
accumulation (deposition) due to collisions with the verti-
cal wall at the bend angle (trapped) and high dissipation
of kinetic energy and momentum reduction in that area.
Finally, they added that interparticle collision at the bend
angle has a profound effect on the particle mixing follow-
ing the bend section; however, a continuous annulus flow
structure is observed further downstream of the bend.
Du et al.[62] reviewed a widely used drag model for gas–
solid systems by simulating the hydrodynamics of a
spouted bed using the commercial CFD package Fluent
6.1. Their aim was to identify the influence of different drag
models on the flow pattern of gas–solid multiphase sys-
tems, particularly in spouted bed dryers. In their numerical
assessment of the flow, a two-fluid Eulerian model was
adopted with the standard k  e turbulence model for the
gas phase. The impact of the solid-phase turbulence was
also included in the gas-phase turbulent equations as added
quantities derived from the Tchen theory of dispersion of
discrete particles by homogenous turbulence.[63] Their

TABLE 2
Hydrodynamic and drying challenges for dryer design
Hydrodynamic model challenges
1. Insufficient understanding of the
interaction between the particles and the
gas phase due to the difference between
their mean velocity fields
2. Insufficient understanding of the turbulent
eddies’ effect on the particles motion by the
gas phase in high-speed systems
3. Insufficient understanding of the
interaction between the fluctuating parts of
the particle motion with the mean particle
motion through interaction forces between
the particles
4. Insufficient understanding of the
interaction between the fluctuating parts of
the gas velocity and the mean motion of the
gas
Drying model challenges
1. Mathematical modeling of mass and energy balances and the
creation of sufficient contact area between product and heating
medium in order to keep the equipment size within reasonable
bounds
2. Product separation from the drying gas and emission
prevention
3. Many products and processes require several additional
requirements and physicochemical phenomena, making process
design and operation empirical rather than knowledge driven.
For many powders, a large range of quality aspects are set; e.g.,
moisture content, bulk density, particle size distribution,
flowability, wettability, dust formation, and more specific
aspects such as color, flavor, brittleness
4. Environmental regulations that force us to focus on reducing
energy consumption and associated CO2 production and on
minimizing product emissions. This leads to innovations of
drying media such as steam drying, alternative thermal cycles
such as chemical regeneration of drying gas, and improved
control strategies. However, saving energy by process
modifications can conflict with the other goals such as quality
aspects; the only way out here is through the use of more
detailed knowledge of all aspects of the drying process
5. The main aspects to be dealt with are the highly nonlinear
physical phenomena inside drying materials, the
nonhomogenous distribution of temperature and humidity
inside dryers, equipment selection, design and control, and final
product quality. One of the challenges for drying research is the
incorporation of the knowledge of basic thermodynamics and
transport phenomena into the description of phase equilibrium
and drying kinetics
 A REVIEW: APPLICATION OF COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS
computational results were validated against experimental
data from the literature and led to the conclusion that among
the five different drag models used in their study,[64–68] the
Gidaspow[67] drag model gave the best fit to experimental
observations both qualitatively and quantitatively. Note that
the volume fraction of particles in a spouted bed can vary
from almost zero to the maximum packing limit. Their work
showed the significance of the choice of a drag model for the
CFD simulation and laid down the basis for an accurate
modeling of spouted bed hydrodynamics with respect to
the appropriate choice of a drag model.
The above-mentioned discussion shows that the two-
fluid Eulerian multiphase models for gas–solid multiphase
systems have matured to a satisfactory level of accuracy.
The use of various discretization methods along with the
kinetic theory approach for granular material showed the
ability of CFD models in predicting the performance of
multiphase flow systems. These models could be used to
enhance our understanding of the flow field and heat and
mass transfer mechanisms in fluidized bed transport
systems and dryers. However, applying these models is
computationally challenging due to many factors, some
of which are discussed in the following section.
Computational Challenges in the Design
of Pneumatic Dryers
The physical phenomena that occur in pneumatic drying
systems introduce experimental and computational chal-
lenges that have not yet been fully understood. In order
to satisfactory understand and quantitatively model the
mechanisms governing the physical phenomena in these
systems, the complexity of the model should be reduced
to a certain extent without jeopardizing its accuracy. From
a computational perspective, this can be handled by taking
reasonable assumptions according to the understanding of
the process itself or by trial-and-error analyses until the
computational findings match quantitatively and=or quali-
tatively the experimental data. However, many products
and processes require several additional requirements,
making process design and process simplification a chal-
lenging task. In view of the above, some of the challenges
characterizing pneumatic drying systems are analogue to
those stated by Sinclair and Jackson[44] for the hydro-
dynamic model in addition to those stated by Kerkhof
and Coumans[69] for the drying model. These are
summarized in Table 2.
In the next section, some of the key advantages that CFD
methods can offer to the drying industry are presented. The
work of many researchers on the use of CFD models in pre-
dicting the flow behavior and drying kinetics in commercial
dryers is discussed. Conclusions drawn from their work
along with the improvements done to the study of the dry-
ing operations using CFD models are also presented.
131
APPLICATION OF CFD TO DRYING SYSTEMS
Introduction
A specific application of a pneumatic conveying and
fluidized bed system is the direct drying system, which
combines both drying and transport objectives. Because
pneumatic transport and fluidized bed systems have been
widely analyzed and studied using CFD applications, it is
natural to extend the applicability of using CFD methods
to the study of drying systems.
The application of CFD to the study of drying mechan-
isms in direct drying systems can be seen in the literature as
a promising task yet computationally complex. Over the
last decade, CFD-based methods are slowly gaining accept-
ance as viable means to evaluate and design commercial
dryers for the food, pharmaceutical, chemical, mining,
agricultural, and petroleum industries. As was previously
mentioned, Xia and Sun[28] reviewed the application of
CFD in the food processing industry particularly for dry-
ing, sterilization, refrigeration, and mixing. The advantages
of using CFD are discussed and the future of CFD applica-
tions is also outlined. Subjects such as steps needed to per-
form a CFD analysis and available commercial codes along
with a detailed description of their weaknesses and strength
and the appropriate applications for their use were also
discussed. In a similar effort, Wang and Sun[70] gave a
comprehensive review on the use of CFD discretization
methods, namely, the FED, FDD, and FVD methods in
the cooling and heating processes of food products along
with a list of authors and publications that adopted them.
It is, however, worthy to mention that the increased use of
CFD has been motivated by significant improvements in
the capabilities of various commercial CFD codes and
major reduction in the cost of computer hardware. Some
of the key advantages that CFD methods can offer to the
drying industry are (1) their ability to predict local con-
ditions of both phases (gas, particle=droplet) in the drying
chamber; (2) their ability to draw a comparison of different
feed-point layouts such as multiple entry points; (3) their
ability to give information on dispersion of particles as they
leave the feed point region; and last but not least, (4) they
can be used as powerful tools for troubleshooting purposes
including the assessment of the effects of varying chamber
geometry or operating parameters. Nevertheless, it should
be noted that CFD cannot completely replace pilot-scale
testing and the partly empirical nature of the design
process.
In general, the drying rate decreases along the axial
direction of the drying chamber due to a decrease in the
driving force (as the air humidity increases). In practice,
high evaporation rates are expected at the dryer inlet due
to the high gas and lower solids temperatures at that
region. As the solids travel along the length of a convective
drying chamber, nonuniform velocity distribution causes
132 JAMALEDDINE AND RAY
nonuniform drying rates. Depending on the type of dryer
used, a slight decrease in the drying rate is often observed
in regions close to the wall of the dryer due to lower gas
velocities and high accumulation of solids. Because this
nonuniform behavior greatly affects the drying process, it
is beneficial to predict its occurrence a priori to seek an
even distribution of the drying rate at each cross section
along the dryer length. CFD analysis can thus predict this
changing behavior and offer a great advantage in evaluat-
ing the efficiency of the drying chamber.
In the following sections, the application of CFD-based
methods to the drying of gas–solid and gas–liquid systems
in various commercial dryers is discussed. A list of publica-
tions on this subject by the pioneering researchers in this
area along with a discussion of their work is presented.
CFD in Flash Dryers
In the following discussion, particle–particle interaction
is neglected in the case of Eulerian-Eulerian approach
because the multiphase flow in pneumatic systems is dilute
and the dominating force is the drag. This criterion does
not apply for the Eulerian-Lagrangian formulation where
the computation of particles trajectories provides the
opportunity to evaluate the interactions between particles,
fluid, and boundary at the microscopic level without the
need for the KTGF approach. Hence, KTGF will not be
presented in this section.
One of the earliest and most comprehensive works on
the use of CFD code (FLOW3D) in conjunction with the
discrete element method (DEM) in the design of pneumatic
dryers is presented by Kemp et al.[71] (also refer to the pio-
neering work of Cundall and Strack[72] in soil mechanics
and Tsuji et al.[73]) in pneumatic pipelines, both without
the mass transfer model added). The authors reviewed
models for pneumatic conveying dryers and concluded that
none has been entirely successful. Thus, they developed a
model for particle motion, heat transfer, and drying rates
in a pneumatic conveying dryer by incorporating the effect
of gas turbulence (k  e model). Particle trajectories were
tracked using a force balance (DEM) incorporating a wall
friction term. CFD simulations were adopted to examine
the flow pattern at the feed-point region. Thin-layer drying
kinetics was used to predict the drying rates. The Nusselt
number was calculated based on the Weber’s modifi-
cation[71] of the Ranz and Marshall[74] equation. The model
was validated against experimental data and showed a con-
siderable improvement on earlier models (which ignored
the effect of the acceleration region on drying kinetics as
well as gas turbulence effects on the solid phase) but under-
predicted particle velocities and drying rates near the feed
point of the drying chamber. A large dead zone near the
feed point was observed due to the presence of high holdup
in this region. The model predicted two previously unex-
plained experimental observations; higher than expected
particle velocities up to 0.5 m above the feed point and
dipping of solids (dead zone with low gas velocity and
temperature and solid recirculation) entering the drying
chamber. In addition, the model underpredicted the drying
rates of the column in comparison to what was experimen-
tally observed. This was due to the absence of the turbu-
lence dispersion of particles in the numerical model as
they claimed. In summary, this article showed the useful-
ness of CFD technique in predicting particles dispersion
in the column, in particular, in the feed-point region. It
also emphasized the importance of including this region
in the numerical simulation due to its critical influence on
the flow pattern and drying rates and the importance of
including the influence of the turbulence dispersion of
particles on the gas phase.
Among the earliest studies conducted on flash drying
systems, Fyhr and Rasmuson[75] presented a single-particle
model for the drying of wood chips in a pneumatic convey-
ing dryer using superheated steam. A 2D drying model that
accounts for the outlet and inlet conditions, as well as the
constant and falling rate periods, was developed. Numeri-
cal simulation was performed using a geothermal code
known as TOUGH that is capable of simulating transport
processes in porous media and allows for the addition of
drying processes with some modifications and extensions.
The numerical model depicted a pilot-scale dryer loop with
total length of 200 m divided into six erect sections with
up-risers and down-comers (U-shaped). A plug flow
steady-state assumption was considered at the gas inlet
with high Reynolds number flow (104). Drag and heat
transfer coefficients accounting for the nonspherical shapes
of the wood chips were incorporated. The model was able
to capture the complex interaction among the drying agent
(steam), particles, and the walls of the dryer; however, the
drag models used (including Ranz and Marchall[74]) signifi-
cantly underestimated the heat transfer coefficient under
the considered conditions. Model results were validated
against experimental data for bark chips conducted in the
pilot-scale dryer. Effect of different wood species such as
spruce and pine was also investigated. It was found that
spruce moisture content was higher than pine for similar
drying times. Three different spruce chip sizes were also
investigated. It was found that although larger chip sizes,
and thus larger mass, have longer residence time in the
dryer, the length of the dryer used was not sufficient to
reduce the moisture content to an acceptable level. Their
key finding is that U-bends significantly influence the dry-
ing behavior because they enhance the velocity differences
(slip) between suspended material and the drying medium.
Additional papers in the literature have also revealed the
success of CFD models in predicting the drying process for
pneumatic drying applications. Eghlimi et al.[76] simulated
the flow and drying of oil shale and coal particles in a
rotary kiln and flash dryers, respectively, using both
 A REVIEW: APPLICATION OF COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS
approaches of multiphase flow, Eulerian-Eulerian, and
Eulerian-Lagrangian models. Their first objective was to
study the mixing process of the oil shale and retorted oil
shale particles in a Eulerian-Eulerian basis. The second
objective was to simulate the drying process of oil shale
and coal particles in a flash dryer using the Eulerian-
Lagrangian model in order to study the temperature, velo-
city, and drying kinetics of these particles. In the former
study (3D Eulerian-granular model) an examination of
the volume fraction of raw oil shale and recycled shale in
the mixing chamber showed nonuniform mixing at the
recycled shale inlet. This nonuniform mixing persisted
along the length of the retort until it reached the exit side
where noticeable mixing occurred. This phenomenon was
accompanied by some degree of back-mixing of recycled
shale due to the presence of their accumulation (another
indication of poor mixing) at that region. Results obtained
from the later study (2D and 3D with and without drying
using Lagrangian models) for the temperature and velocity
profiles were also analyzed and discussed. It was found that
oil shale particles (2D in a 19-m-long column with 1.5 m
diameter) collided with the top surface of the column and
some bounced few times before exiting the column with
gas inlet velocity of 15 m=s. Also, 10–40% of moisture
removal was achieved with this design. For the 2D and
3D heating and drying analysis of coal particles in a
19-m-long, 0.84-m-diameter column, a 25 m=s gas inlet
velocity failed to entrain all of the particles in the column.
However, a complete drying of solids was achieved.
In a comprehensive study on the use of the two-fluid
model for the study of dilute gas–solid flow in a 2D pneu-
matic conveying dryer, Skuratovsky et al.[77] adopted the
FVD method to simulate the temperature and moisture
contents of sand particles and PVC particles in a small-
and large-scale gas-operated pneumatic dryers, respect-
ively. A detailed analysis of the governing equations for
the two-fluid models was presented. Computational results
were validated against published experimental data of
Baeyens et al.[78] and Rocha[79] for large- and small-scale
pneumatic dryers, respectively. De Brandt’s[80] and Baeyens
et al.’s[78] correlations for Nusselt and Sherwood numbers
were used in the theoretical study. These correlations were
previously proposed by Baeyens et al.[78] and originally
developed for pneumatic dryers. A two-stage drying pro-
cess was considered for which in the first stage of drying
was dominated by convective evaporation of surface mois-
ture, whereas the second stage was dominated by vapor
diffusion inside a porous core. Adiabatic and conducting
wall-boundary conditions were incorporated. Good
agreement was observed between the experimental and
computational data in contrast to the steady-state one-
dimensional numerical studies conducted previously by
Rocha[79] (models a and b) in which the conservation equa-
tion of momentum for the fluid as a mixture of fluid and
133
particles was solved in the first model (model a), whereas
in the second model (model b) conservation of momentum
for each phase was solved. Assumptions taken in these stud-
ies include no shrinkage of particles during drying; plug flow
for both phases; uniform properties and geometry at a pipe
cross section; and no work between the phases. Based on the
above-mentioned assumptions mass, momentum, and
energy balance equations were formulated for the mixture
and the solid phase. The correlation of Ranz and
Marshall[74] was used for calculating the heat and the mass
transfer coefficients with adiabatic wall boundary con-
ditions. It would be crucial to add that the conducting wall
temperature condition incorporated in Skuratovsky et al.[77]
fit well with the experimental gas temperatures in contrary
to the adiabatic condition, which deviated considerably
from the experimentally reported results.
Based on the study of Hidayat and Rasmuson[60] and
Fyhr and Rasmuson,[75] Hidayat and Rasmuson[79]
extended the hydrodynamic and drying models to investi-
gate the drying process in a U-bend pneumatic conveying
dryer using the Eulerian-Eulerian formulation with CVD
method in Fluent. Their aim was to investigate the effect
of gas velocity, solid loading ratio, bend radius ratio, and
moisture content of solid particles entering the system on
heat and mass transfer coefficients and the drying rates in
the drying chamber. Two user-defined scalar equations
(UDS) were introduced into the solution to predict the
solid particle moisture content and the mass fraction of
water in the gas phase. User-defined functions (UDF) were
also implemented in the solution to cover both periods of
drying: the constant and falling rate periods. A validation
of the drying model was accomplished by comparing the
simulation results with an in-house experimental data.
Their simulation results showed that the moisture content
in the gas phase was slightly overpredicted. They predicted
that this behavior was due to the absence of a cyclone in
the simulation and the lack of detailed modeling of sawdust
properties. In addition, the predicted sawdust temperature
was higher than that obtained from experimental data.
However, the calculation of air temperature showed very
good agreement with experimental data. Furthermore,
the mass-weighted average drying rate occurring in the
U-bend showed slightly undesired results. It was mentioned
that due to high accumulation of solid particles at the outer
region of the U-bend wall, a slight decrease in the mass-
weighted average drying rate was predicted. However, a
slight increase in the phase’s slip velocity and thus
increased drying rate was observed in areas downstream
of the U-bend where solid particles dispersed primarily
due to gravitational forces. The numerical results also
showed a decrease in the drying rate with an increase in
the solid loading ratio on the contrary to what should be
expected. They concluded the reason behind this result
was the strong decrease in the driving force with a decrease
134 JAMALEDDINE AND RAY
in the gas velocity resulting in a decrease in mass transfer
coefficient due to decreased Reynolds number.
CFD in Spray Dryers
CFD has also been used to investigate the performance
and design of spray dryers particularly in the food industry.
They are used to get detailed predictions of the motion of
particles, their residence time in the chamber, and the dry-
ing conditions they encounter. Spray dryers are used to
produce products such as milk, coffee powder, and even
detergents.[82] However, the complexity of air and spray
flow patterns inside spray dryers make their design difficult
by computational methods and require meaningful
assumptions.
Langrish and Fletcher[20] reviewed the application of
CFD in the design of spray dryers and the flow patterns
occurring in these systems. Their objective was to show
work done on spray-drying design studies using CFD
and to point out the influence of flow pattern on issues
related to the drying of foodstuffs, namely, thermal degra-
dation, aroma loss, and particle stickiness. The reader is
referred to this paper for a comprehensive review of the
application of CFD in spray dryers. In an earlier publi-
cation, Langrish and Zbicinski[83] demonstrated the use
of a CFD model (CFX) to explore methods for decreasing
the wall deposition rate, including modifications to the air
inlet velocity and a reduction in the spray cone angle. They
carried out their study on a small-scale spray dryer design.
For lack of space and to avoid repetition, work that has
not been reviewed by Langrish and Fletcher[20] will only
be discussed in the following paragraphs.
In a similar effort to demonstrate the ability of CFD
commercial codes (Fluent) in predicting the drying rates,
wall deposition, velocity distribution, and heat transfer
properties in spray dryers, Frydman et al.[84,85] simulated
a discrete droplet model (or DEM) and solved the partial
differential equations of momentum and heat and mass
conservation for both gas and dispersed phase (water dro-
plets). The model was used to simulate the behavior of a
pilot-scale spray dryer operated with two drying media:
superheated steam and air. For the simulation, a drop-size
spectrum was represented by six discrete droplets diameters
(12, 24, 36, 48, 60, and 72 mm) fitting to an experimental
droplets size distribution and all droplets were injected at
the same velocity taken as the calculated velocity of the
liquid sheet at the nozzle orifice (70 m=s). The turbulent
k  e model was adopted along with UDF for the heat
transfer and drag coefficients. Heat exchange through the
chamber walls was assumed for the later study with low
external heat transfer coefficient on the order of 2 W=
m2  K. It was shown that the model can evaluate the most
important features of a spray dryer such as the temperature
distribution inside the chamber, velocity of gas, and dro-
plets trajectories as well as deposits on the walls. The model
predicted a fast down-flowing core jet surrounded by a
large recirculation zone (previously shown in Oakley and
Bahu,[86] who predicted water droplet trajectories from a
hollow-cone pressure nozzle and showed a significant
increase in the evaporation rate in the recirculation region
compared to the central jet region; their work demon-
strated that CFD based models can predict spray dryer
flow pattern and spray=gas mixing behavior). It also
showed that there are slight differences in flow patterns
using superheated steam or air as a drying medium except
for the recirculation, which is tighter in steam. Moreover,
the general behavior of droplets in air or steam was quite
the same: the smallest droplets were entrained by the
central core and the largest ones were taken into the recir-
culation zone. In superheated steam, however, the droplets
penetrated to a greater extent in the recirculation zone and
evaporated faster. Smaller-size droplets evaporated almost
instantaneously at the nozzle inlet; medium-size droplets
(36 and 48 mm) evaporated further downstream; and
large-size droplets went through the recirculation zone
where some were trapped to the wall (more pronounced
in air). Finally, contour plots of temperature distribution
showed narrower cool zones in steam than in air.
Harvie et al.[87] demonstrated good agreement between
theoretical and experimental data for swirling flow in
tall-form countercurrent spray dryers. They represented
the first application in the use of the very large eddy simu-
lation (VLES) approach in CFD package (CFX 4.3) for the
numerical simulation of flow pattern in spray dryers. Their
decision to choose this type of turbulent model was based
on the fact that flow behavior in spray dryers is transient
and unstable and because their simulations on unsteady
flow in three-dimensional sudden expansions were success-
ful when compared to experimental data, this model would
be appropriate for these spray-drying simulations. In this
approach, the computational mesh is chosen to be fine
enough to resolve the significant flow features and a turbu-
lence model is used to represent the dissipative scales. It
was found that by altering the angle of the inlet air streams
into the dryer, the nature of the flow within the dryer could
be significantly altered. In the majority of the cases simu-
lated, large transients developed in the flow as a result of
inlet conditions. It can be concluded that because the exis-
tence of such transients would be detrimental to actual
spray-dryer performance, a better control over the inlet
gas conditions (velocity, inlet angle, etc.) is necessary.
Another key finding from their study is that the flow
pattern inside the dryer chamber can be stabilized by intro-
ducing a large amount of swirl into the chamber. Their
conclusion was based on two cases of air inlet conditions,
25
radial and horizontal inlet angles and 0
radial and
horizontal inlet angles. Subsequently, Harvie et al.[88]
demonstrated that the Lagrangian particle tracking appro-
ach can be successfully used to model moisture evaporation
 A REVIEW: APPLICATION OF COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS
from droplets and particles for a cocurrent tall-form spray
dryer. The underlying assumption used in their drying
model is that the discrete phase experiences two distinct
stages of drying. During the first drying stage or the con-
stant rate drying period, also called a hindered drying phase,
the surface of the droplet=particle is saturated with water,
and only the resistance of the droplet=particle boundary
layer to heat and mass transfer influences the evaporation
rate. The second drying stage or the falling rate period, also
called the unhindered drying phase, begins once sufficient
moisture has been removed from the particle such that sur-
face saturation can no longer be maintained, which results
in the formation of a dry outer layer that progressively
thickens, impeding the transport of moisture from the core
to the surface of the particle, so that the drying rate falls
steadily. They stated that during this phase, unrealistic
fluid conditions used for the prediction of drying would
lead to unrealistic values of heat and mass transfer rates.
For this reason, the heat and mass transfer to a particle
were calculated based on wet bulb temperature rather than
the actual particle temperature corresponding to the local
particle gas conditions. In effect, the model employed in
these simulations was exactly represented by the character-
istic drying curve shown in drying theory. They have shown
reasonable agreement between the predicted and measured
moisture content of powder at the exit point of a spray
dryer, although no comparisons were made between
predictions and experiment at any locations within the
spray-drying chamber.
Among the earliest researchers who used the CFD
technology in the study of spray dryers fitted with pressure
nozzles are Oakley and Bahu,[8] Oakley,[9] Levi-Hivroni
et al.,[11] Kieviet et al.,[12] Southwell et al.,[89] Southwell
and Langrish,[17] Langrish and Kockel,[19] Langrish and
Fletcher,[20] Ducept et al.,[22] Wu and Liu,[23] Huang
et al.[24,25] Langrish and Zbicinski,[83] Goula and
Adamopoulos,[90] and Verdurmen et al.[108] Those reviewed
by Langrish and Fletcher[20] will not be discussed to avoid
repetition.
Ducept et al.[22] performed a CFD study to simulate a
cocurrent spray dryer in an attempt to investigate the resi-
dence time distribution (RTD) of real product particles
(10% dried matter of KCl solution) dried by superheated
steam. Their earlier work presented in Frydman et al.[84,85]
demonstrated the drying of water droplets for which RTD
would vary compared to real product, which transforms
into powdery form when dried, and thus time=temperature
history would be different. Their numerical predictions
based on Eulerian-Lagrangian formulation and the k  e
turbulence model were initially validated against experi-
mental data obtained for water droplets and then modified
to account for real product drying conditions. Final dried
particles were assumed to rebound when contacting the
chamber wall and thus particle stickiness to the walls was
135
not considered. Similar results to the earlier work were
reported in terms of drying conditions; that is, smaller-size
particles dried out at the nozzle inlet; mid-size particles
dried out further downstream; and large-size particles got
carried out to the recirculation zone and thus had the long-
est residence time. Their simulations showed an average of
5 s for the particle residence time with higher RTD on the
order of 25 s. They concluded that time=temperature his-
tory strongly depends on the characteristics of the final
product, product size distribution, particle flow pattern,
and nozzle type. A key finding from this article shows the
superiority of superheated steam drying evaporation rate
to that of air, a trend toward the use of a smaller chamber,
and lower manufacturing costs. It is worth mentioning that
a direct comparison between the RTD using the super-
heated steam spray dryers for water droplets and real pro-
duct particles was not included in their conclusions and
therefore no further discussion will be added.
A comprehensive study on the effect of different dryer
configurations on the temperature and flow pattern in a
cocurrent spray dryer was carried out by Huang et al.[24]
Their objective was to present and discuss a set of numeri-
cal results obtained using the commercial software Fluent
for a fixed set of inlet liquid-slurry flow rate and gas
conditions (flow rate, temperature, and humidity). The
Eulerian approach was used for the gas-phase predictions,
whereas the Lagrangian formulation was adopted for the
particle phase to determine the particle trajectories, resi-
dence time, dispersion rate, and drying times. It was
assumed that no swirling is to occur and thus the k  e tur-
bulence model was used along with the turbulent stochastic
model (TSM) option provided by Fluent. The latter model
allows for the tracking of particles and takes into account
the effect of the random velocity fluctuations of turbulence
on particle dispersion.[91] A two-way coupling between the
phases was also assumed to account for the effect of the gas
phase on the particle phase and vice versa. In other words,
a finite transfer of momentum, mass, and heat was assumed
between the phases. This was accomplished by the particle
source in cell (PSI cell) method provided by the software.
Different chamber geometries, namely, cylinder-on-cone,
conical, hourglass-shaped, and lantern-shaped were con-
sidered for a two-dimensional axisymmetric configuration
such that the inlet and exit of the chamber were aligned
at the center of the dryer. Numerical predictions were
validated against the experimental data of Langrish and
Zbicinski.[83] Similar inlet, exit, and boundary conditions
to Langrish and Zbicinski’s[83] model were used for vali-
dation purposes and similar inlet size and boundary
conditions were also followed for all configurations for a
direct comparison between the model predictions. It was
found that as a result of variations in the gas flow and
thermal patterns in the four configurations examined, the
droplet trajectories, residence times, and drying times
136 JAMALEDDINE AND RAY
varied. Furthermore, it was noted that the effective cham-
ber volume occupied by drying particles depended on the
chamber design. It is to be noted that it was not the
author’s intention in this paper to present limitations and
merits of the novel chamber geometries discussed above
and thus these aspects were not included in their conclusion
of results. A key finding form this paper is the possibility of
choosing other chamber geometries than the traditional
cylinder-on-cone geometry for spray-drying processes.
In a subsequent article, Huang et al.[24] extended the
numerical methods employed in the above work with the
assumption of heat exchange between the inside and out-
side of a cylinder-on-cone drying chamber to study the
air flow pattern, temperature, and humidity profile at dif-
ferent levels of a cocurrent spray dryer using Fluent. The
effects of operating pressure, heat loss from the chamber
wall, and inlet air conditions on the gas flow pattern, drop-
let trajectories, and overall dryer performance were investi-
gated. For the sake of numerical validation, their results
were compared to those obtained by Kieviet[92] (who inves-
tigated a cocurrent spray dryer fitted with a pressure nozzle
both numerically [CFX] and experimentally) on an iden-
tical system. Good agreement was reported between the
numerical predictions and the experimental data. The
authors pointed out the influence of altitude and high-
humidity conditions on the final product capacity and
advised that compared to sea-level and lower humidity
conditions, spray dryers should be designed with increased
air inlet velocities and air mass flow rates.
Langrish and Fletcher[93] discussed the trends that led to
the use of CFD packages in the spray-drying industry and
referenced some of the early work that used CFD in spray
dryers such as Crowe,[94] Oakley and Bahu,[86] Oakley
et al.,[95] and Livesley et al.[96] They pointed out the weak-
nesses of two-dimensional axisymmetric models in predict-
ing swirling and swinging oscillations inside a short-form
(height-to-diameter aspect ratio of 2:1) spray dryer from
conclusions drawn based on Guo et al.’s[97] 3D transient
simulation. These phenomena were observed even with
no swirl assumption imposed at the chamber inlet (pre-
viously reported by Langrish et al.[98] and Southwell and
Langrish[99]). They further added that two-dimensional axi-
symmetric models can only be regarded as indicative at
best, because they do not reproduce the basic physics
involved in real physical systems. They also commented
on Stafford et al.’s[100] article, which showed instabilities
in the flow pattern due to an offset in the central jet attrib-
uted to the misdistribution of inlet air. These successfully
predicted aspects using CFD simulations along with the
predicted central recirculation zone in Oakley et al.’s[95]
study and the need to investigate the effect of droplets
stickiness (adhesion and cohesion) on the final product out-
come motivated Langrish and Fletcher[93] to present this
review paper on current and future trends in using CFD
models for the design of spray dryers. They concluded that
3D transient CFD simulations with standard turbulent
models can successfully predict the frequencies of the tran-
sient flows and the 3D nature of the flow pattern inside
spray dryers with adequate accuracy. Finally, they stated
the need and confirmed the potential for incorporating wall
deposition phenomena of particles including adhesion,
cohesion, and agglomeration into CFD simulations.
Fluent 5.3 CFD code was also used to study how
changes in spray drying operating conditions can affect
the fouling of the equipment during the drying process by
Goula and Adamopoulos.[90] A set of experiments was con-
ducted on a laboratory-scale spray dryer by keeping the
feed rate, feed temperature, air inlet temperature, and ato-
mizer pressure constant and varying the compressed air
and drying air flow rates. They further simulated these
conditions in a 3D transient k  e model for a countercur-
rent flow of gas and particles. The gas phase was simulated
using the Eulerian approach and the solids using
Lagrangian approach with the stochastic trajectory model
for the prediction of particle dispersion (previously dis-
cussed). Heat exchange through the chamber walls was
assumed. No heat transfer coefficients were tabulated for
the internal walls. Six different sizes for particle diameters
were examined for various inlet air flow rates. Similar
trends were observed between experimental and simulated
data. Simulation results gave a better understanding of
several phenomena that appear during spray drying such
as residue accumulation, which increased with a decrease
in the flow rate of compressed and drying air (low drying
air flows led to a tendency for droplets to be drawn toward
the wall by strong air recirculation patterns). It was shown
that a lower drying air flow rate caused an increase in pro-
duct residence time and enforced circulation effects (as
shown in Oakley and Bahu[86]). This led to a greater degree
of moisture removal, as should be expected. On the con-
trary, an increase in the air drying rate favored the decrease
of residence time, which led to higher moisture content.
The result of their work gave an insight that can be used
to select operating conditions for laboratory-scale spray
dryers and can be extended through similar computations
to production-scale spray dryers. Finally, they added that
simulation results can sharply reduce the number of experi-
ments needed to find a solution to the fouling problem.
In a similar study to Harvie et al.,[87] LeBarbier et al.,[101]
and Guo et al.,[102] Langrish et al.[103] demonstrated good
agreement between theoretical and experimental data for
a swirling flow in a short-form pilot-scale spray dryer.
Their aim was to investigate the effect of air inlet swirl
on the flow stability within dryer chamber. The turbulent
shear stress transport (SST) model was used in CFX 5
CFD program. Their results further highlighted the impor-
tance of transient phenomena in short-form spray models.
Three cases for the gas inlet conditions were analyzed: no
 A REVIEW: APPLICATION OF COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS
swirl, moderate swirl (15
), and high swirl (25
). Significant
differences for the flow pattern were observed for the three
cases at the dryer axis and toward the dryer wall as exper-
imentally observed by Southwell and Langrish.[104] It was
found that a central air jet was seen to wobble with
large-scale eddying motion outside the dryer axis for the
no-swirl case, compared to strong precession of the central
air jet and vortex breakdown with reverse flow occurring at
the axis of the dryer for moderate- and high-swirl con-
ditions. Both numerical and experimental studies showed
less spray–air mixing in the no-swirl case due to the spread
of a spray cloud toward the bottom of the dryer due to the
strong axial jet generated by this flow inlet. Moreover, the
jet became shorter and more transient for the moderate
swirl condition as the fast flowing core became more of a
swirling air cloud due to the stronger centrifugal forces in
the swirling air inlet. This enhanced the spray–air mixing.
Finally, the jet appeared to spread out almost completely
with the high-swirl case with greater spray–air mixing;
nevertheless, a negative outcome of this flow pattern would
be greater wall deposition of particles.
Following the work of of LeBarbier et al.[101] and
Langrish et al.,[103] Woo et al.[105] further demonstrated
that flow pattern in cylinder-on-cone spray dryer geometry
is inherently unsteady and exhibits self-sustained oscil-
lation. They carried out a 3D numerical simulation of a
cylinder-on-cone geometry using Fluent 6.3.26 with the
provided RNG k  e turbulence model and 3D double pre-
cision solver. A second-order upwind scheme was used to
discretize the governing equations along with the log-law
function at the wall. For experimental validation, air flow
measurements were conducted using a single hot-wire
anemometer. The effect of geometry and inlet condition
(mesh distribution) on the stability of the flow pattern
and the transient behavior of the flow was tested. Three
diameter cases and five mesh-size distributions were ana-
lyzed. They demonstrated that finer mesh does not neces-
sarily capture the transient oscillation of the flow as was
shown in Langrish et al.,[103] and that dryer geometry,
including chamber length-to-diameter ratio and chamber
diameter to inlet diameter, has an influential effect on this
transient behavior. It was shown that large chamber diam-
eter (1.32 m) produced steady-state solution in contrast to
smaller diameters such as 1.0 and 0.85 m. They further
emphasized that large chamber diameters with fine mesh
at the inlet region represented the physical behavior of an
actual system. Furthermore, it was shown that the larger
the chamber diameter to inlet diameter, the more stable
is the flow and vice versa.
Nijdam et al.[106,107] revealed various challenges encoun-
tered in developing CFD models for the simulation of par-
ticle agglomeration within spray dryers. Challenges such as
accurately measuring droplet coalescence rates and the
accurate prediction of particles trajectories, evaporation
137
rates, gas–particle turbulent interactions, and particle tur-
bulent dispersion were addressed. The relative versatility
and ease of implementation of the Lagrangian model com-
pared with the Eulerian model were also demonstrated, as
well as the accuracy of both models for predicting turbu-
lent dispersion of droplets and the turbulent flow field
within a simple jet system. Their simulations using both
approaches revealed their consistency with each other, sug-
gesting that either approach can be used with confidence
for future spray-drying modeling. Similarly, Verdurmen
et al.[108,109] simulated the drying operation taking into
account two types of agglomeration processes; namely,
the primary and secondary agglomeration. In the former,
collision of sprayed particles occurs, whereas the latter
indicates the collision between sprayed and dried particles.
Their simulated model was based on the Euler-Lagrange
formulation with the following submodels incorporated
in the STAR-CD CFD code: drying, collision, agglomer-
ation, and coalescence of the dispersed phase. A two-way
coupling with k  e turbulence model was adopted. A clear
preference was given for the Lagrangian approach, because
Eulerian approaches currently involve representing each
particle size fraction as an additional solids phase; thus,
each phase requires another set of equations. Because the
Eulerian approach does not allow for the determination
of the particles trajectory (thus, particle residence time),
it is clear that a Lagrangian approach is more adequate
for the prediction of particle agglomeration=coalescence
in spray dryers.
The above set of papers has illustrated the potential of
CFD to accurately predict both the air flow patterns and
the interaction of the gas and the discrete phase within a
spray dryer. They further demonstrated the ability of these
models to predict particle trajectories and residence times
with a high degree of precision. They have also demon-
strated good qualitative agreement between experiment
and Lagrangian predictions of droplet coalescence. More-
over, they have shown that the Lagrangian predictions of
coalescence are consistent with a rigorous multiphase
Eulerian calculation, which lends support to the validity
of the Lagrangian approach for modeling both droplet
coalescence and particle agglomeration. These workers
have provided a rough estimate of the coalescence and
agglomeration constants that appear in the Lagrangian
model of droplet coalescence; however, further reliable esti-
mates are still needed in order to attain more feasible
results.
Huang et al.[110] used Fluent 6.1 CFD formulation to
investigate the drying kinetics in a two-dimensional axi-
symmetric cylinder-on-cone spray chamber fitted with a
pressure nozzle. The dryer was 2.215 m in diameter with
a cylindrical top section of 2.005 m and a bottom cone
1.725 m high. The predicted results by the built-in drying
model in Fluent (Eulerian-Lagrangian) were compared
138 JAMALEDDINE AND RAY
with three modified drying models. The modified drying
models were developed by fitting droplets or particles
evaporation rate in falling rate period as a linear or a poly-
nomial (high- and low-order) function of moisture content,
thus predicting the droplet=particle drying history in this
period. Note that these added functions can be easily
implemented in the existing CFD code without the need
for a source code. Particle moisture content, temperature,
velocity, and particle histories were presented and
discussed. It was found that the built-in drying model in
Fluent overestimated the evaporation and drying rate in
the falling rate period using the provided turbulence mod-
els (stochastic and deterministic; not specifically described
in the paper, but it is probably discrete random walk
[DRW] with RSM provided by Fluent for the particle
phase and k-epsilon for the gas phase, which are commonly
used for these type of models) by the program for the pre-
diction of particles trajectories due to turbulence in the gas
phase. Furthermore, Huang et al.[111] used CFD for inves-
tigating various turbulent models in a two-phase swirling
flow inside spray dryers fitted with a rotary atomizer. They
showed the success of the RNG k  e model for simulating
these cases with reasonable accuracy and computational
effort when compared with other turbulence models such
as the standard k  e, realizable k  e, and RSM. Subse-
quently, Huang et al.[112] extended their previous models
and showed updated 3D CFD simulations of a spray dryer
fitted with a rotary atomizer where different turbulent
models were used and compared. Although the simulated
results compared well with the available experimental data,
the accuracy of the CFD simulations was not entirely con-
firmed because limited experimental data still exist due to
the complexity of direct experimental measurements. Thus,
qualitative agreement was concluded and more improved
CFD models were suggested. Later on, Huang et al.[113]
compared spray dryers fitted with different types of atomi-
zers; namely, rotary disc atomizers and pressure nozzles.
They emphasized the use of 3D simulation for such spray
dryers compared to 2D axisymmetric models. It was found
that pressure nozzle may lead to a high velocity variation in
the core center of the dryer with large recirculation zones.
For the rotary disk atomizer design, it was observed that a
greater proportion of the chamber volume is utilized com-
pared to the pressure nozzle design. However, larger zones
of deposits were found on the cylinder wall. Recently,
Huang and Mujumdar[114,115] used CFD models to
simulate an industrial-scale vertical and horizontal (new
application) spray dryers for heat-sensitive solutions,
respectively. In Huang and Mujumdar,[114] numerical pre-
dictions were compared with experimental measurements
made on a full-scale spray dryer. The predicted deposit
amount and locations showed that the adapted CFD model
presented good agreement with the measured data. Their
parametric studies showed that the drying air temperature,
spray rate, pressure nozzle selection, air flow rate, and wall
insulation affect the spray-drying performance. Off-design
performance predictions were also made to show the
effects of various operating parameters such as outlet tem-
perature, residual moisture, energy consumption, and wall
deposits on the dryer performance in an attempt to
improve the dryer efficiency and minimize wall deposits.
Their predicted overall drying performance values showed
that high evaporation rates can be achieved in the model
with an increase in the drying rate under certain operating
conditions in the dryer chamber. In their later publication,
Huang and Mujumdar[115] simulated a two-stage horizon-
tal spray dryer using a CFD model (Fluent) that was
validated for a conventional vertical spray dryer. Their
goal was to investigate successful design configurations
for horizontal spray-drying systems using numerical techni-
ques in an effort to provide a mathematical model that can
speed up the development process with substantial savings
in time and cost. Their work showed that the performance
of a two-stage horizontal spray-drying system with a fluid
bed incorporated in the drying chamber can significantly
affect the drying performance; nevertheless, a poor design
of the fluid bed could lead to poor drying results, even
worse than that in a single-stage spray dryer.
In a recent publication on the study of spray-drying
models for dryers equipped with rotary atomizers using
CFD, Woo et al.[116] showed a successful attempt to carry
out further investigation on two previously studied drying
models by Langrish and Kockel,[19] Walton and
Mumford,[117] Chen and Xie,[118] and Harvie et al.[88] These
are the reaction engineering approach (REA) and the
characteristic drying curve (CDC) models. Their goal was
to investigate how these drying models response to changes
in the ambient conditions of an actual spray dryer in order
to give more insights to CFD users on the use of these
models. It is noteworthy to indicate that this work showed
two dropping rate versions of the CDC drying model; these
are the linear and convex drying rate models. Moreover,
this work showed a nonprecedential attempt to calculate
the particle surface moisture using the REA model. Particle
trajectory and rigidity while being deposited on the dryer
wall were also among the predicted parameters. In addi-
tion, the influence of feed moisture content on the response
of both models was studied. In their work, a pilot-scale
short-form cylinder-on-cone spray dryer was considered
for experimental validation and CFD simulation. The com-
pared data showed that the REA and CDC (with linear
drop in drying rate version) models predicted the outlet
conditions reasonably well in contrast to what has been
predicted in the above publications. Furthermore, both
models showed different responses to the initial moisture
content of the feed, with the REA model predicting higher
drying rate at higher initial moisture, resulting in shorter
drying time. On the other hand, both models did not result
 A REVIEW: APPLICATION OF COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS
in significant changes to the particle trajectories and
particle rigidity. The authors linked the reason behind the
non-similar response of both models to the initial moisture
content of the particle to the presence of Raoult’s law in the
REA model formulation, which is not taken into account
in its counterpart.
In addition, Zbicinski and Zietara[119] studied the rate of
particle agglomeration (Euler-Lagrange frame of reference)
for countercurrent spray dryers using fully coupled,
two-dimensional, axisymmetrical steady-state CFD model
(Fluent 6.0.2). Particle dispersion is determined using the
built-in discrete random walk (DRW) turbulent stochastic
model. Agglomeration (coalescence and agglomeration in
this article) rate was determined on the basis of probability
of particle collisions and density distribution of dispersed
phase in the calculation domain. To determine the complex
flow behavior and recirculation rate, the Reynolds stress
model (RSM) for turbulence was adopted. Experimental
distributions of particle size and velocities of particle frac-
tions, random spraying angle, heat losses to the environ-
ment, etc., were incorporated into the calculations. The
regions of agglomeration and wall deposition were ident-
ified in the drying column. Theoretical and experimental
results were analyzed and compared. It was concluded that
large recirculation zones occurred near the drying air inlet
and in the vicinity of the nozzle. These recirculation zones
modified moisture and temperature profiles of both phases,
increased the residence time of particles in the dryer, and
promoted particle agglomeration and wall deposition. It
was also concluded that their agglomeration model was
able to predict the rates of agglomeration as well as the
regions of occurrence. They further stated that those
regions occurred where particle moisture content was
reported high because only wet particles can form immov-
able liquid bridges during collision.
In a subsequent paper by Li and Zbicinski,[120] they
carried out a sensitivity study on CFD modeling of cocur-
rent spray-drying process. One of their concerns was that
the failure of CFD models in predicting the physical
response of spray dryers is highly influenced by the gas
and solid actual input parameters as well as the turbulent
models used. For that matter, they attempted to eliminate
all forms of assumptions usually adopted in numerical
simulations due to lack of unreliable and scarce experi-
mental measurements by carrying out a set of theoretical
analyses based on extensive experimental measurements.
The test unit used consisted of a vertical spray tower,
500 mm in diameter and 9 m long. Raw material used was
liquid suspension of baker’s yeast with 90% initial moisture
content. A pneumatic spray nozzle with inner phase mixing
from Spray Systems (Carol Stream, IL, USA) was applied
to spray the suspension. Data obtained from the experi-
mental observations such as the material critical moisture
content were used as input for numerical simulations.
139
For model validation, simulations were performed in an
identical geometry to the experimental test column (with
no swirl). Standard CFD code Fluent 6.0.12 was config-
ured to perform numerical simulation. The Euler-Lagrange
approach was used along with the stochastic model to trace
the effects of turbulent dispersion of particles. RSM and
k  e turbulence models for the gas phase were used to con-
firm that the latter is most appropriate one for gas turbu-
lence prediction in spray dryers in the absence of swirl. It
was found that the RSM model induced 38.7% error com-
pared to 19.9% for the standard k  e model. It was also
found that particle shrinkage and critical moisture contents
played a crucial role in influencing the final form of the
results because simulations covering the falling rate period
revealed significant sensitivity to the implemented value of
critical moisture content. Finally, the authors stated that
among the most influential factors that affect the correct-
ness of CFD models are the gas turbulence models, atomiz-
ing air, turbulent particle dispersion, initial atomization
parameters, and drying kinetics. In addition, Zbicinski
and Li[121] relied on the experimental findings (such as criti-
cal moisture content) and previously validated CFD
model[120] and conducted a theoretical study on the drying
of 10, 30, and 50% of initial solid content of maltodextrin.
High accuracy was achieved for the predictions of discrete-
(particle size distribution, particle moisture content, par-
ticle velocity, spray temperature) and continuous-phase
parameters (gas temperature and humidity). The reported
maximum error from the predictions of discrete-phase
parameters was on the level of 20%, which was argued to
be close to the current capacity of the CFD technique for
modeling spray dryers. Comparison of experimental
measurements and theoretical results showed that incor-
poration of realistic spray-drying kinetics into the CFD
model and correct definition of initial drying and atomi-
zation parameters enable reliable simulations of spray-
drying processes.
In summary, Langrish[122] reviewed developments in the
simulation of spray dryer behavior including challenges
attributed to the modeling of the complex air flow pattern,
particle drying kinetics, and reaction processes. He showed
confidence and optimism in the current CFD models in
investigating methods to reduce wall deposition of particles
and thermal degradation through small changes in the air
inlet geometry. However, he also addressed pitfalls associa-
ted with CFD modeling of spray dryers such as the choice
of a suitable turbulent model because the air flow patterns
are highly sensitive to the turbulence parameters[123] selec-
ted, which in turn influence the process characteristics
including heat and drying kinetics. He discussed the differ-
ences between using the RSM and the k  e models for gas
turbulence in reference to Oakley and Bahu[86] and stated
that although the former is more precise and accurate, it
involves substantial computational effort then the later
140 JAMALEDDINE AND RAY
models. However, in the case of 3D transient modeling, he
showed how the k  e model outperform the RSM model
for predicting frequency and regularity of oscillations as
shown in Guo et al.[124–126] In regards to agglomeration,
he discussed Nijdam et al.’s[106,107] and Verdurmen
et al.’s[108,109] work. In regards to wall deposition, he
emphasized the influence of air flow pattern on the depo-
sition of the particles to the dryer wall. Through extensive
analysis of his previous work and the work of others, he
concluded that by predicting the trajectories of particles
in the drying chamber, a judgment can be made as to
whether particles will hit the wall, bounce off, adhere, or
cohere to other already adhered particles but added that
sticky material, particularly foodstuff with sugar content,
has a higher tendency to stick to the wall. Moreover, he
discussed the work of Chen et al.[127] and Ozmen and
Langrish,[128] who showed the role of electrostatic forces
on the wall deposition rates. It was found that these forces
have small effects on wall deposition rates. Finally, aroma
loss and thermal degradation were addressed in reference
to Kerkhof[129] and Coumans et al.[130] and concluded that
aroma diffusion coefficients are low compared with those
for water at low moisture contents, creating effectively
semipermeable dry layers and reducing the rate of aroma
transport significantly. Finally, because thermal degrada-
tion is crucial in the drying of heat-sensitive products, it
is important to study the particle residence time and
temperature–time history of particles as they travel in the
drying chamber and to predict those characteristics with
high accuracy. These characteristics are primarily air flow
dependent and thus their accurate prediction requires
accurate hydrodynamic prediction in the drying chamber.
CFD in Spouted Bed Dryers
Spouted beds were originally invented in Canada by
Mathur and Gishler[131] as an alternative to fluidized beds
for handling coarse particles larger than 1 mm in diam-
eter.[132] Currently, they are widely used in physical opera-
tions such as drying, coating, and granulation. Zhonghua
and Mujumdar[133] classified spouted bed regions into three
distinct regions, namely, the spout, the fountain, and the
annulus or downcomer. They stated that the volume
fraction of particles varies from zero at the spout region
to its maximum packing limit in the annulus region.
Mujumdar[134] has classified over 30 variants of the spouted
bed. Although several experimental works[135–139] have
been done on investigating the air flow and thus particle
flow pattern in spouted beds, very little work has been done
on simulating the flow numerically as well as the mass
transfer mechanism in these units. In the following, avail-
able publications on this subject are discussed.
The first attempt at modeling flows in spouted beds was
made by Thorley et al.,[140] who formulated equations
based on Newton’s force balance on solid particle
(DEM).[132] Subsequently, Lim and Mathur,[141] Epstein
and Grace,[142] Lefroy,[143] and Lefroy and Davidson[144]
modeled the flow in spouted beds adopting unidirectional
flow and neglecting radial variations and scale-up analysis.
Due to the complexity of the flow and heat and mass trans-
fer mechanisms in spouted bed units, the radial variation of
scalar and vector quantities needs to be investigated in
order to increase our understanding of the flow in these
units and to enhance our design capabilities. One of the
first attempts was provided by Szafran and Kmiec.[145]
In their study, Szafran and Kmiec[145] conducted a
two-dimensional transient Eulerian-Eulerian CFD model-
ing of the heat and mass transfer mechanisms of grain
material (spherical porous particles 220 mm in diameter,
Geldart A) in spouted bed dryers. The KTGF along with
k  e turbulent models for the gas- and solid-phase interac-
tion and particle–particle and particle–wall interaction
were adopted. The prediction of moisture contents of the
gas and solid phases was implemented in the user-defined
scalar functions (UDS) in Fluent 6.1. Theoretical correla-
tions for Nusselt and Sherwood numbers were added as
UDF to enhance and characterize the software abilities in
predicting heat and mass transfer mechanisms between
both phases. Two periods of drying were implemented;
these are the constant rate and falling rate drying periods.
To distinguish between these periods, the UDF was coded
to calculate the minimum of either of the convectional
(concentration gradient between the particle surface and
the drying medium) and diffusional (concentration gradi-
ent in the particle pores) drying rates and provide this value
as the dominating mass transfer (drying) mechanism, thus
eliminating the need for the value of critical moisture con-
tent. Due to the symmetrical nature of the geometry, one
half of the computational domains (a 2D axisymmetric
model) were used for the simulation to reduce computa-
tional effort. Both 2D and 3D simulations predicted good
qualitative agreement as previously reported by Lettieri
et al.[146] and thus the 2D model assumption is appropriate
and valid. No-slip boundary conditions were assumed for
both phases with adiabatic walls. A uniform plug flow inlet
condition was assumed for the gas phase (air plus 0.01 kg=
kg moisture content). The dryer column was 0.7 m high, the
diameter of the cylindrical part was 0.17 m, the inlet diam-
eter was 0.03 m, and the cone angle was 50
. Their calcula-
tions based on CFD simulations underpredicted the heat
transfer rate but agreed well with the mass transfer data
previously reported from an experimental investigation
by Kmiec and Szafran.[147] Moreover, the predicted values
of the Nusselt and Sherwood numbers are above 2, which is
in agreement with theory but in disagreement with the
values obtained from correlations of heat and mass transfer
in spouted beds (nearly 2–3 order of magnitudes lower).
With an additional effort, Szafran and Kmiec[148]
adapted what they called a ‘‘point-by-point’’ solution
 A REVIEW: APPLICATION OF COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS
procedure to simulate their[145] model in an attempt to
verify that this model is capable of predicting the kinetics
of long-time batch processes for two types of grains
(organic and inorganic) with great accuracy and to verify
that this procedure is capable of shortening the compu-
tation time taken by the previous study. The main idea
of this procedure is to transform the time-dependent
system of grain moisture content versus time to the time-
independent system of drying rates versus grain moisture
content. Geldart’s A and D group particles (microspherical
porous and rapeseed particles) were used for the simulation.
The results of the simulations were compared with their
experimental data and with values obtained from various
correlations. The drying kinetics during the constant and
falling rate drying periods of inorganic particles was pre-
dicted with sufficient accuracy with mean relative errors of
3.24 and 19.8% for the first and second periods, respectively.
Results obtained from the CFD simulations were closer to
the experimental data than to the values obtained from
correlations, which showed that a CFD modeling technique,
coupled with classical drying kinetics models, provide
useful results for engineering purposes and can be used
throughout all phases of research and development. How-
ever, the point-by-point solution procedure failed to predict
the beginning and ending drying conditions properly. The
authors stated that because this is an averaging technique,
only exact solutions can handle short-time instabilities
occurring in the beginning and ending drying conditions.
In a similar study, Zhonghua and Mujumdar[133]
adapted similar technique to Szafran and Kmiec[145] for
the numerical simulation of a spouted bed dryer. The
authors, however, used Gidaspow et al.’s correlation for
the drag coefficient[33] and the Ranz-Marshall corre-
lation[74] for Nusselt and Sherwood numbers. In addition,
a particle–wall restitution coefficient of 0.9 and a specular-
ity coefficient of 0.5 were also assumed for the particle–wall
interaction, instead of the no-slip condition adopted by
Szafran and Kmiec[145] at the dryer wall. The Tchen theory
correlations[63] for the turbulent model of the particulate
phase were adopted along with the k  e model for gas tur-
bulence. The hydrodynamic model was initially validated
against the experimental data of He et al.[149,150] for a
1.4-m-high, 0.152-m-diameter cylinder-on-cone dryer with
0.019-m-diameter air inlet. Following the numerical vali-
dation of the hydrodynamic model, the drying model was
incorporated. In their predictions, the authors commented
on the hydrodynamic behavior in great depth and
addressed its attributes to the drying behavior. Although
no experimental validation was used for the drying predic-
tions, it was found that based on the hydrodynamically
validated model, these predictions provided a qualitative
estimate for the drying kinetics in spouted beds. Their pre-
dictions provided important information for the scale-up
and process design of spouted bed dryers.
141
From the above, it can be concluded that the Eulerian-
Eulerian, transient, axisymmetric, and turbulent CFD
model incorporating the KTGF was able to predict the
flow pattern and drying kinetics for spouted beds reason-
ably well. Through the use of this technique, a deeper
understanding of the flow patterns and their effect on
drying kinetics can be achieved. However, further numeri-
cal investigations are needed for design and optimization
purposes.
CFD in Tray Dryers
An industrial and efficient alternative to the sun-drying
method of vegetables and fruits is the tray-drying oper-
ation. In this technique, fresh products are placed on
shelves or trays inside a drying chamber and dried using
convective heat transfer mechanism by means of circulated
air stream. The advantage of this method over the conven-
tional sun-drying method is the time savings, low cost, and
material handling capabilities it can provide to the food
industry. In addition, the drying rate can be controlled
by the air flow rate and air flow velocity supplied to the
drying chamber.
Previous experimental investigations on the influence of
air velocity and air distribution in the drying chamber on
the drying rates have been carried out by several research-
ers.[151,152] It was found that the drying rate is a strong
influence of the air flow and air velocity inside the drying
chamber. In order to minimize energy cost and to achieve
a better drying rate inside the drying chamber, it would
be beneficial to study the effect of the air movement in
the dryer. Mathioulakis et al.[153] used a CFD approach
to simulate the air movement inside an industrial
batch-type tray air dryer. Pilot-scale and numerical geome-
tries of the drying chamber were 6 m in length, 2.8 m in
width, and 2.0 m in height. Nonadiabatic wall conditions
were imposed with low thermal conductivities. A three-
dimensional CFD program (PHOENICS) was adopted.
Due to geometrical symmetry of the drying chamber,
one half of the total size was modeled and analyzed. The
so-called Chen-Kim k  e model, which is a variant of
the latter, was used for simulating the gas turbulence.
The choice of this model is its speed of convergence and
its outperformance in comparison to the standard k  e
models in predicting streamline curvatures and recircula-
tion. Experimentally, fruit products were placed on wood-
en trays placed on sets of supports with a maximum total
tray count of 480. Drying tests of several fruits were
performed and the results showed that the degree of fruit
dryness depended on its position within the dryer. Determi-
nation of pressure profiles, air velocities, and the weight
loss of the products at various levels in the dryer led to
the conclusion that the main cause of variations in drying
rates and moisture contents was the lack of spatial homo-
geneity of air velocities within the dryer and the presence
142 JAMALEDDINE AND RAY
of recirculation regions that enhanced heat and mass trans-
fer rates. It was also concluded that this type of dryer
would lead to nonuniform drying conditions with two
low regions of drying. These are the entrance region and
somewhere in the middle of the drying chamber.
A study conducted by Margaris and Ghiaus[154] con-
firmed the ability of CFD methods (PHOENICS) in pre-
dicting the air flow characteristics inside the tray dryer
and in improving the design of these dryers. Various turbu-
lent models were investigated and the decision on the best
model, in this case the k  e model, was made based on an
initial validation of numerical predictions for the flow
pattern of one tray with experimental data. Their numeri-
cal analyses were validated against experimental results
for a complex geometry drying spaces having hundreds
of trays. The authors carried out extensive simulation of
the air flow inside the full-scale industrial dryer and stated
that their work provided a better understanding of the
flow pattern inside tray dryers and thus can lead to a
substantial improvement of the quality of the dried
product together with considerable reduction of energy
consumption.
CFD in Fluidized Bed Dryers
The application of CFD methods in the design of
fluidized bed drying systems was presented in Theologos
et al.[155] and Assarie et al.[156] In their article, the former
authors developed a mathematical model for predicting a
three-dimensional, two-phase flow problem with heat and
mass transfer mechanisms using the two-fluid approach
formulated in PHOENICS commercial package. The scope
of their work was to determine the effect of flow dynamics
and geometrical factors on the temperature and moisture
content distribution of the dried particles. A bed height
of 1 m and bed diameter of 2 m was used. Particles density
of 1750 kg=m3 and 0.5 m in diameter were simulated with
initial moisture content of 0.25 kg=kg (wet basis). Inlet air
humidity was 0.1 kg=kg (wet basis). Wet particles entered
the computational domain from a side inlet at the 1 m level,
and dry particles overflowed from the same plane diametri-
cally opposite to the inlet point. Hot air acting as the
fluidizing and drying medium entered uniformly distribu-
ted at the bottom of the bed and exited from the top of
the containing cylindrical vessel. No turbulence models
were reported in their work. The integral form of the gov-
erning equations of mass, momentum, and energy for the
gas and solid phases was numerically solved to predict
the temperature, velocity, and moisture content distri-
bution in the dryer chamber. No entrainment was reported
in the free board region of the container due to the rela-
tively large particle diameter considered. High moisture
contents were reported at the particle inlet with uniform
dried particles at the exit region. In addition, higher air
humidity was recorded at the top of the bed with lower
moisture content of particles at that region. Their work
was not validated against any experimental findings. The
kinetic theory approach for granular flow was not used
in their simulation and thus the solid viscosity and pressure
terms were not accounted for in their predictions.
Assarie et al.[156] developed a two-dimensional math-
ematical model for batch drying based on the Eulerian
two-fluid model to simulate the drying process of wheat
particles (0.15 m internal diameter) in a fluidized bed dryer
(1.2 m high). The accuracy of their numerical results was
performed by comparing the temperature and drying time
profiles of the experiments to those of theoretical results.
They also studied the temperature and moisture distri-
bution in the drying chamber for two inlet temperatures
at gas velocities of 4 and 5 m=s. Particle–particle interac-
tion was ignored and particle–wall interaction was modeled
based on the condition proposed by Soo[48] for which par-
ticles slide along the walls with no circulation. Discrepan-
cies between the predicted and experimental data were
obvious specifically at the initial stages of drying. Never-
theless, the authors stated that their model was able to cap-
ture the two drying stages and showed the influence of the
moisture content in the solid phase on this phenomenon.
Solid temperature predictions were much closer than the
moisture content predictions upon comparison to the
experimental data. The authors argued that the high accu-
racy in the measuring tools used and the heat loss from the
drying chamber walls caused this discrepancy in addition
to the theoretical heat transfer correlation used. It can be
concluded from this work that the two-fluid model is some-
how capable of predicting the constant and falling rate
periods in fluidized bed drying systems under the same
boundary and initial conditions as well as assumptions
shown in the above model.
CFD in Impinging Jet Dryers
Impinging jet heat transfer is a very active area of
research. Numerous papers on the use of commercial
CFD packages for the investigation of the flow field in
impinging jets have appeared in the recent literature.[157,158]
In the fabrication of printed wiring boards (PWBs),
exposure to process chemicals takes place by either immer-
sion in tanks or conveyance through spray chambers.
These approaches, however, deliver nonuniform spreading
of the process chemicals on the entire surface of the PWBs
and can be optimized by an alternative impinging jet
approach.[159]
In the related area of heat and mass transfer for the
impinging jet application in the PWBs fabrication process,
an understanding of the mass transfer behavior is of critical
concern. For instance, when a rinsing process is applied
and involves dissolved species, the process is limited by
mass transfer. Thus, increasing the mass transfer rate of
a rinsing device can save space, thus facilitating the use
 A REVIEW: APPLICATION OF COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS
of multiple countercurrent stages and reducing the amount
of water required for the cleansing process. This in turn
reduces operating cost and, in some cases, the volume of
hazardous waste.[159]
In an effort to optimize and study the mass transfer
mechanism involved in the wet chemical process, Moreno
et al.[159] relied on CFD methods to characterize the fluid
dynamics and mass transfer properties of a single
impinging jet confined between parallel plates. Their data
showed that copper etching with acidic cupric chloride
solutions can be approximated as a mass transfer-limited
process and that the etching follows established correla-
tions from the literature. Their conclusion was based on
a combination of electrochemical studies, CFD simulation,
and direct etch rate.
The cooling and moisture evaporation processes in the
food industry, in particular the meat market, are critical
steps that have to be commenced as soon as the cooking
process is completed in order to save the quality and safety
of cooked meats.[160] In their paper, Hu and Sun[160] stated
the complexity of the flow field in the proximity of
cylindrical-shaped meat surfaces and discussed the reasons
behind the incentive for CFD modeling of such processes.
The authors studied the flow field characteristics and heat
and moisture transfer processes for the chilling process of
cooked ham using a commercial CFD package CFX. Their
aim was to develop a validated CFD model for predicting
cooling rate and weight loss of cooked meat simultaneously
during an air-blast chilling process in order to determine
the correct operating conditions and optimize the design
of the chilling process and equipment. In their approach,
a three-step numerical method was developed in order to
save computation time and avoid convergence problems
caused by the complex geometry of the dried object. This
three-step process involves simulating the flow field with
a low Reynolds number k  e turbulence model followed
by convective and radiative heating and the prediction of
heat and mass transfer rates. A homogenous heat transfer
coefficient based on an average coefficient was assumed
taking into account the effect of forced convection, radi-
ation, and moisture evaporation from the surface of the
cooked meat. Two fans were utilized to cool down the
meat, which was placed in a compartment measuring
700 mm in length, 360 mm in width, and 610 mm in height.
The compartment inlet and outlet were of circular shapes.
The meat diameter was 168 mm and 240 mm length. Due to
geometrical symmetry, only one half of the entire geometry
was modeled. They argued that CFD simulations can be
used to investigate the effects of changing parameters such
as inlet velocity, chillers dimensions, position of fans and
their outlet, by taking into account all forms of heat trans-
fer losses due to convective, radiative, and evaporative
losses. Furthermore, they stated the merits of using CFD
simulations compared to tedious laboratory work for
143
improving design and operation of processing equipment
and the quality and safety of meat product.
CFD in Pulse Combustion Dryers
The pulse combustion spray-drying technique is one of
the most promising methods of disperse drying but still
requires further research.[161] In their paper, Strumillo
et al.[161] analyzed the flow field, temperature, and moisture
content distribution in the drying chamber of a pulse
combustion dryer experimentally using LDA and phase
Doppler anemometry techniques and the time-dependent
velocity and temperature distribution theoretically using
CFD technique (Fluent 5.0.2). The pulse combustion spray
drying system involves a pulse combustor, a drying cham-
ber, and a cyclone. Various inlet operating conditions and
feed rates were implemented to investigate their sensitivity
on the drying process. No mass transfer models were used
in their numerical simulation. The standard k  e turbu-
lence model was used in the calculation due to the high
turbulence level observed experimentally. The flow was
modeled in a chamber 1.2 m long and 0.30 m in diameter
with a free outflow to ambient air and a preceding
12-cm-long pulse combustor pipe, 0.044 m in diameter
(horizontally oriented assembly). Raw material was intro-
duced to the drying chamber by a pneumatic nozzle. Satis-
factory agreement was found between their experimental
results and theoretical simulations for the temperature
and velocity distribution of a sodium chloride (NaCl)
solution in certain regions of the drying chamber. They
argued that observed discrepancies in other regions of the
chamber might be caused by geometrical assumptions
concerned with the system geometry (conducting walls to
facilitate the LDA measurement) and flow pattern to mini-
mize computational time and effort. Furthermore, from
their experimental and theoretical study, they were able
to prove that the character of flow produced by a pulse
combustor is complex, non-axisymmetric, and highly
turbulent. This observation enhances the drying process
in these systems.
Subsequently, the advantages of a pulsating spray-
drying process compared to the conventional spray-drying
process were shown in a study conducted by Wu and
Liu.[162] In their study, the CFD method was used for the
analysis and investigation of flow, temperature, and humi-
dity fields in a pulsating flow spray-drying chamber using
10% NaCl solution as the spraying medium. In an earlier
investigation, Zbicinski[163] studied the drying kinetics in
a pulse combustion spray dryer with the drying gas stream
pulsating from a pulse combustor at droplets atomized by a
nozzle. In this investigation, the pulsating gas stream from
a pulse combustor was used to directly atomize and dry the
slurry. The cylindrical combustion chamber was 0.25 m in
length and 0.1 m in diameter (smaller scale compared to
Strumillo et al.[161]). The tailpipe connecting the drying
144 JAMALEDDINE AND RAY
chamber to the pulse combustor was 1.5 m long and 0.04 m
in diameter (vertically oriented assembly). An optical ana-
lyzer was used to measure the size distribution of droplets.
The k  e turbulence model was used in the numerical
simulation. Particle trajectories were calculated by solving
the particle motion equations (Newton’s second law).
Spherical particles were assumed as in the previous papers.
In addition, a dilute phase with no particle–particle interac-
tion was assumed. One-way coupling was assumed; that is,
the particle phase did not affect the gas-phase flow pattern.
The second law was applied to predict the vaporization of
discrete-phase particles during the period where particle
temperature reached the vaporization temperature and
ending when the boiling temperature was reached. The rate
of vaporization in this period was modeled using convec-
tive mass transfer equation that shows the driving force
due to concentration gradient between the droplet surface
and the drying gas. The third law was then adopted when
the particles temperature exceeded the boiling point until
the last volatile component evaporated. Nonuniform grid
was implemented with fine size at the inlet and outlet and
close to the wall region to capture the flow field with better
accuracy and to satisfy turbulent conditions close to the
wall. A high pulsating gas velocity was given at the cham-
ber inlet with the inlet values of the turbulent quantities
taken proportional to the square of the input velocity.
The simulated profiles of flow field, temperature, and
humidity of the gaseous phase, as well as the particulate
phase, in the drying chamber were presented. The simula-
tion showed changes of the flow field and particle trajec-
tories in the drying chamber during one pulsating period.
A large-scale vortex was observed in the upper part of
the drying chamber because of the unstable state of flow
field and particle trajectories. Short drying time and large
evaporation rate were also observed (characteristics of
pulsating spray-drying process). The simulation results
showed that compared with a conventional spray-drying
process with steady air stream, a pulsating spray-drying
process has the following advantages: First, the average
atomized droplet diameter is reduced by about 50% com-
pared to the nozzle-type atomizer; Second, a short drying
time to reach the same final moisture content can be
achieved; and third, an evaporation rate nearly six times
higher than the evaporation rate of traditional spray-
drying process is achieved. In conclusion, their work
contributed to a better understanding of the pulsating
spray-drying process.
In a later and more recent publication, Wu and
Mujumdar[164] conducted a similar approach to Wu and
Liu[162] and relied on their experimental data to study the
effect of an intense oscillating high-temperature turbulent
flow field generated in the tailpipe of a pulse combustor.
In this work, the four turbulent models provided by Fluent
6.18 were investigated to determine the most appropriate
for the simulation of pulse combustion drying process.
Note that only the k  e turbulence model was used in
the previous work. Droplet trajectories and heat and mass
transfer rates between droplets and the drying gas were
evaluated by the discrete phase model (Lagrangian
approach) provided in Fluent. Identical assumptions were
taken as before. A two-dimensional grid with symmetrical
model and no swirl was also adopted. A grid independence
study was investigated with each of the four turbulent
models by doubling the number of grids in the radial and
axial directions. It was found that the computed results
for the RNG turbulence and the RSM models were both
suitable for pulse combustion spray dryer simulation; how-
ever, the authors used the later for the numerical prediction
of flow variables. The simulated profiles of flow field, tem-
perature, and humidity of gaseous phase and particle tra-
jectories in a drying chamber were presented and
discussed. The effects of gas temperature, pulse frequency
and amplitude, and gas mass flow rate on the transient flow
patterns, droplet trajectories, and overall dryer perform-
ance were investigated. Simulation results showed that
the flow field and droplet drying conditions vary widely
during a single pulsating period. The paper also showed
that the characteristics of pulse combustion spray drying
(very short drying times and very high drying rate) allow
it to be applied to the drying of fine droplets of highly
heat-sensitive materials even with high initial jet tempera-
ture at the atomizer inlet.
With the above discussion on the application of CFD to
the study of various types of direct drying systems, it is
worth adding a summary of some of the advantages and
disadvantages of using CFD in the study of these systems.
This will be addressed in the following section.
Merits and Shortcomings of CFD in Drying Systems
A key advantage of CFD methods in evaluating drying
systems is that it makes it possible to evaluate geometric
changes with much less time (faster turnaround time) and
expense (flexibility to change design parameters without
the expense of hardware changes) than would be involved
in laboratory testing. A second advantage is that CFD pro-
vides far more detailed output information (suited for
trouble-shooting) including, particularly, air flow vectors
throughout the system that provide engineers with a much
better understanding of why a proposed design performs
the way it does and a far better understanding of the dryer
performance than can be obtained in the laboratory. Fur-
thermore, CFD simulation provides immediate graphical
feedback during grid generation, model creation, and the
solution process.
On the contrary, CFD methods inherit disadvantages as
well. Massah and Oshinowo[165] indicated some of the com-
putational challenges (shortcomings) of CFD modeling in
the drying applications of granular material as follows.
 A REVIEW: APPLICATION OF COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS 145

First of all, they stated that most processes involve solids to their reliance on experimental observations and
with irregular shapes and a distribution of sizes, which correlated equations. Thus, although qualitative predic-
affect the mean turbulent flow interactions between phases. tions might be attainable to a reasonable extent, quantitat-
They further stated that shape and size distribution as well ive predictions are still the biggest challenge.
as the cohesion of particles that sometimes occurs in the
solid phase cannot be entirely captured in the modeling
CONCLUDING REMARKS
process, thus affecting the final form of the results. Second,
This article reviews the application of CFD for direct
Eulerian-Eulerian CFD methods rely on the kinetic theory
industrial drying processes. As can be seen from the above
approach to describe the constituent relations for solids
discussion, CFD can be used as a tool to predict the hydro-
viscosity and pressure, which are based on binary collisions
dynamic as well as the heat and mass transfer mechanisms
of smooth spherical particles and do not account for devia-
occurring in these units. It can also be used to better under-
tions in shape or size distribution. Third, the interaction
stand and design the drying equipments with less cost and
between the mean flow fields of the phases is described
effort than laboratory testing. Furthermore, past and
by drag formulas, which are derived experimentally. Pro-
recent studies showed that CFD techniques have been suc-
posed by various authors, they are primarily a function
cessfully adapted to simulate the thermal processes of
of solids volume fraction and do not include particle size
industrial dryers and that these techniques have been
distribution or particle shape. They do not include turbu-
routinely used owing to the availability of user-friendly
lent interactions either, because there is very little known
commercial packages. Considerable growth in the devel-
about the interaction between the turbulent fields of solids
opment and application of CFD in the area of drying is
and fluid phases, especially when the solids concentration is
obvious; however, the numerical predictions are by far still
high. In addition to the above-stated shortcomings, note
considered as qualitative measures of the drying kinetics
that CFD simulations of three-dimensional geometries
and should be validated against experimental results. This
are computationally demanding and costly and although
is due to the fact that model approximations are used in
in some cases the computational effort can be reduced by
association with CFD methods to facilitate and represent
modeling a two-dimensional representation of the actual
complex geometries and reduce computational time and
geometry, the realistic behavior of the simulated system
convergence problems.
might be weakly represented and not be fully captured.
Although CFD techniques are widely used, the modeler
Some geometrical systems cannot be modeled using the
should bear in mind many of the pitfalls that characterize
above simplification and thus the computational effort
them. A modeler should not entirely rely on these techni-
becomes a must. This argument also applies to models
ques to draw a concrete decision of the simulated system.
adopting the Eulerian-Lagrangian formulation for dense
There should be a common understanding that these
systems, which determine the trajectories of particles as
simulations are qualitative and not purely quantitative.
they travel in the computational domain. Finally, formulas
In addition, due to the complex nature of the processes
describing cohesion and frictional stresses within solids
occurring in the drying systems, extensive simulations must
assembly are not well established in these models.
be carried out to demonstrate that the solution is time and
As for the heat and mass transfer model capabilities
grid independent and that the numerical schemes used have
used in CFD methods, few correlations are provided by
high level of accuracy. This is particularly crucial in the
CFD software and the implementation of modified or vari-
approximation of the convective terms, because low-order
ous other correlations than the one already known and=or
schemes are stable but diffusive, whereas high-order
provided by commercial CFD software demand the need
schemes are more accurate but harder to converge.
for UDF. This method can become complicated and
usually requires many hours of coding and debugging.
Although the heat transfer model capabilities are well NOMENCLATURE
improved and capture the heat transfer mechanism to a A Surface area (m2)
reasonable extent, average Nusselt correlations are used b Coefficient in turbulence model
instead of local values. This in turn reduces the accuracy C1e, C2e, C3e Turbulence coefficients (¼1.42, 1.68, 1.2,
of the solution results. Additionally, the nature of the respectively)
CFD equations is approximated, which captures the CD Drag coefficient, defined different ways
solution results based on approximated assumptions and Cg Vapor concentration in the gas phase
not on exact solutions. From a mass transfer capabilities (kmol=m3)
point of view, mass transfer models still lack robustness Cp,s Vapor concentration at the particle
and are rarely included in the current available commercial surface (kmol=m3)
software. The physics behind these mechanisms is rich and Cl Turbulence coefficient ¼ 0.09
complex and not entirely captured by CFD methods due c Particle fluctuation velocity (m=s)
146 JAMALEDDINE AND RAY

cp Specific heat capacity of the gas phase Sh Sherwood number

(J=kg K) Tg Gas temperature (K)
cvm Virtual mass coefficient ¼ 0.5 Ts Solid temperature (K)
Dq Strain rate tensor for phase q (1=s) TcrH2O Water vapor critical temperature (k)
Ds, Dt,sg Turbulent quantities for the dispersed phase Tcrg Dry gas critical temperature (k)
Dv Diffusion coefficient of water vapor in air t Time (s)
!
(m2=s) U
!dr
Drift velocity vector (m=s)
ds Particle diameter (m) U Velocity vector of gas phase (m=s)
!g
ess Particle–particle restitution coefficient Uq Velocity vector of phase q (m=s)
!
ew Particle–wall restitution coefficient U Velocity vector of solid phase (m=s)
!s
Flift Lift force per unit volume (N=m3) U
!sg
Relative velocity between the phases (m=s)
Fvm Virtual mass force per unit volume (N=m3) U s;k Particle slip velocity parallel to the wall
Gk,g The production of turbulence kinetic energy (m=s)
g Gravitational acceleration constant (m=s2); V Volume (m3)
the gas phase X Particle moisture content (%)
go Radial distribution function X Mean particle moisture content (%)
Hpq The interphase enthalpy (J=kg) XH2O Vapor mole fraction in the gas phase
Hq Enthalpy of the q phase (J=kg) Yq Mass fraction of vapor in phase q (%)
h Heat transfer coefficient (W=m2 K)
I Identity matrix Greek Symbols
KErgun Fluid–particle interaction coefficient of the aq Volume fraction of phase q (s ¼ solid;
Ergun equation (kg=m3s) g ¼ gas)
Kgs The interphase momentum exchange as,max Maximum volume fraction of solid phase
coefficient (kg=m3s) bsg Drag force per unit volume between the
k Turbulence kinetic energy (m2=s2) phases (N=m3)
kc Convective mass transfer coefficient (m=s) cs Collisional dissipation of granular
kcond Thermal conductivity of gas phase temperature (kg=m3 s)
(W=m K) e Turbulent dissipation rate (m2=s3)
kg Turbulence quantity of the gas phase eg Turbulent dissipation rate of gas phase
(m2=s2) (m2=s3)
ks Turbulence quantity of the solid phase es Turbulent dissipation rate of solid phase
(m2=s2) (m2=s3)
ksg Turbulence quantity of the interphase gsg Turbulence quantity
(m2=s2) hs Granular temperature (m2=s2)
kh Diffusion coefficient for granular energy h Angle (rad)
Lt,g Length scale (m) K Interphase drag coefficient (kg=m3s)
M Molecular weight (kg=kmol) mb Solid bulk viscosity (kg=m s) or (Pa s)
M_ pq Mass transfer between phases per unit mg Gas dynamic viscosity (kg=m s) or (Pa s)
volume (kg=m3s) ms Solid shear viscosity (kg=m s) or (Pa s)
ms Solid mass (kg) mt,q Turbulence viscosity of phase q (kg=m s)
Nd Number of particles per unit volume (1=m3) or (Pa s)
Nus Nusselt number Pk,g, Ps,g Influence of dispersed phase on
P Pressure (N=m2) continuous phase
PcrH2O Water vapor critical pressure (Pa) qg Density of the gas phase (kg=m3)
Pcrg Dry gas critical pressure (Pa) qq Density of phase q (kg=m3)
Ps Solid pressure (N=m2) qs Density of the solid phase (kg=m3)
Psat Saturated vapor pressure (Pa) rgs The dispersion Prandtl number ¼ 0.75
Pr Prandtl number (dimensionless) rk Turbulent Prandtl number for the
Qpq Heat exchange between the phases per unit turbulent kinetic energy k
volume (W=m3) re Turbulent Prandtl number for the
R Gas constant (J=kmol K); particle radius (m) turbulent dissipation rate e
Res Solid Reynolds number sF,sg Characteristic particle relaxation time
Sc Schmidt number connected with inertial effects (s)
 A REVIEW: APPLICATION OF COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS 147

sq Reynolds stress tensor (N=m2 or Pa) 13. Mathioulakis, E.; Karathanos, V.T.; Belessiotis, V.G. Simulation of
air movement in a dryer by computational fluid dynamics: Appli-
ss Solid stress tensor (N=m2) cation for the drying of fruits. Journal of Food Engineering 1998,
st,g Characteristic time of the energetic 36, 182–200.
turbulent eddies (s) 14. Southwell, D.B.; Langrish, T.A.G.; Fletcher, D.F. Use of computa-
st,sg Lagrangian integral time scale (s) tional fluid dynamics techniques to assess design alternatives for the
r Rate of change in special coordinate (1=m) plenum chamber of a small spray dryer. In Proceedings of the First
Asian Australian Drying Conference, Bali, Indonesia, 24–27 October
Subscripts 1999; 626–633.
15. Frydman, A.; Vasseur, J.; Ducept, F.; Sionneau, M.; Moureh, J.
cr Critical property
Simulation of spray drying in superheated steam using computa-
dg Dry gas property tional fluid dynamics. Drying Technology 1999, 17, 1313–1326.
ds Dry solid property 16. Strumillo, C.; Zbicinski, I.; Smucerowicz, I.; Crowe, C. An analysis
eq Equilibrium property of a pulse combustion drying system. Chemical Engineering and
g Gas property Processing 1999, 38, 593–600.
17. Southwell, D.B.; Langrish, T.A.G. Observations of flow patterns in a
H2O(l) Liquid water
spray dryer. Drying Technology 2000, 18, 661–685.
o Initial condition 18. Reinhold, M.; Horst, C.; Hoffmann, U. Experimental and theoreti-
q, p Phase property (s ¼ solid; g ¼ gas) cal investigations of a spray dryer with simultaneous chemical reac-
s Solid property tion. Chemical Engineering Science 2001, 56, 1657–1665.
sat Saturated condition 19. Langrish, T.A.G.; Kockel, T.K. The assessment of a characteristic
drying curve for milk powder for use in computational fluid dynam-
vm Virtual mass
ics modeling. Chemical Engineering Journal 2001, 84, 69–74.
Superscripts 20. Langrish, T.A.G.; Fletcher, D.F. Spray drying of food ingredients
and applications of cfd in spray drying. Chemical Engineering
! Vector quantity Process 2001, 40, 345–354.
¼ Tensor quantity 21. Straatsma, J.; Van Houwelingen, G.; Steenbergen, A.E.; Jong, P.D.
Spray drying of food products: 1. Simulation model. Journal of Food
Engineering 1999, 42, 67–72.
REFERENCES
22. Ducept, F.; Sionneau, M.; Vasseur, J. Superheated steam dryer:
1. Mujumdar, A.S. Research and development in drying: Recent trends Simulations and experiments on product drying. Chemical Engineer-
and future prospects. Drying Technology 2004, 22 (1–2), 1–26. ing Journal 2002, 86, 75–83.
2. Bimbenet, J.J.; Boanzzi, C.; Dumoulin, E. Drying of foodstuffs. 23. Wu, Z.H.; Liu, X.D. Simulation of spray drying of a solution
In Proceedings of the 13th International Drying Symposium, Beijing, atomized in a pulsating flow. Drying Technology 2002, 20,
China, 27—30 August 2002; 26–29. 1101–1121.
3. Mujumdar, A.S.; Law, C.L. Fluidized bed drying. In Handbook of 24. Huang, L.; Kumar, K.; Mujumdar, A.S. Use of computational fluid
Industrial Drying, 3rd Ed; Mujumdar, A.S., Ed.; Marcel Dekker: dynamics to evaluate alternative spray dryer chamber configurations.
New York, 2006; 173–202. Drying Technology 2003, 21, 385–412.
4. Pallai, E.; Szentmarjay, T.; Mujumdar, A.S. Spouted bed drying. In 25. Huang, L.; Kumar, K.; Mujumdar, A.S. A parametric study of the
Handbook of Industrial Drying, 3rd enhanced Ed; Mujumdar, A.S., gas flow patterns and drying performance of co-current spray dryer:
Ed.; Taylor & Francis: New York, 2006; 363–384. Results of a computational fluid dynamic study. Drying Technology
5. Mujumdar, A.S. Impingement drying. In Handbook of Industrial 2003, 21, 957–978.
Drying, 3rd Ed; Mujumdar, A.S., Ed.; Taylor & Francis: New York, 26. Huang, L.; Kumar, K.; Mujumdar, A.S. Simulation of spray
2006; 385–396. evaporation using pressure and ultrasonic atomizer—A comparative
6. Kudra, T.; Mujumdar, A.S. Special drying techniques and novel analysis. Russian TSTU Trans (English Version), Part 1A 2004, 10,
dryers. In Handbook of Industrial Drying, 3rd Ed; Mujumdar, A.S., 83–100.
Ed.; Taylor & Francis: New York, 2006; 453–520. 27. Norton, T.; Sun, D.-W. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD)—An
7. Mujumdar, A.S.; Wu, Z. Thermal drying technologies—Cost- effective and efficient design and analysis tool for the food industry:
effective innovation aided by mathematical modeling approach. A review. Trends in Food Science and Technology 2006, 17,
Drying Technology 2008, 26, 146–154. 600–620.
8. Oakley, D.E.; Bahu, R.E. Spray=gas mixing behavior within spray 28. Xia, B.; Sun, D.W. Applications of computational fluid dynamics
dryers. Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium Drying, (CFD) in the food industry: A review. Computers and Electronics
Prague, Czechoslovakia, 1–4 August 1990; 303–313. in Agriculture 2002, 34, 5–24.
9. Oakley, D.E. Scale-up of spray dryers with the aid of computational 29. Available: http://www.fluent.com/solutions/articles/ja056.pdf
fluid dynamics. Drying Technology 1994, 12, 217–233. 30. Available: http://www.fluent.com/solutions/food/index.htm
10. Kieviet, F.G.; Kerkhof, P.J.A.M. Measurements of particle residence 31. Enwald, H.; Peirano, E.; Almstedt, A.E. Eulerian two-phase flow
time distributions in a co-current spray dryer. Drying Technology theory applied to fluidization. International Journal of Multiphase
1995, 13, 1241–1248. Flow 1996, 22 (suppl.), 21–66.
11. Levi-Hevroni, D.; Levy, A.; Borde, I. Mathematical modelling of 32. Wen, C.Y.; Yu, Y.H. Mechanics of fluidization. Chemical Engineer-
drying of liquid=solid slurries in steady state one-dimensional flow. ing Progress Symposium Series 1996, 62, 100–111.
Drying Technology 1995, 13, 1187–1201. 33. Ergun, S. Fluid flow through packed columns. Chemical Engineering
12. Kieviet, F.G.; Raaij, J.V.; Moor, P.P.E.A.D.; Kerkhof, P.J.A.M. Progress 1952, 48, 89–94.
Measurement and modelling of the air flow pattern in a pilot plant 34. Gidaspow, D.; Bezburuah, R.; Ding, J. Hydrodynamics of circulating
spray dryer. Transactions of the Institute of Chemical Engineering, fluidized beds, kinetic theory approach. Fluidization VII Proceedings
Part A 1997, 75, 321–328.
148 JAMALEDDINE AND RAY
of the 7th Engineering Foundation Conference on Fluidization, Gold
Coast (Australia), 3–8 May 1992; 75–82.
35. Tsuji, Y.; Kawagushi, T.; Tanaka, T. Discrete particle simulation
of two-dimensional fluidized bed. Powder Technology 1993, 77,
79–87.
36. Hoomans, B.P.B.; Kuipers, J.A.M.; Briels, W.J.; Van Swaaij,
W.P.M. Discrete particle simulation of bubble and slug formation
in a two-dimensional gas-fluidised bed: A hard-sphere approach.
Chemical Engineering Science 1996, 51, 99–118.
37. Chiesa, M.; Mathiesen, V.; Melheim, J.A.; Halvorsen, B. Numerical
simulation of particulate flow by the Eulerian-Lagrangian and the
Eulerian-Eulerian approach with application to a fluidized bed.
Computers and Chemical Engineering 2005, 29, 291–304.
38. Johansen, S.T.; Laux, H. Simulations of granular materials flows.
Proceedings of the International Symposium on the Reliable Flow of
Particulate Solids; Telemark College, Porsgrunn, Norway, 11–13
August 1999; 11.
39. Morton, K.W.; Mayers, D.F. Numerical Solution of Partial Differen-
tial Equations: An Introduction; Cambridge University Press:
Cambridge, UK, 1994.
40. Versteeg, H.K.; Malalasekera, W. An Introduction to Computational
Fluid Dynamics: The Finite Volume Method; Addison-Wesley,
Longman: New York, 1995.
41. Strang, G.; Fix, G. An Analysis of the Finite Element Method;
Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1973.
42. Gallagher, R.H. Finite Element Analysis: Fundamentals;
Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1975.
43. Chapman, S.; Cowling, T.G. The Mathematical Theory of
Non-Uniform Gases, 3rd Ed; Cambridge University Press:
Cambridge, UK, 1970.
44. Sinclair, J.L.; Jackson, R. Gas-particle flow in a vertical pipe with
particle-particle interactions. AIChE Journal 1989, 35, 1473–1486.
45. Ding, J.; Gidaspow, D. A bubbling fluidization model using kinetic
theory of granular flow. AIChE Journal 1990, 36, 523–538.
46. Tsuo, Y.P.; Gidaspow, D. Computation of flow patterns in
circulating fluidized beds. AICHE Journal 1990, 36, 885–896.
47. Gidaspow, D.; Tsuo, Y.P.; Luo, K.M. Computed and experimental
cluster formation and velocity profiles in circulating fluidized beds.
Fluidization IV International Fluidization Conference, Banff, Alberta,
Canada, 1–8 May 1989.
48. Soo, S.L. Fluid Dynamics of Multiphase Systems; Blaisdelle Publish-
ing: Waltham, MA, 1967.
49. Pita, J.A.; Sundaresan, S. Gas-solid flow in vertical tubes. AIChE
Journal 1991, 37, 1009–1018.
50. Louge, M.; Mastorakos, E.; Jenkins, J.T. The role of particle
collisions in pneumatic transport. Journal of Fluid Mechanics
1991, 231, 345–359.
51. Pita, J.A.; Sundaresan, S. Developing flow of a gas-particle mixture
in a vertical riser. AIChE Journal 1993, 39, 541–552.
52. Nieuwland, J.J.; Van Sint Annal, M.; Kuipers, J.A.M.; Van Swaaij,
W.P.M.; Hydrodynamic modeling of gas=particle flows in riser reac-
tors. AIChE Journal 1996, 42, 1569–1582.
53. Mathiesen, V.; Solberg, T.; Arastoopour, H.; Hjertager, H. Experi-
mental and computational study of multiphase gas=particle in a
CFB riser. AIChE Journal 1999, 45, 2503–2518.
54. Neri, A.; Gidaspow, D. Riser hydrodynamics: Simulation using
kinetic theory. AIChE Journal 2000, 46, 52–67.
55. Van Wachem, B.M.G.; Schouten, J.C.; Van den Bleek, C.M.;
Krishna, R.; Sinclair, J.L. Comparative analysis of CFD models of
dense gas-solid systems. AIChE Journal 2001, 47, 1035–1051.
56. Benyahia, S.; Arastoopour, H.; Knowlton, T.M.; Massah, H.
Simulation of particles and gas flow behavior in the riser section of
a circulating fluidized bed using the kinetic theory approach for
the particulate phase. Powder Technology 2000, 112, 24–33.
57. Knowlton, T.; Geldart, D.; Matsen, J.; King, D. Comparison of CFB
hydrodynamic models. PSRI challenge problem. Presented at the
Eighth International Fluidization Conference, Tour, France, 14–19
May 1995.
58. Ibsen, C.H.; Solberg, T.; Hjertager, B.H. Evaluation of a
three-dimensional numerical model of a scaled circulating fluidized
bed. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 2001, 40,
5081–5086.
59. Deardorf, J.W. On the magnitude of the subgrid scale eddy
coefficient. Journal of Computational Physics 1971, 7, 120–133.
60. Hidayat, M.; Rasmuson, A. Numerical assessment of gas-solid flow
in a U-bend. Transactions of Institute of Chemical Engineering, Part
A 2004, 82, 332–343.
61. Lee, L.Y.; Quek, T.Y.; Deng, R.; Ray, M.B.; Wang, C.H. Pneumatic
transport of granular materials through a 90 bend. Chemical Engin-
eering Science 2004, 59, 4637–4651.
62. Du, W.; Bao, X.J.; Xu, J.; Wei, W.S. Computational fluid dynamics
(CFD) modeling of spouted bed: Assessment of drag coefficient
correlations. Chemical Engineering Science 2006, 61, 1401–1420.
63. Hinze, J.O. Turbulence; McGraw-Hill Publishing: New York, 1975.
64. Richardson, J.R.; Zaki, W.N. Sedimentation and fluidization: Part I.
Transactions of the Institute of Chemical Engineering 1954, 32,
35–53.
65. Syamlal, M.; O’Brien, T.J. Simulation of granular layer inversion in
liquid fluidized beds. International Journal of Multiphase Flow 1988,
14, 473–481.
66. Arastoopour, H.; Pakdel, P.; Adewumi, M. Hydrodynamic analysis
of dilute gas–solids flow in a vertical pipe. Powder Technology
1990, 62, 163–170.
67. Gidaspow, D. Multiphase Flow and Fluidization; Academic Press:
San Diego, 1994.
68. Di Felice, R. The voidage functions for fluid-particle interaction
system. International Journal of Multiphase Flow 1994, 20,
153–159.
69. Kerkhof, P.J.A.M.; Coumans, W.J. Drying: A fascinating unit oper-
ation. Chemical Engineering Journal 2002, 86, 1–2.
70. Wang, L.; Sun, D.W. Recent developments in numerical modelling
of heating and cooling processes in the food industry—A review.
Trends in Foods Science 2003, 14, 408–423.
71. Kemp, I.C.; Oakley, D.E.; Bahu, R.E. Computational fluid dynamics
modeling of vertical pneumatic conveying dryers. Powder Tech-
nology 1991, 65, 477–484.
72. Cundall, P.A.; Strack, O.D. A discrete numerical model for granular
assemblies. Geotechnique 1979, 29, 47–65.
73. Tsuji, Y.; Tanaka, T.; Ishida, T. Lagrangian numerical simulation
of plug flow of cohesionless particle in a horizontal pipe. Powder
Technology 1992, 71, 239–250.
74. Ranz, W.E.; Marshall, W.R. Evaporation from drops. Chemical
Engineering Progress 1952, 48, 3–4.
75. Fyhr, C.; Rasmuson, A. Mathematical model of a pneumatic convey-
ing dryer. AIChE Journal 1997, 43, 2889–2902.
76. Eghlimi, A.; Benito, R.; Golab, K. The CFD investigation of flash
dryer and rotating kiln design. 2nd International Conference on
CFD in the Minerals and Process Industries, CSIRO, Melbourne,
Australia, 6–8 December 1999.
77. Skuratovsky, I.; Levy, A.; Borde, I. Two-fluid, two-dimensional
model for pneumatic drying. Drying Technology 2003, 21,
1645–1668.
78. Baeyens, J.; Van Gauwbergen, D.; Vinckier, I. Pneumatic drying:
The use of large-scale experimental data in a design procedure.
Powder Technology 1995, 83, 139–148.
79. Rocha, S.C.S. Contribution to Study of Vertical Pneumatic Drying:
Simulation and Influence of the Gas–Solid Heat Transfer Coefficient;
Ph.D. thesis, EPUSP, Sao Paulo SP, Brazil, 1988.
 A REVIEW: APPLICATION OF COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS
80. De Brandt. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry, Process Design &
Development 1974, 13, 396.
81. Hidayat, M.; Rasmuson, A. Heat and mass transfer in U-bend of a
pneumatic conveying dryer. Transactions of the Institute of
Chemical Engineering, Part A 2007, 85, 307–319.
82. Chen, X.D.; Lin, S.X.Q. Air drying of milk droplet under
constant and time-dependent conditions. AIChE Journal 2005, 51,
1790–1799.
83. Langrish, T.A.G.; Zbicinski, I. The effects of air inlet geometry and
spray cone angle on the wall deposition rate in spray dryers. Transac-
tions of the Institute of Chemical Engineering, Part A 1994, 72,
420–430.
84. Frydman, A.; Vasseur, A.; Moureh, J.; Sionneau, M.; Tharrult, P.
Comparison of superheated steam and air operated spray dryers
using computational fluid dynamics. Drying Technology 1998, 16,
1305–1338.
85. Frydman, A.; Vasseur, J.; Ducept, F.; Sionneau, M.; Moureh, J.
Simulation of spray drying in superheated steam using computa-
tional fluid dynamics. Drying Technology 1999, 17, 1313–1326.
86. Oakley, D.E.; Bahu, R.E. Spray=gas mixing behavior within spray
dryers. In Drying; Mujumdar, A.S.; Filkova, I., Eds.; Elsevier
Science: Amsterdam, 1991; 303–313.
87. Harvie, D.J.E.; Langrish, T.A.G.; Fletcher, D.F. Numerical simula-
tion of gas flow patterns within a tall-form spray dryer. Transactions
of Institute of Chemical Engineering, Part A 2001, 79, 235–248.
88. Harvie, D.J.E.; Langrish, T.A.G.; Fletcher, D.F. A computational
fluid dynamics study of a tall-form spray dryer. Transactions of
the Institution of Chemical Engineers, Part C 2002, 80, 163–175.
89. Southwell, D.B.; Langrish, A.G.; Fletcher, D.F. Process intensifi-
cation in spray dryers by turbulence enhancement. Transactions of
the Institute of Chemical Engineering, Part A 1999, 77, 189–205.
90. Goula, A.M.; Adamopoulos, K.G. Influence of spray drying con-
ditions on residue accumulation-simulation using CFD. Drying
Technology 2004, 22, 1107–1128.
91. Fluent 6.3 User’s Guide; Fluent Inc.: Lebanon, NH, 2006.
92. Kieviet, F.G. Modeling Quality in Spray Drying; Ph.D. thesis,
Endinhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands, 1997.
93. Langrish, T.A.G.; Fletcher, D.F. Prospects for the modelling and
design of spray dryers in the 21st century. Drying Technology
2003, 21, 197–215.
94. Crowe, C.T. Modelling spray-air contact in spray-drying systems. In
Advances in Drying; Mujumdar, A.S., Ed.; Hemisphere: New York,
1980; 63–99.
95. Oakley, D.E.; Bahu, R.E.; Reay, D. The aerodynamics of cocurrent
spray dryers. Proceedings of the 6th International Drying Symposium;
Versailles, France, 5–8 September 1988; 373–378.
96. Livesley, D.M.; Oakley, D.E.; Gillespie, R.F.; Elhaus, B.; Ranpuria,
C.K.; Taylor, T.; Wood, W.; Yeoman, M.L. Development and vali-
dation of a computational model for spray-gas mixing in spray
dryers. Proceedings of the 8th International Drying Symposium,
Montreal, Canada, 2–5 August 1992; 407–416.
97. Guo, B.; Langrish, T.A.G.; Fletcher, D.F. Time-dependent simula-
tion of turbulent flows in axisymmetric sudden expansions. Proceed-
ings of the 13th Australasian Fluid Mechanics Conference, Melbourne,
Australia, 13–18 December 1998; 283–286.
98. Langrish, T.A.G.; Oakley, D.E.; Keey, R.B.; Bahu, R.E.;
Hutchinson, C.A. Time dependent flow patterns in spray dryers.
Transactions of the Institution of Chemical Engineers, Part A
1993, 71, 355–360.
99. Southwell, D.B.; Langrish, T.A.G. Observations of flow patterns in a
spray dryer. Drying Technology 2000, 18, 661–685.
100. Stafford, R.A.; Fauroux, O.; Glass, D.H. Flow visualization and
instantaneous velocity measurements of spray dryer gas and spray
flows using particle image velocimetry. Proceedings of the 10th
149
International Drying Symposium, Krakow, Poland, 30 July–2 August
1996; 555–562.
101. LeBarbier, C.; Kockel, T.K.; Fletcher, D.F.; Langrish, T.A.G.
Experimental measurement and numerical simulation of the effect
of swirl on flow stability in spray dryers. Transactions of Institute
of Chemical Engineering, Part A 2001, 79, 260–268.
102. Guo, B.; Langrish, T.A.G.; Fletcher, D.F. Simulation of gas flow
instability in a spray dryer. Transactions of Institute of Chemical
Engineering, Part A 2003, 81, 631–638.
103. Langrish, T.A.G.; Williams, J.; Fletcher, D.F. Simulation of the
effects of inlet swirl on gas flow patterns in a pilot-scale spray dryer.
Transactions of the Institution of Chemical Engineers, Part A 2004,
82, 821–833.
104. Southwell, D.B.; Langrish, T.A.G. The effect of swirl on flow
stability in spray dryers. Transactions of the Institute of Chemical
Engineering 2001, Part A, 79, 222–234.
105. Woo, M.W.; Daud, W.R.W.; Mujumdar, A.S.; Talib, M.Z.M.;
Tasirin, S.M. Non-swirling steady and transient flow simulations in
short-form spray dryers. Chemical Product and Process Modeling
2009, 4(1), Article 20, pg. 34.
106. Nijdam, J.J.; Guo, B.; Fletcher, D.F.; Langrish, T.A.G. Challenges
of simulating droplet coalescence within a spray. Drying Technology
2004, 22, 1463–1488.
107. Nijdam, J.J.; Guo, B.; Fletcher, D.F.; Langrish, T.A.G. Validation
of the Lagrangian approach for predicting turbulent dispersion
and evaporation of droplets within a spray. Drying Technology
2006, 24, 1373–1379.
108. Verdurmen, R.E.M.; Menn, P.; Ritzert, J.; Blei, S.; Nhumaio,
G.C.S.; Sorensen, T.; Gunsing, M.; Straatsma, J.; Verschueren, M.;
Sibeijn, M.; Schulte, G.; Fritsching, U.; Bauckhage, K.; Tropea,
C.; Sommerfeld, M.; Watkins, A.P.; Yule, A.J.; Schonfeldt, H. Simu-
lation of agglomeration in spray drying installations: The EDECAD
project. Drying Technology 2004, 22, 1403–1461.
109. Verdurmen, R.E.M.; van Houwelingen, G.; Gunsing, M.;
Verschueren, M.; Straatsma, J. Agglomeration in spray drying
installations (the EDECAD project): Stickiness measurements and
simulation results. Drying Technology 2006, 24, 721–726.
110. Huang, L.; Kumar, K.; Mujumdar, A.S. Computational fluid dynamic
simulation of droplet drying in a spray dryer. Proceedings of the 14th
International Drying Symposium, São Paulo, Brazil, 22–25 August
2004; 326–332.
111. Huang, L.; Kumar, K.; Mujumdar, A.S. Simulation of a spray dryer
fitted with a rotary disk atomizer using a three-dimensional computa-
tional fluid dynamic model. Drying Technology 2004, 22, 1489–1515.
112. Huang, L.X.; Passos, M.L.; Kumar, K.; Mujumdar, A.S. A three
dimensional simulation of a spray dryer fitted with a rotary atomizer.
Drying Technology 2005, 23, 1859–1873.
113. Huang, L.X.; Kumar, K.; Mujumdar, A.S. A comparative study of a
spray dryer with rotary disc atomizer and pressure nozzle using
computational fluid dynamic simulations. Chemical Engineering
and Processing 2006, 45, 460–471.
114. Huang, L.; Mujumdar, A.S. Numerical study of two-stage horizontal
spray dryers using computational fluid dynamics. Drying
Technology 2006, 24, 727–733.
115. Huang, L.; Mujumdar, A.S. Simulation of an industrial spray dryer
and prediction of off-design performance. Drying Technology 2007,
25, 703–714.
116. Woo, M.W.; Daud, W.R.W.; Mujumdar, A.S.; Wu, Z.H.; Talib,
M.Z.M.; Tasirin, S.M. CFD evaluation of droplet drying models
in a spray dryer fitted with a rotary atomizer. Drying Technology
2008, 26, 1180–1198.
117. Walton, D.E.; Mumford, C.J. Spray dried products—
Characterization of particle morphology. Transactions of the
Institute of Chemical Engineering 1999, 77, 21–38.
150 JAMALEDDINE AND RAY
118. Chen, X.D.; Xie, G.Z. Fingerprints of the drying behavior of
particulate or thin layer food materials established using a reaction
engineering model. Transactions of the Institute of Chemical
Engineering 1997, 75, 213–222.
119. Zbicinski, I.; Zietara, R. CFD model of counter-current spray drying
process. Proceedings of the 14th International Drying Symposium, São
Paulo, Brazil, 22–25 August 2004; 169–176.
120. Li, X.; Zbicinski, I. A sensitivity study on CFD modeling of
cocurrent spray drying process. Drying Technology 2005, 23,
1681–1692.
121. Zbicinski, I.; Li, X. Conditions of accurate CFD modeling of
spray-drying process. Drying Technology 2006, 24, 1109–1114.
122. Langrish, T.A.G. New engineered particles from spray dryers:
Research needs in spray drying. Drying Technology 2007, 25, 971–983.
123. Oakley, D.E.; Bahu, R.E.; Reay, D. The aerodynamics of cocurrent
spray dryers. Proceedings of the 6th International Drying Symposium,
Versailles, France, 5–8 September 1988; 373–378.
124. Guo, B.; Langrish, T.A.G.; Fletcher, D.F. An assessment of turbu-
lence models applied to the simulation of a two-dimensional jet.
Applied Mathematical Modeling 2001, 25, 635–653.
125. Guo, B.; Langrish, T.A.G.; Fletcher, D.F. Numerical simulation of
unsteady turbulent flow in axisymmetric sudden expansions. Journal
of Fluids Engineering 2001, 123, 574–587.
126. Guo, B.; Langrish, T.A.G.; Fletcher, D.F. Simulation of turbulent
swirl flow in an axisymmetric sudden expansion. American Institute
of Aeronautics and Astronautics Journal 2001, 39, 96–102.
127. Chen, X.D.; Lake, R.; Jebson, S. Study of milk powder deposition on
a large industrial dryer. Transactions of the Institute of Chemical
Engineering 1993, 71, 180–186.
128. Ozmen, L.; Langrish, T.A.G. An experimental investigation into wall
deposition of milk powder in spray dryers. Developments in
Chemical Engineering and Minerals Processing 2005, 13, 91–108.
129. Kerkhof, P.J.A.M. The role of theoretical and mathematical model-
ing in scale-up. Drying Technology 1994, 12, 1–46.
130. Coumans, W.J.; Kerkhof, P.J.A.M.; Bruin, S. Theoretical and
practical aspects of aroma retention in spray drying and freeze
drying. Drying Technology 1994, 12, 99–149.
131. Mathur, K.B.; Gishler, P.E. A technique for contacting gases with
coarse solid particles. AIChE Journal 1955, 1, 157–164.
132. Du, W.; Wei, W.; Xu, J.; Fan Y.; Bao, X. Computational fluid
dynamics (CFD) modeling of fine particle spouting. International
Journal of Chemical Reactor Engineering 2006, 4, 1341–1361.
133. Zhonghua, W.; Mujumdar, A.S. Simulation of the hydrodynamics
and drying in a spouted bed dryer. Drying Technology 2007, 25,
59–74.
134. Mujumdar, A.S. Spouted bed technology—A brief review. In Drying;
Mujumdar, A.S., Ed.; Hemisphere: Washington, DC, 1984; 151–157.
135. Benkrid, A.; Caram, H.S. Solid flow in the annular region of a
spouted bed. AIChE Journal 1989, 35, 1328–1336.
136. He, Y.L.; Lim, C.J.; Grace, J.R. Spouted bed and spout fluid bed
behavior in a column of diameter 0.91 m. Canadian Journal of
Chemical Engineering 1992, 70, 848–857.
137. He, Y.L.; Lim, C.J.; Grace, J.R.; Zhu, J.X.; Qin, S.Z. Measurements
of voidage profiles in spouted beds. Canadian Journal of Chemical
Engineering 1994, 72, 229–234.
138. He, Y.L.; Lim, C.J.; Grace, J.R. Particle velocity profiles and solid
flow patterns in spouted beds. Canadian Journal of Chemical
Engineering 1994, 72, 561–568.
139. Roy, D.; Larachi, F.; Legros, R.; Chaouki, J. A study of solid
behavior in spouted beds using 3-D particle tracking. Canadian
Journal of Chemical Engineering 1994, 72, 945–952.
140. Thorley, B.; Mathur, K.B.; Klassen, J.; Gishler, P.E. Effect of Design
Variables on Flow Characteristics in a Spouted Bed; National
Research Council of Canada: Ottawa, 1958.
141. Lim, C.J.; Mathur, K.B. Modeling of particle movement in spouted
beds. In Fluidization; Davidson, J.F., Keairns, D.L., Eds.;
Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 1978; 104–109.
142. Epstein, N.; Grace, J.R. Spouting of particle solids. In Handbook of
Powder Science and Technology; Fayed, M.E., Otten, L., Eds.; Van
Nostrand Reinhold: New York, 1984; 507–536.
143. Lefroy, G.A. The Mechanics of Spouted Beds; Ph.D. thesis,
University of Cambridge, Cambridge, 1966.
144. Lefroy, G.A.; Davidson, J.F. The mechanics of spouted beds. Trans-
actions of the Institute of Chemical Engineering 1969, 47, 120–128.
145. Szafran, R.G.; Kmiec, A. CFD modeling of heat and mass transfer
in a spouted bed dryer. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research
2004, 43, 1113–1124.
146. Lettieri, P.; Micale, G.; Cammarata, L.; Colman, D. Computational
fluid-dynamics simulations of gas-fluidized beds: A preliminary
investigation of different modelling approaches. In Proceedings
of the 10th Workshop on Two-Phase Flow Predictions, Merseburg,
9–12 April 2002; 300–309.
147. Kmiec, A.; Szafran, R.G. Kinetics of drying of microspherical parti-
cles in a spouted bed dryer with a draft tube. In Proceedings of the
12th International Drying Symposium; Amsterdam, Netherlands,
28–31 August 2000.
148. Szafran, R.G.; Kmiec, A. Point-by-point solution procedure for the
computational fluid dynamics modeling of long-time batch drying.
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 2005, 44, 7892–7898.
149. He, Y.L.; Lim, C.J.; Grace, J.R.; Zhu, J.X.; Qin, S.Z. Measurements
of voidage profiles in spouted beds. Canadian Journal of Chemical
Engineering 1994, 72, 229–234.
150. He, Y.L.; Lim, C.J.; Grace, J.R. Particle velocity profiles and solid
flow patterns in spouted beds. Canadian Journal of Chemical
Engineering 1994, 72, 561–568.
151. Mulet, A.; Berna, A.; Borras, C.; Pinaga, F. Effect of air flow rate on
carrot drying. Drying Technology 1987, 5, 245–258.
152. Karathanos, V.T.; Belessiotis, V.G. Sun and artificial air drying
kinetics of some agricultural products. Journal of Food Engineering
1997, 31, 35–46.
153. Mathioulakis, E.; Karathanos, V.T.; Belessiotis, V.G. Simulation of
air movement in a dryer by computational fluid dynamics: Appli-
cation for the drying of fruits. Journal of Food Engineering 1998,
36, 183–200.
154. Margaris, D.P.; Ghiaus, A.D. Dried product quality improvement
by air flow manipulation in tray dryers. Journal of Food Engineering
2006, 75, 542–550.
155. Theologos, K.N.; Maroulis, Z.B.; Markatos, N.C. Simulation of
transport dynamics in fluidized-bed dryers. Drying Technology
1997, 15, 1265–1291.
156. Assarie, M.R.; Tabrizi, H.B.; Saffar-Avval, M. Numerical simulation
of fluid bed drying based on two-fluid model and experimental
validation. Applied Thermal Engineering 2007, 27, 422–429.
157. Shi, Y.; Ray, M.B.; Mujumdar, A.S. Computational study of
impingement heat transfer under a turbulent slot jet. Industrial &
Engineering Chemistry Research 2002, 41, 4643–4651.
158. Shi, Y.; Mujumdar, A.S.; Ray, M.B. Parametric study of heat trans-
fer in turbulent gas-solid flow in multiple impinging jets. Industrial &
Engineering Chemistry Research 2003, 42, 6223–6231.
159. Moreno, O.A.; Katyl, R.H.; Jones, J.D.; Moschak, P.A. Mass trans-
fer of an impinging jet, confined between parallel plates. IBM
Journal of Research and Development 1993, 37, 143.
160. Hu, Z.; Sun, D.W. CFD simulation of heat and moisture transfer for
predicting cooling rate and weight loss of cooked ham during air-blast
chilling process. Journal of Food Engineering 2000, 46, 189–198.
161. Strumillo, C.; Zbicinski, I.; Smucerowicz, I.; Crowe, C. An analysis
of a pulse combustion drying system. Chemical Engineering and
Processing 1999, 38, 593–600.
 A REVIEW: APPLICATION OF COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS 151

162. Wu, Z.H.; Liu, X.D. Simulation of spray drying of a solution where U ~ s Þ and ~
~g  U
~ gs ¼ ðU bgs is the drag force between
atomized in a pulsating flow. Drying Technology 2002, 20, 1101–1121. phases given by:
163. Zbicinski, I. Development and experimental verification of momen-
tum, heat and mass transfer model in spray drying. Journal of  
Chemical Engineering 1995, 58, 123–133. ~
bgs ¼ Kgs U~g  U
~s ðA5Þ
164. Wu, Z.H.; Mujumdar, A.S. A parametric study of spray drying of a
solution in a pulsating high temperature turbulent flow. Drying
Technology 2006, 24, 751–761. The interphase momentum coefficient Kgs is represented by
165. Massah, H.; Oshinowo, L. Advanced gas-solid multiphase flow the drag model of Gidaspow[67]:
models offer significant process improvements. Journal Articles by
Fluent Software Users 2000, Lebanon, MH, JA112, 1–6. http://
www.fluent.com/solutions/articles/ja112.pdf For ag  0:8
166. Lun, C.K.K.; Savage, S.B.; Jeffrey, U.J.; Chepurniy, N. Kinetic the-  
as 1  ag lg q g as  
ories for granular flow: Inelastic particles in couette flow and slightly
Kgs ¼ KErgun ¼ 150 þ 1:75 U ~ s
~g  U
inelastic particles in a general flow field. J. Fluid Mechanics 1984, 2
ag ds ds
140, 223–256.
167. Gidaspow, D.; Huilin, L. Equation of state and radial distribution For ag > 0:8
function of FCC particles in a CFB. AlChE Journal 1998, 279. 3 qg as  
168. Gunn, D.J. Transfer of heat or mass to particles in fixed and fluidized Kgs ¼ KWenYu ¼ CD U ~ s a2:65
~g  U ðA6Þ
g
4 ds
beds. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 1978, 21, 467–476.
169. Bird, R.B.; Stuart, W.E.; Lightfoot, E.N. Transport Phenomena;
Wiley: New York, USA, 1960. where
170. Fick, A. Ueber diffusion. Poggendorffs Annals of Physics 1855, 94,
  
59–86. 24
1 þ 0:15Re0:687 for Res  1000
CD ¼ Res s ðA7Þ
0:44 for Res > 1000
 
APPENDIX qg U~g  U ~ s  ds
Res ¼ ðA8Þ
Hydrodynamic Model Equations lg
The volume fraction balance equation is (q ¼ g, s):
The lift force ~
F lift in equations (A3) and (A4) was not
X
n considered in the simulation. The virtual mass force ~
Fvm
aq ¼ 1 ðA1Þ accounts for the force needed to accelerate the fluid
q¼1
surrounding the solid particle. It is given by:

where aq ¼ Vq
V !
~g dU
dU ~s
The mass conservation equation for phase (q ¼ g, s) is: ~
Fvm ¼ as qg cvm  ðA9Þ
dt dt
@    X n
~q ¼
qq aq þ r  qq aq U _ pq
M ðA2Þ
@t The final form of the above equations for the drag and
p¼1
virtual mass forces are based on the number of particles
presented in a computational cell (control volume). A
In the above, M _ pq (defined in the drying model section)
factor known as the number density is introduced to each
represents the mass transfer from the pth phase to the expression:
qth phase. When q ¼ g, p ¼ s, M_ pq ¼ M
_ sg ¼ M
_ gs .
The momentum balance equations for the gas- g and 6as
Nd ¼ ðA10Þ
solid-phase s are pds3

@  
~ g þ r  qg ag U ~ gU

~ g ¼ ag rP þ r  sg
For instance, the drag force in the vertical direction is
qg ag U defined as
@t
g þ~
þ qg ag~ bgs þ M _ sg U
~ gs
1   
~vm þ F~lift bgs ¼ Nd CD qg Ug  Us U ~ s Asurface
~g  U
þF ðA3Þ 2
6as 1    2
¼ 3 CD qg Ug  Us U ~ s  pds
~g  U
@  
~ s þ r  qs as U ~ sU

~ s ¼ as rPs pds 2 4
qs a s U
@t 3 as qg   
¼ CD Ug  Us U ~ s
~g  U
g ~
þ r  ss þ qs as~ bgs 4 ds
 
_ ~
 M sg U gs þ F vm þ ~
~ F lift ðA4Þ ¼ Kgs Ug  Us ðA11Þ
152 JAMALEDDINE AND RAY

The Reynolds shear stress defined in Eqs. (A3) and (A4) for where the first term on the right-hand side (RHS) is the gen-
(q ¼ g, s) is eration of energy by the solid stress tensor; the second term
represents the diffusion of energy; the third term represents
sg ¼ 2ag lg Dq the collisional dissipation of energy between the particles;
 
~ s I þ 2as ls Dq
ss ¼ Ps þ as lb r  U and the fourth term represents the energy exchange (transfer
of kinetic energy) between the gas and solid phases.
such that The diffusion coefficient for the solid phase energy
1  T 1  fluctuation given by Gidaspow[67] is
Dq ¼ ~q þ r  U
rU ~q ~q I
 rU ðA12Þ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2 3 2
150qs ds hs p 6
ks ¼ 1 þ as go ð1 þ ess Þ
384ð1 þ ess Þgo 5
Note that these values are altered for turbulent models as 1
shown in the subsequent definitions. hs 2
þ 2a2s qs ds go ð1 þ ess Þ ðA18Þ
The solid shear viscosity ms given by Gidaspow[67] is p
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 2 The dissipation of energy fluctuation due to particle
10qs ds hs p 4 collision is
ls ¼ 1 þ as go ð1 þ ess Þ
96as ð1 þ ess Þgo 5 " 1
#
1
2 2 4 hs 2 ~s
4 hs 2
cs ¼ 3as qs go ð1  ess Þhs r  U ðA19Þ
þ as qs ds ð1 þ ess Þgo ðA13Þ ds p
5 p
The radial distribution function go based on Ding and
The solid bulk viscosity mb given by Lun[166] accounts for Gidaspow’s[45] model is a measure of the probability of
the resistance of granular particles to compression and particles to collide. For dilute phases go ! 1 ; for dense
expansion: phases, go ! 1.
1 " #
1 1
4 hs 2
3 as 3
lb ¼ as qs ds go ð1 þ ess Þ ðA14Þ go ¼ 1 ðA20Þ
3 p 5 as;max

The solid pressure Ps given by Gidaspow and Huilin[167] is

composed of a kinetic term, collisional term, and cohesive
forces term due to particles surface charge; however, Drying Model Equations
becausee electrostatic forces are assumed to be negligible, The conservation equation of energy is (q ¼ g, s):
it will only be shown in the pressure equation and will @   
qq a q H q þ r  qq a q U~ q Hq ¼ aq rP
not be considered for the numerical simulation. Thus, @t
  þ sq : rU _ pq Hq
~ q þ Qpq þ M ðA21Þ
Ps ¼ as qs hs 1 þ 2ð1 þ ess Þas go  ð0:73as þ 8:957a2s Þ
The temperature distribution inside the particulate phase
ðA15Þ
was considered to be uniform; that is, with this assumption
and for Bi < 0.1, the lumped capacitance method can be
where hs is the granular temperature, which measures the used. This dictates that a heat balance at the particle
kinetic energy fluctuation in the solid phase written in surface yields:
terms of the particle fluctuating velocity c as:
dTs
c2 hAs ðTg  Ts Þ ¼ ms cp ðA22Þ
hs ¼ ðA16Þ dt
3 Introducing the number of particles per unit volume or
Equation (A16) states that the granular temperature for the number density Nd, the intensity of heat exchange between
particulate phase is directly proportional to the kinetic the phases becomes:
energy of the random motion of particles. This parameter
can be governed by the following conservation equation: 6as 6as dTs
Qsg ¼ Nd pds2 hðTg  Ts Þ ¼ hðTg  Ts Þ ¼ m s cp
  ds ds dt
3 @ ~ s hs
ðqs as hs Þ þ r  qs as U ðA23Þ
2 @t
 
¼ Ps I þ ss : r  U ~s It is crucial to note that the solid temperature at the RHS of
the equation is a function of heat and drying rates, whereas
þ r  ðks rhs Þ  cs  3bsg hs ðA17Þ the left-hand side (LHS) is the initial solid temperature.
 A REVIEW: APPLICATION OF COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS 153

Many empirical correlations are available in the litera- where Eq. (A35) was derived based on Fick’s diffusion
ture for the value of the heat transfer coefficient h. For equation[170] for a spherical particle averaged over an
example, Gunn[168] (Eq. (A25)), Ranz-Marshall[74] (Eq. elementary volume. The initial form and analytical solution
(A26)), and De Brandt[80] (Eq. (A27)): for this equation in a spherical coordinate are given
respectively as follows:
Nus kcond
h¼ ðA24Þ @C @ 2 C 2 @C @X @ 2 X 2 @X
ds ¼ Dv þ ) ¼ Dv þ
@t @r2 r @r @t @r2 r @r
Nus ¼ ð7  10ag þ 5a2g Þð1 þ 0:7Re0:2 1=3
Þ ðA36Þ
s Pr

þ ð1:33  2:4ag þ 1:2a2g ÞRe0:7

s Pr
1=3
ðA25Þ with the initial condition given by X0 ¼ Xcr and boundary
conditions at the center of the particle @X@r ¼ 0 and the
Nus ¼ 2:0 þ 0:6 Res1=2 Pr1=3 ðA26Þ particle surface X ¼ Xeq. Thus,

Nus ¼ 0:16 Re1:3 0:67

ðA27Þ X  Xeq 6X1
1 Dv t
s Pr ¼ 2 exp n2 p2 2 ðA37Þ
Xcr  Xeq p n¼1 n2 R
Such that
Because this series converges rapidly, the first term can be
cp l g used to obtain Eq. (A35) with minor errors.[133]
Pr ¼ ðA28Þ During the drying process, liquid water is removed and
kcond
the particle density gradually increases. With the assump-
lg
Sc ¼ ðA29Þ tion of no shrinkage, the particle density is expressed by:
qg Dv
qH2 OðlÞ qds
qs ¼ ðA38Þ
Analogous to the heat transfer coefficient correlations, the X ðqds  qH2 OðlÞ Þ þ qH2 OðlÞ
mass transfer coefficient kc correlations are governed by
The water vapor distribution in the gas phase can be
Sherwood number Sh defined in a similar fashion as
obtained from:
follows:

Sh ¼ ð7  10ag þ 5a2g Þð1 þ 0:7 Re0:2 1=3

Þ @
s Sc ~ g Yg Þ ¼ r  ðag qg Dv rYg Þ þ M
ðq ag Yg Þ þ r  ðqg ag U _ sg
@t g
þ ð1:33  2:4ag þ 1:2a2g ÞRe0:7
s Sc
1=3
ðA30Þ ðA39Þ
Sh ¼ 2:0 þ 0:6 Re1=2
s Sc
1=3
ðA31Þ

Sh ¼ 0:16 Re1:3 0:67

ðA32Þ Turbulence Model Equations
s Sc
To describe the effects of turbulent fluctuations of velo-
The diffusion coefficient Dv defined in the above equations cities and scalar quantities in each phase, the k  e multi-
is represented by Bird[169] as: phase turbulent model is used. In the context of gas–solid
PDv models, three approaches can be applied: (1) modeling tur-
1=3   bulent quantities with the assumption that both phases
ðPcrH2 O Pcrg ÞðTcrH2 O Tcrg Þ5=12 ð1 MH2 O þ 1 Mdg Þ1=2 form a mixture of density ratio close to unity (mixture tur-
!
4 Tg bulence model); (2) modeling the effect of the dispersed
¼ 3:64  10 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ðA33Þ phase turbulence on the gas phase and vice versa (dispersed
TcrH2 O Tcrg
turbulence model); or (3) modeling the turbulent quantities
Equations for the constant rate drying period and falling in each phase independent of each other (turbulence model
rate drying period are expressed respectively as follows: for each phase). Comparing the above options, it is obvious
that the first option is not suitable for gas–solid flow
because the density ratio of solid to gas is large. Note that
_ convection ¼ kc M ðCp;s  Cg Þ
M the third option is computationally expensive when com-
ds pared to the secondary one; thus, the dispersed turbulence
kc M Psat ðTs Þ P model is usually adopted. This model is applicable when
¼  XH2 O ðA34Þ
ds RTs RTg there is one primary phase and the rest are dispersed dilute
secondary phases such that the influence of the primary
2
_ diffusion ¼ Dv qs p ðX  Xeq Þ
M ðA35Þ phase turbulence is the dominant factor in the random
R2 motion of the secondary phase (Fluent 6.3 User’s guide).
154 JAMALEDDINE AND RAY

Continuous-Phase Turbulence Equations with inertial effects acting on a particulate phase is defined as:
The modified k
e model equations for the continuous !
phase are
1 qs
sF ;sg ¼ qg as Kgs þ CV ðA47Þ
qg
@ ~ g kÞ
ðq ag kÞ þ r  ðqg ag U The Lagrangian integral timescale calculated along particle
@t g

lt;g trajectories is defined as:
¼ r  ag rkg þ ag Gk;g
ag qg eg þ ag qg Pkg ðA40Þ
rk st;g
st;sg ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ðA48Þ
ð1 þ Cb n2 Þ
and


@ l where
~ g eg Þ ¼ r  ag t;g reg
ðqg ag eg Þ þ r  ðqg ag U
@t re ~ sg jst;g
jU
eg n¼ ðA49Þ
þ ag ðC1e Gk;g
C2e qg eg Þ þ ag qg Peg ðA41Þ Lt;g
kg
and
In the above equations, Pkg and Peg represent the influence
of the dispersed phase on the continuous phase and take Cb ¼ 1:8
1:35ðcos hÞ2 ðA50Þ
the following forms:
such that h is the angle between the mean particle velocity
Xm
Kgs
Pkg ¼ ~ gs  U
ðkgs
2kg þ U ~ dr Þ ðA42Þ and the mean relative velocity and CV ¼ 0.5 (added mass
a q
p¼1 g g coefficient).
The length scale of the turbulent eddies defined in (A49)
eg is given by:
Peg ¼ C3e Pk ðA43Þ
kg g
rffiffiffi
~ dr is defined in Eq. (A57). This velocity
The drift velocity U 3 kg3=2
Lt;g ¼ Cl ðA51Þ
results from turbulent fluctuations in the volume fraction. 2 eg
When multiplied by the interchange coefficient Kgs, it
serves as a correction to the momentum exchange term The turbulence quantities for the particulate phase
for turbulent flows. include:
!
The generation of turbulence kinetic energy due to the b2 þ gsg
mean velocity gradients Gk,g is computed from: ks ¼ kg ðA52Þ
1 þ gsg
Gk;g ¼ lt;g ðr  U ~ g ÞT Þ : r U
~ g þ ðr  U ~g ðA44Þ !
b þ gsg
The turbulent viscosity lt,g given in the above equation is writ- ksg ¼ 2kg ðA53Þ
1 þ gsg
ten in terms of the turbulent kinetic energy of the gas phase as:
1
kg2 Dt;sg ¼ ksg st;sg ðA54Þ
lt;g ¼ qg Cl ðA45Þ 3
eg
Such that
The Reynolds stress tensor defined in Eq. (A12) for the !
1
continuous phase and based on the Boussinesq hypothesis q
b ¼ ð1 þ CV Þ s þ CV ðA55Þ
is given by: qg
2 st;sg
sg ¼
ðqg ag kg þ qg ag lt;g r  U~ g ÞI gsg ¼ ðA56Þ
3 sF ;sg
þ qg ag lt;g ðr  U ~ g ÞT Þ
~ g þ ðr  U ðA46Þ The drift velocity defined in Eq. (A42) is given by:


~ Ds Dg
U dr ¼
ras
rag ðA57Þ
Dispersed-Phase Turbulence Equations rgs as rgs ag
Time and length scales that characterize the motion are Such that for Tchen theory of multiphase flow:
used to evaluate the dispersion coefficients, the correlation
functions, and the turbulent kinetic energy of the particulate
phase. The characteristic particle relaxation time connected Dg ¼ Ds ¼ Dt;sg ðA58Þ

View publication stats