Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter December 24, 2019

Simulation of a Scaled down 250 MWe CFB Boiler Using Computational Particle Fluid Dynamics Numerical Model

Vidya Venkatesan, Lakshminarasimhan Mukundarajan and Anantharaman Narayanan


Eulerian-Eulerian approach and conventional Eulerian-Lagrangian model are computationally exhaustive for modelling circulating fluidized bed (CFB) riser which has wide particle size distribution and billions of particles Alternatively, the relatively recent Eulerian- Lagrangian computational particle fluid dynamics (CPFD) model enables simulation of the CFB system with lesser computational resources. Most of the published studies on CPFD simulations of CFB risers deal with single grate system. The present study aimed to investigate the performance of the CPFD model for predicting solids distribution in a CFB riser with pant-leg structure (dual grate) and characteristics similar to a commercial boiler. Experiments conducted in a scaled down 250 MWe CFB facility according to Glicksman’s simplified similarity laws for fluidized beds were simulated using commercial code Barracuda. The bottom dense bed, upper lean solid phase, increase in bottom bed voidage with increasing fluidizing velocity and reducing solids inventory, decrease in bottom bed solids concentration with decrease in particle size and exchange of solids between the legs typically occurring in a CFB with pant-leg structure were successfully captured by the CPFD calculations. Simulation results showed that the upper solids concentration is hardly influenced by the solids inventory level in line with the experimental observation, therefore the amount of solids inventory can be optimized during actual operation. The predicted pressures varied from the average experimental pressure data within the range –10 to 39 %.



Particle acceleration, ms–2


Archimedes Number


Model constant = 180


Model constant = 2


Drag coefficient


Smagorinsky constant = 0.01


Model constant = 27.2


Model constant = 0.0408


Particle diameter, m


Equivalent diameter, m


Wen and Yu drag function, s–1


Ergun drag function, s–1


Drag Function, s–1


Momentum exchange rate per volume between phases


Particle distribution function (PDF)


Solids flux, kgm–2s–1


Gravitational acceleration = 9.81, ms–2


Riser height, m


Static bed height, m


Unit tensor


Riser dimension, m


Particle mass, kg


Pressure, Pa


Pressure constant = 1, Pa


Reynolds number


Reynolds Number at minimum fluidizing velocity


Particle radius, m


Time, s


Velocity magnitude of gas phase, ms–1


Fluidization gas velocity, ms–1


Minimum fluidization gas velocity, ms–1


Gas phase velocity vector, ms–1


Solid phase velocity vector, ms–1


Particle spatial location, m


Constant = 3


Subgrid length scale, m


Product of dimensions of a cell, m3


Constant = 108


Effective dynamic viscosity of gas phase, Pas


Gas viscosity, Pas

μt, g

Turbulent viscosity of gas phase, Pas


Density of gas phase, kgm–3


Particle density, kgm–3


Gas phase effective stress tensor, Pa


Particle stress function, Pa


Gas volume fraction


Solid volume fraction


Initial solid volume fraction


Particle volume fraction at close pack


[1] Ministry of Forest, Environment and Climate Change, Government of India, New Delhi. Environment (Protection) Amendment Rules, 2015, Gazette Notification. in Google Scholar

[2] Basu P, Nag PK. Heat transfer to walls of a circulating fluidized-bed furnace. Chem Eng Sci. 1996;51:1–26.10.1016/0009-2509(95)00124-7Search in Google Scholar

[3] Liu X, Zhang M, Lu J, Yang H. Effect of furnace pressure drop on heat transfer in a 135 MWCFB boiler. Powder Technol. 2015;284:19–24.10.1016/j.powtec.2015.06.019Search in Google Scholar

[4] Johnsson F, Leckner B. Vertical distribution of solids in a CFB-furnace. Proceedings of the 13th Fluidized Bed Combustion conference, Orlando, Florida, May 7–10, 1995.Search in Google Scholar

[5] Andersson BA. Effects of bed particle size on heat transfer in circulating fluidized bed boilers. Powder Technol. 1996;87:239–48.10.1016/0032-5910(96)03092-6Search in Google Scholar

[6] Blaszczuk A, Nowak W. Bed-to-wall heat transfer coefficient in a supercritical CFB boiler at different bed particle sizes. Int J Heat Mass Transf. 2014;79:736–49.10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2014.08.080Search in Google Scholar

[7] Li F, Song F, Benyahia S, Wang W, Li J. MP-PIC simulation of CFB riser with EMMS based drag model. Chem Eng Sci. 2012;82:104–13.10.1016/j.ces.2012.07.020Search in Google Scholar

[8] Wang Q, Niemi T, Peltola J, Kallio S, Yang H, Lu J, et al. Particle size distribution in CPFD modeling of gas–solid flows in a CFB riser. Particuology. 2015;21:107–17.10.1016/j.partic.2014.06.009Search in Google Scholar

[9] Wang Q, Niemi T, Peltola J, Kallio S, Yang H, Lu J, et al. Particle size distribution in CPFD modelling of gas-solid flows in a CFB riser. Particuology. 2015;21:107–17.10.1016/j.partic.2014.06.009Search in Google Scholar

[10] Hartge E-U, Ratschow L, Wischnewski R, Joachim Werther J. CFD-simulation of a circulating fluidized bed riser. Particuology. 2009;7:283–96.10.1016/j.partic.2009.04.005Search in Google Scholar

[11] Snider DM. An incompressible three-dimensional multiphase particle-in-cell model for dense particle flows. J Comput Phys. 2001;170:523–49.10.1006/jcph.2001.6747Search in Google Scholar

[12] Weng M, Plackmeyer J. Comparison between measurements and numerical simulation of particle flow and combustion at the CFBC plant Duisburg. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Circulating Fluidized Beds and Fluidization Technology, 2011.Search in Google Scholar

[13] Blaser PJ, Corina G. Validation and application of computational modelling to reduce erosion in a circulating fluidized bed boiler. Int J Chem Reactor Eng. 2012;10:A51.10.1515/1542-6580.3001Search in Google Scholar

[14] Zhang Y, Lan X, Gao J. Modelling of gas-solid flow in a CFB riser based on computational particle fluid dynamics. Pet Sci. 2012;9:535–43.10.1007/s12182-012-0240-7Search in Google Scholar

[15] Lan X, Shi X, Zhang Y, Yu W, Xu C, Gao J. Solids backmixing behaviour and effect of the mesoscale structure in CFB risers. Ind Eng Chem Res. 2013;52:11888–96.10.1021/ie3034448Search in Google Scholar

[16] Chen C, Werther J, Heinrich S, Qi H-Y, Hartge E-U. CPFD simulation of circulating fluidized bed risers. Powder Technol. 2013;235:238–47.10.1016/j.powtec.2012.10.014Search in Google Scholar

[17] Wang Q, Yang H, Wang P, Lu J, Liu Q, Zhang H, et al. Application of CPFD method in the simulation of a circulating fluidized bed with a loop seal, part I – Determination of modelling parameters. Powder Technol. 2014;253:814–21.10.1016/j.powtec.2013.11.041Search in Google Scholar

[18] Jiang Y, Qiu G, Wang H. Modelling and experimental investigation of the full loop in a circulating fluidized bed with six cyclone separators. Chem Eng Sci. 2014;109:85–97.10.1016/j.ces.2014.01.029Search in Google Scholar

[19] Thapa RK, Frohner A, Tondl G, Pfeifer C, Halvorsen BM. Circulating fluidized bed combustion reactor: computational particle fluid dynamic model validation and gas feed position optimization. Comput Chem Eng. 2016;92:180–8.10.1016/j.compchemeng.2016.05.008Search in Google Scholar

[20] Upadhyay M, Park HC, Hwang JG, Choi HS, Jang H-N, Seo Y-C. Computational particle-fluid dynamics simulation of gas-solid flow in a circulating fluidized bed with air or O2/CO2as fluidizing gas. Powder Technol. 2017;318:350–62.10.1016/j.powtec.2017.06.021Search in Google Scholar

[21] Ma Q, Lei F, Xu X, Xiao Y. Three-dimensional full loop simulation of a high density CFB with standpipe aeration experiments. Powder Technol. 2017;320:574–85.10.1016/j.powtec.2017.07.094Search in Google Scholar

[22] Liu H, Li J, Wang Q. Simulation of gas-solid flow characteristics in a circulating fluidized bed based on a computational particle fluid dynamics model. Powder Technol. 2017;321:132–42.10.1016/j.powtec.2017.07.040Search in Google Scholar

[23] Tu Q, Wang H. CPFD study of a full-loop three-dimensional pilot scale circulating fluidized bed based on EMMS drag model. Powder Technol. 2018;323:534–47.10.1016/j.powtec.2017.09.045Search in Google Scholar

[24] Wang Z, Sun J, Yang Z, West L, Li Z. Bed inventory overturn mechanism for pant-leg circulating fluidized bed boilers. Powder Technol. 2011;214:469–76.10.1016/j.powtec.2011.08.050Search in Google Scholar

[25] Sun J, Wang Z, Cao W, Wu H, Li Z, Lei X, et al. Mechanism of the impact of particle size distribution to bed inventory overturn for pant-leg circulating fluidized bed. Flow, Turbul Combust. 2013;90:885–95.10.1007/s10494-013-9458-8Search in Google Scholar

[26] Nicastro MT, Glicksman LR. Experimental verification of scaling relationships for fluidized bed. Chem Eng Sci. 1984;39:1381–91.10.1016/0009-2509(84)80071-8Search in Google Scholar

[27] Johansson A, Johnsson F, Leckner B. Solids back-mixing in CFB boilers. Chem Eng Sci. 2007;62:561–73.10.1016/j.ces.2006.09.021Search in Google Scholar

[28] Ake TR, Glicksman LR. Scale model and full scale test results of a circulating fluidized bed combustor. Seminar of fluidized bed combustion technology for utility applications, Palo Alto, California, May 3 – 5, 1988.10.1016/B978-0-08-036225-0.50007-1Search in Google Scholar

[29] Glicksman LR, Hyre M, Westphalen D. Verification of scaling relations for circulating fluidized beds. Proceedings of the 12th Fluidized Bed Combustion conference, San Diego, California, May 9–13, 1993.Search in Google Scholar

[30] Johnsson F, Vrager A, Leckner B. Solids flow pattern in the exit region of a cfb-furnace - influence of exit geometry. Proceedings of the 15th Fluidized Bed Combustion conference, Savannah, Georgia, May 16–19, 1999.Search in Google Scholar

[31] Kolar AK, Leckner B. Scaling of CFB boiler hydrodynamics. Advances in energy research, 4–5 December 2006. Mumbai: IIT Bombay, McMillan India Ltd, 2006:34–40.Search in Google Scholar

[32] Glicksman LR, Hyre MR, Farrel PA. Dynamic similarity in fluidization. Int J Multiphase Flow. 1994;20:331–86.10.1016/0301-9322(94)90077-9Search in Google Scholar

[33] Grace JR. Contacting modes and behaviour classification of gas-solid and other two-phase suspensions. Can J Chem Eng. 1986;64:353–63.10.1002/cjce.5450640301Search in Google Scholar

[34] Kunii D, Levenspiel O. Fluidization Engineering, 2nd ed. United States: Butterworth-Heinemann, 1991.Search in Google Scholar

[35] Snider DM, Clark SM, O’Rourke PJ. Eulerian – Lagrangian method for three – dimensional thermal reacting flow with application to coal gasifiers. Chem Eng Sci. 2011;66:1285–95.10.1016/j.ces.2010.12.042Search in Google Scholar

[36] Wen C, Yu Y. Mechanics of fluidization. Chem Eng Prog Symp Ser. 1966;62:100–11.Search in Google Scholar

[37] Ergun S. Fluid flow through packed columns. Chem Eng Prog. 1952;48:89–94.Search in Google Scholar

[38] Gidaspow D. Multiphase flow and fluidization: Continuum and Kinetic Theory Descriptions. Boston: Academic Press, 1994.Search in Google Scholar

[39] Svensson A, Johnsson F, Leckner B. Bottom bed regimes in a circulating fluidized bed boiler. Int J Multiphase Flow. 1996;22:1187–204.10.1016/0301-9322(96)00025-0Search in Google Scholar

[40] Johnsson F, Pallares D. Solids back mixing in CFB furnaces. Proceedings of the 14th International conference on Fluidization – From Fundamentals to Products, 2013.Search in Google Scholar

[41] Svensson A, Johnsson F, Leckner B. Fluid dynamics of the bottom bed of circulating fluidized bed boilers. Proceedings of the 12th International conference on Fluidized Bed Combustion, 1993.Search in Google Scholar

[42] Li J, Zhang H, Yang H, Liu Q, Yue G. The mechanism of lateral solid transfer in a CFB riser with pant leg structure. Energy Fuels. 2010;24:2628–33.10.1021/ef901338gSearch in Google Scholar

Received: 2019-02-25
Revised: 2019-10-05
Accepted: 2019-11-11
Published Online: 2019-12-24

© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston