computer automated radioactive particle tracking … automated radioactive particle tracking (carpt)...

Computer Automated Radioactive Particle Tracking (CARPT) and Gamma Ray Computed Tomography (CT) for Opaque Multiphase Flows

NERL-DOE Workshop on Multiphase Flow ResearchMorgantown, WV, June 6-7, 2006

Power Point Presentation with Notes

Being unable to attend this important workshop, I would like to share with attendees some of my thoughts and suggestions via this presentation.

Understanding multiphase flows on all scales, from nano to very large equipment scale, and being able to model them quantitatively is essential for a myriad of technologies, including generation of liquid fuels and energy from novel sources. While both accurate experimentation and mathematical models are needed on all scales and for all types of flows (e.g., gas-solid, gas-liquid, liquid solid, gas-liquid-solid, gas-liquid-liquid-solid, etc) I will focus here on a subset of problems that deal with quantification of fluid dynamics in multiphase reactor systems. This requires the development of codes that can effectively handle large systems of complex geometry, the improved understanding and better physical models of inter-phase interaction and turbulence, and the experimental validation of these codes.

In our Chemical Reaction Engineering Laboratory (CREL) at Washington University (WUSTL) we have developed and implemented two unique facilities for determination of velocity and holdup (volume fraction) fields in opaque systems of large volume fraction of dispersed phase. Our Computer Automated Radioactive Particle Tracking (CARPT) and Gamma Ray Computed Tomography (CT) have been used successfully to map bubble columns, stirred tanks, fluidized beds, etc.

The enclosed power point slides and notes (please read the document in Notes format) illustrate some of the successful uses of these techniques and continued remaining challenges for which we hope to attract collaborators from the workshop attendees.

Please see our last slide 33 for areas in which we seek partners for collaboration

Computer Automated Radioactive Particle Tracking (CARPT) and Gamma Ray Computed Tomography (CT)

for Opaque Multiphase Flows

M. P. DudukovicChemical Reaction Engineering Laboratory (CREL)

Washington University, St. Louis, MO 63130 – 4899, USAhttp://crelonweb.che.wustl.edu

NETL Workshop on Multiphase Flow ResearchMorgantown, WV, June 6-7, 2006

Importance of multiphase reactors and flowsFlow pattern and phase distribution determination - Conventional tracer technique and densitometry- Particle tracking and tomography- Computational fluid dynamics (CFD)Improved engineering modelsConclusions

S

S1

G

G

G

G

L

S

L

L

L

S

G

G L+S

G

G

L

L

G

G

S

S

G

G

L

Outline

Chaouki, Larachi, Dudukovic, I & EC Res., 36(11), 4476-4503 (1997)Dudukovic, Mills, Larachi, Catalysis Reviews, 44(1), 123-246 (2002) S1

http://crelonweb.che.wustl.edu/

Petroleum Refining

PolymerManufacture

EnvironmentalRemediation

Synthesis & Natural Gas Conversion

BulkChemicals

Fine Chemicals &Pharmaceuticals

HDS, HDN, HDM,Dewaxing, Fuels,Aromatics, Olefins, ...

MeOH, DME, MTBE,Paraffins, Olefins,Higher alcohols, ….

Aldehydes, Alcohols,Amines, Acids, Esters,LAB’s, Inorg Acids, ...

Ag Chem, Dyes,Fragrances, Flavors,Nutraceuticals,...

Polycarbonates,PPO, Polyolefins,Specialty plastics

De-NOx, De-SOx,HCFC’s, DPA,“Green” Processes ..

Value of Shipments:

$US 637,877 Million

Uses of Multiphase Reactor Technology

BiomassConversion

Syngas, Methanol, Ethanol, Oils, High

Value Added Products

EnergyCoal, oil, gas, nuclear power plants

ADVANCES IN MULTIPHASE REACTORS REQUIRE:Flow Mapping and Modeling of Opaque Multiphase Systems

S3

G

G

S

S

G

G

LS

G

G

G

G L+S

G

G

L

L

Dudukovic, AICHE Symposium Ser., 321, 30-50 (1999)

Dudukovic, Larachi, Mills, Catalysis Reviews (2002), 44(1), 123-246

REACTOR SCALE MODELS FOR CONTACTING OF TWO MOVING PHASESIdeal Reactor Concepts:

A) Plug Flow (PFR)

B) Stirred Tank (CSTR)U1

U2

K1

2C) Axial Dispersion Model

D) Need More Accurate Flow & Mixing Description ViaPhenomenological models based on: 1) CFD Models (Euler-Euler Formulation)2) Experimental Validation: Holdup Distribution and Velocity Field

U1

U2K

1

2

Photons of Visible light fail to pass through opaque objects

Transparent

OpaqueVisible light Photons

Visible light Photons

Gamma Ray Photons

Eye

Eye

Gamma Ray detector

High energy gamma ray can pass through opaque objects

This concept is used:

•To determine chordal densities via gamma ray densitometry and

global flow patterns (RTD) by radioactive tracer studies

•To quantify phase distributions with the aid of Computer Tomography

•To monitor the motion of a single radioactive particle which mimics

the density and flow behavior of a particular phase in order to obtain

velocity fields and mixing patterns

S4

Radioactive Techniques in Reactor Model Development

t

2σ

Reactor

Input

Response

reactor Source Detector

t

Tracer impulse response

Mean holdup

2σ Dispersion coefficient

Match dispersion model or CSTR in series model or some other compartmental model to observed response

Line averaged holdup

Gamma Ray Densitometry

From a number of line measurements obtain an approximate assessment of density and phase holdup distribution

Classic Methods for trouble shooting and “blackbox” model development

Modern methods for CFD validation and flow and mixing model development.

Tomography and single particle tracking.S5

S2 CHEMICAL REACTION ENGINEERING LABORATORY

Single source CT is a technique for measurement of the cross-sectional density distribution of two phase flow by measuring the attenuation distribution in two phase systems ( e.g. G-L, …).

Computed Tomography (CT)

∑=−=l

ijij,eff0

l)(IIlnA ρμ

Experimental Result

∑=K

ij,Kij,Kij,eff )()( ερμρμ

S6

Kumar (1994), Kumar et al., (1995)

Radioactive Particle Tracking

CARPT (RPT) Schematic Experimental Setup

Lin et al. (1985), Moslemian (1986), Devanathan (1990), Devanathan et al. (1991), Chaouki, Larachi and Dudukovic (1997)

CHEMICAL REACTION ENGINEERING LABORATORYS7

Computer Automated Radioactive Particle Tracking (CARPT)Computer Automated Radioactive Particle Tracking (CARPT)

1.In-situ calibration 2. Particle Tracking

The tracer particle Lagrangian trajectory

embedded in 0.5 to 2.3 mm

Counts from Detectors (t)+

Distance - Count Map

Instantaneous Positions(x, y, z, t)

Filtered Instantaneous Positions (x, y, z, t)

Instantaneous Velocities (x, y, z, t)

Mean Velocities(x, y, z)

Fluctuating Velocities(x, y, z, t)

Regression / Monte-Carlo Search

Filter

Time-Difference Between Successive Locations

Ensemble (Time) Average

Turbulent Parameters, Reynolds Stresses,

TKE, Eddy diffusivities, etc.

S8

Moslemian (1986);Devanathan (1990); Degaleesan ( 1996);Chaouki, Larachi, Dudukovic (1997);

Particle tracking in multiphase systems

S2 CHEMICAL REACTION ENGINEERING LABORATORYS9

Example of information gained from particle tracking

Portion of Particle Lagrangian Trajectory from CARPT in a 6” Bubble Column

Radial position, cm

(UG = 12 cm/s)(UG = 2.4 cm/s)

Ensemble Averaged Velocity Vectors

S10

Systems to which these techniques have been applied in the past

G

G

L

L

G

G

S

S

S

G

GG

G

L

G

G L+S

Bubble Column

Packed BedsRisers

Stirred TanksFluidized Beds


Bubble Column ExampleCARPT-CT and other measurements are used to develop an appropriate phenomenological reactor flow and mixing model. CFD generated data are used to assess model parameters at pilot plant or plant conditions. Reactor flow and mixing model are coupled with the kinetic information.Degaleesan et al., Chem. Eng. Sci., 51, 1967(1996); I&EC Research, 36,4670 (1997); Gupta et al., Chem. Eng. Sci., 56, 1117 (2001)

Dzz

Drr

uz(r)

1-εL(r)

0-R R

CT CT SCAN

CARPT

FLOWPATTERN

CFD + CARPT + CT

AFDU

0 100 200 300 400

1

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.20

Detector Level 1

0 100 200 300 400

1

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.20

Detector Level 6

Run 14.6

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

0 20 40 60 80 100

Time (sec)

Norm

aliz

ed R

espo

nse

Sim_L1Exp_L1Sim_L4Exp_L4Sim_L7Exp_L7

Pressure = 50 atmTemperature =250 Deg. CUg = 25 cm/s

0 20 40 60 80 100

1

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.20

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

Liquid Tracer

Gas TracerGas

Gas

DET.

Data

ModelPrediction

time (s)

time (s)

time (s)

S13

Ensemble Averaged Equations for TwoEnsemble Averaged Equations for Two--Phase FlowPhase Flow

( ) 0=ε+∂ε∂

ccc .t

u∇ ( ) 0=ε+∂ε∂

ddd .t

u∇

( ) ( ) ( )bccccvmdccccc

ccc p

tσ∇.σ∇.∇.∇ ε+ε++−ε−ερ=⎟

⎠

⎞⎜⎝

⎛ +∂

∂ερ MMguuu ( )vmdddddd

ddd p

tMMguuu

++ε−ερ=⎟⎠

⎞⎜⎝

⎛ +∂

∂ερ ∇.∇

Liquid Phase Gas Phase

CLOSURESCLOSURES

⎟⎠

⎞⎜⎝

⎛ −εε=Dt

DDt

DC dc

vmdcvmuuM

21

InterInter--Phase Momentum ExchangePhase Momentum Exchange StressesStresses

)(O.C ddvm23231 ε+ε+=

;d

6d3

p

dcd FM

πεε

=

( )dcdcD2pcd Cd

81 uuuuF −−πρ=

( ) ⎥⎦⎤

⎢⎣⎡

++=

438150124 6870

EoEof,Re.

RemaxC .

D

2

23

79

671867171

⎭⎬⎫

⎩⎨⎧

εε+

=c

c

..f

( ) )(O; ddc

*c

c*cc ε+ε+=

μμ

+μ=251T

cuu ∇∇σ

'u'u cccbc ρ−=σ

( ) dcpdbtbc

tbc

bc dk; uuuu T

c −ε=ν+νρ= ∇∇σ

)ttanConsEmpirical(2.1k b =

τρ≡≡ 2pcdgNumberEotvosEo

cdcpcdNumberynoldsReBubbleRe μ−ρ≡≡ uu

Input Parameter : Bubble Size, dp

S52S2 CHEMICAL REACTION ENGINEERING LABORATORYS14


Two-Fluid CFD of 3D Bubble Columns Using FLUENT

Sanyal et al., Chem. Eng. Sci., 55, 5071 (1999)

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

Dimensionless Radius

Axia

l Liq

uid

Velo

city

, cm

/s

CARPT DataTwo-FluidASMM

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

0.45

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1Dimensionless Radius

Gas

Hol

dup

CT DataTwo-FluidASMM

S15

Multiphase k-εImplementation of Breakup and Coalescence Models ; Chen (2004)

19 cm – ID12 cm/s

1.00 0.95 0.90 0.85 0.80 0.75 0.70 0.65 0.60 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.25 0.20 0.15 0.10 0.05 0.00

(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)

-60.0

-40.0

-20.0

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0


Tim

e-av

erag

ed L

iqui

d A

xial

Vel

ocity

, cm

/s

CARPTTwo-fluidASMM, DVASMM, SV

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0


Tim

e-av

erag

ed H

oldu

p

CTTwo-fluidASMM, DVASMM, SV

44 cm – IDUg = 10 cm/s

Ug, cm/s 10 14 30 30 30P, Bar 1 1 1 4 10


Time Evolution of the Gas Tracer Time Evolution of the Gas Tracer ConcentrationConcentration

D = 14D = 14--cm; cm; UUgg = 2.4 cm/s= 2.4 cm/s

Time Evolution of the Liquid Tracer Time Evolution of the Liquid Tracer ConcentrationConcentration

D = 14D = 14--cm; cm; UUgg = 2.4 cm/s= 2.4 cm/s

Time,Time,secsec 22 44 66 99 191900 Time,Time,

secsec 11 22 33 55 7700


COMPARISON OF COMPUTED (CFDLIB) AND MEASURED COMPARISON OF COMPUTED (CFDLIB) AND MEASURED DDzzzz

Dzz

(cm

2/s

)

τ (sec)

Ug = 12 cm/sDc = 8”

S17

Dzz

(cm

2/s

)

τ (sec)

Ug = 10 cm/sDc = 18”

Radioactive Particle Tracking (CARPT) Provides Solids

Velocity and Mixing Information

High Pressure Side(80-100 psi)

Low Pressure Side( <80 psi)

HOPPER

R

I

S

E

R

EDUCTOR

Computer Tomography (CT)Provides Solids Density Distribution

S18

WATER TANK

PUMP

RECYCLE LINE

6′11"

6′′

PP

P

P

9′11"

Cold Flow Model

Tracer Studies Confirm Liquid In Plug Flow (N > 20)

(Devanathan, 1990; Kumar, 1994; Roy, 2000)

0.2to1.025,20,155.25.2 3 ==== LSscmLcmgmmd pp ρ

Trace over 38 s (1900 positions)

CARPT Results

-505

t = 60 sTime Average(25 - 100 s)

Z = 100 cm

Z = 125 cm

0

50

100

150

-7.6 -2.6 2.4 7.4

x-Position, cm

z-Po

sitio

n, c

m

-8

-3

2

7

12

17

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Radial Position, cm

Axial Solids Velocity, cm/s

0

0.05

0.1

0.150.2

0.25

0.30.35

0.4

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Radial Position, cm

Solids Holdup

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7Radial Position, cm

Granular Temperature, cm2/s2

CFD Results

Comparison of CFD with Data

Ready for plant design, optimization and model based control

Final2-D Convection

DiffusionReactor Model for

the Riser

UL

Us

Dz

Dr

S19

Roy and Dudukovic, I&EC Res., 40, 5440 (2001)

CHEMICAL REACTION ENGINEERING LABORATORY

Circulating Fluid Bed (CFB) Reactor

Maleic Anhydride

Inert Gas

Air

Off-gas (COx, H2O,..)

ButaneFeed GasReoxidized

Catalyst

ReducedCatalyst

O2 O2V+3 V+4 V+5

HC HC

RiserRiser

Regen Riser

Catalyst Catalyst RedoxRedox

O OO

O2

Main ReactionMain Reaction

SolidsFlow

Direction

V+5

S20

GAS-SOLID RISER Gas-Solid Riser

Gas-Liquid or Liquid Fluidized Bed CARPT Detectors on Gas-Solid Riser

S21CHEMICAL REACTION ENGINEERING LABORATORY

OVERALL SOLIDS FLUX - TIME-OF-FLIGHT MEASUREMENTS

H= 2.2 m

Downcomer

Detectors to get RTD’s of the sections in the loop

ΔH = 40 cm

Solid flux from the hopper

Scintillation detectors

Sc-46 radioactive particle ( 150 μm , 2.55 g.cc-3 )

• Solids Mass Flux (Gs) in the downcomer is :

[ ] sssA A

sssss

s dAdAA

G ενρενενρ⋅⋅≈+⋅= ∫ ∫ ''

tHv s

Δ= t average time of flight obtained for number of particle visits

• Mean velocity can be calculated as

59.0=sε

Radial Solids Hold Profile (Downcomer)

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1Dimensionless Radius

Solid

s ho

ld u

p



Evaluation of Residence Time and First Passage Time DistributionEvaluation of Residence Time and First Passage Time Distributionssfrom CARPT Experimentsfrom CARPT Experiments

Time spent by the tracer between B-C should not be counted in the residence time

20 30 40 50 600

200

400

600

800

Time (sec)

Cou

nts

(#)

Part of raw data from 3 detectors

Riser bottomRiser topDowncomer top

(1 ) A

(2 ) B

(3 ) C D

Residence time

20 30 40 50 600

200

400

600

800

Time (sec)

Cou

nts

(#)

Part of raw data from 3 detectors

Riser bottomRiser topDowncomer top

(1 ) A

(2 ) B

(3 ) C D

Residence time

Solids from Solids from hopperhopper

Air inlet

Riser

Solids + air into Solids + air into disengagement sectiondisengagement section

D

O

W

N

C

O

M

ER

Lead shields

Solids from Solids from hopperhopper

Air inlet

Riser

Solids + air into Solids + air into disengagement sectiondisengagement section

D

O

W

N

C

O

M

ER

Lead shields

Typical trajectory of the tracer

BCA

D

S23

Solids RTD & FPTD Results Solids RTD & FPTD Results –– Dilute Phase Transport RegimeDilute Phase Transport Regime


1.55 1.56 1.57 1.58 1.59 1.6

x 104

0

250

500

750

1000

1250

1500Part of the RTD rawcount data at Ug(riser) =4.5 m/s, Gs = 36.8 kg/m2/s

Time (sec)

Det.1 -Riser topDet.2 - Riser bottomDet.3 - Downcomer top

1.69 sec

248.52 sec

Very long solids internal recirculation

0 1 2 4 50

0.05

0.1

0.14Solids RTD with "open" system analysis

θ ( τ = 17 )0

0.5

1

F- C

urve

0

0.2

0.3

()

0 1 2 3 4 50

0.5

1Solids FPTD with "closed" system analysis

θ ( τ = 10 )

F-C

urve

Mean of FPTD = 10 secStdev of FPTD = 41.2 sec

Mean of RTD = 17 sec Stdev of RTD = 42.3 sec

sec

sec

σ2 = 6.2, Dz = 4 m2.s-1

σ2 = 17, Dz = 7.3 m2.s-1

Co

un

ts

E(θ

)f(

θ)

Ugriser = 3.2 m.s-1 ; Gs = 33.7 kg.m-2.s-1; dp = 150 μm; ρp = 2,550 kg/m3

S24 Bhusarapu (2004)

Mean Solids Velocity Field and Holdup Mean Solids Velocity Field and Holdup –– CARPT & CTCARPT & CT


FF - Ugriser = 3.2 m.s-1; Gs = 26.6 kg.m-2.s-1

DPT - Ugriser = 4.5 m.s-1; Gs = 36.8 kg.m-2.s-1

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

0

100

200

300

400

500

Nondimensional radius ( )

Mea

n A

xial

Vel

ocity

(cm

/s)

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

0

10

20

30


Mea

n R

adia

l Vel

ocity

(cm

/s)

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15


Mea

n A

zim

utha

l Vel

ocity

(cm

/s)

ξ

ξ

ξ

DPT regimeFF regime Solids Holdup TomogramsSolids Holdup Tomograms

S25


Axial Velocity Axial Velocity PDFsPDFs –– Spatial Variation, FF RegimeSpatial Variation, FF Regime

-1000 0 10000

20

40

60r / R = 0.063

Freq

uenc

y

-1000 0 10000

20

40

60r / R = 0.438

-1000 0 10000

200

400

600r / R = 0.938

Z / D

= 3

6

-1000 0 10000

20

40

60

Freq

uenc

y

-1000 0 10000

20

40

60

80

-1000 0 10000

50

100

150

200

Z / D

= 3

5

-1000 0 10000

20

40

60

80

Freq

uenc

y

-1000 0 10000

20

40

60

80

Axial Velocity ( cm/s)-1000 0 1000

0

200

400

600

Z / D

= 3

3.7

n = 407<v> = 190.25 = 382.66

v σ

n = 384<v> = 147.02

= 340.11 σ v

n = 2208<v> = -9.84

= 169.41 σ v

n = 336<v> = 168.07

= 415.86 σ v

n = 469<v> = 126.32

= 349.41 σ v

n = 960<v> = -60.63

= 239.2 σ v

n = 463<v> = 205.8 = 375.64 σ

v

n = 447<v> = 125.85

= 347.15 σ v

n = 2186<v> = -19.08σ

v = 185.35

n - Particle Occurences in the voxel(#); <v> - Mean axial velocity(cm/s); - Standard deviation of axial velocity (cm/s) σ v

Axial Velocity –

•Large radial gradients

• Negative near the wall

• Little axial variation in the zone

• In the core (near center) seems to have two prominent velocities - negative (downflow)

- positive (upflow)

Ugriser = 3.2 m.s-1

Gs = 26.6 kg.m-2.s-1

S26

Motor

Detector

Calibration Rod

Radioactive Particle

Particle trajectories Azimuthally Averaged Velocity vector plot :

zr V,V

Plane including baffles

Plane including baffleszr VV x

Single phase flow in STR : Single phase flow in STR :

results at a glanceresults at a glance

Plane at bottom of the tank

θV,Vr

Disc

Blades

BafflesRammohan et al., Chem. Eng. Research & Design (2001), 79(18), 831-844.S27

HT=D T

DT=200mm

DT/3

DT/10

Gas Jets from

Sparger with 8 holes

Time Averaged Gas Holdup Profile

0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0 2 4 6 8 10

Radial Location (cms)

Frac

tiona

l Gas

Hol

dup

eg

Impeller

Region

Shaft + Hex Nut

Wall Region

CTCT CARPTCARPT

Two phase flow in STR : Two phase flow in STR :

results at a glanceresults at a glance

S28

Rammohan et al. I&EC Research, 42, 2589 (2003)

Liquid Distribution in Study Trickle Bed Reactors - Experimental Setup

• Exit Liquid Distribution

• Computed Tomography

DISTRIBUTOR

Single point10mm diameter

liquid inlet

PACKING6’’ (14 cm)

Column

1<L/D<4

3mm diameterglass beads

COLLECTINGTRAY

25 crosssectional areas

x/R

y/R

-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

0.400.360.320.280.240.200.160.120.080.040.00

εL

x/D=0.34 Hbed= 2D

x (mm)

y(m

m)

-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

6.56.05.55.04.54.03.53.02.52.01.51.00.50.0

Exit liquid distribution, % of total flux (FT)

L/D = 2, FT = 85 kg.m-2.s-1, Mf = 0.054UL = 4 mm.s-1, UG = 0 m.s-1

• Computed TomographyLiquid holdup

Cross-sectional liquid holdup and exit liquid distribution are compared in the region close to the reactor bottom. Figures show that results are in good qualitative agreement even though two different parameters (i.e. liquid holdup and exit liquid fluxes) are compared.

• Exit Liquid Distribution

S29

-101

1

2

3

4

x/D

-10

1

r/R

1.000.960.920.880.840.800.760.720.680.640.60

-101

1

2

3

4

x/D

-10

1

r/R

1.000.960.920.880.840.800.760.720.680.640.60

-101

1

2

3

4

x/D

-10

1

r/R

1.000.960.920.880.840.800.760.720.680.640.60

CT in Structured Packing under Counter-current flow

Gas holdup profiles at ZEROgas flow in a 12 inch column

Vl = 1.3 cm/sec

Vl = 0.63 Vl = 2.17

Corrugated Structured Packing

Results at a glance

S30

Conclusions

• Development of fundamentally based phenomenological models for reactors with two (three) moving phases is possible (e.g. bubble columns, riser, stirred tank, etc.)

• CARPT-CT provide a unique tool for evaluation of holdup and velocity distribution in these systems and for validation of CFD codes.

• CFD codes based on Euler-Euler interpenetrating fluid model with appropriate closures, upon validation, provide the means for effective calculation of reactor flow and mixing parameters.

• Phenomenological reactor models are capable of predicting tracer impulse responses. Thus they can predict reactor performance for linear kinetics exactly.

• Radioactive techniques have a major role to play in such model development.

S31

Acknowledgement of Financial Support and Effort in Advancing Multiphase Reaction Engineering and

Establishing Unique CARPT/CT Technologies

Department of Energy: DE-FC22 95 95051DE-FG22 95 P 95512

CREL Industrial Sponsors: ABB Lummus, Air Products, Bayer, Chevron, Conoco, Dow Chemicals, DuPont, Elf Atofina, Exxon, ENI Technologie, IFP, Intevep, MEMC, Mitsubishi, Mobil, Monsanto, Sasol, Shell, Solutia, Statoil, Synetix, Union Carbide, UOP

CREL Colleagues and M.H. Al-Dahhan, J. Chen, S. Degaleesan, Graduate Students: N. Devanathan, P. Gupta, A. Kemoun, B.C. Ong, Y.

Pan, N. Rados, S. Roy, A. Rammohan, Y. Jiang, M. KhadilkarY. Jiang, A. Kemoun, B.C. Ong, Y. Pan, N. Rados, S. Roy

Special Thanks to: B.A. Toseland, Air Products and ChemicalsM. Chang, ExxonMobilJ. Sanyal, FLUENT, USAB. Kashiwa, CFDLib, Los AlamosV. Ranade, NCL, Pune, India

S32

Chemical ReactionEngineering Laboratory (CREL)http://crelonweb.che.wustl.edu

Objectives

M. Al-DahhanCo-Director

M. DudukovicDirector

• Education and training of students• Advancement of reaction engineering methodology• Transfer of state-of-the-art reaction engineering to industrial practice

Sponsors

SponsorsPartners

S33

ABB LummusAir Products

BayerBP Amoco

Chevron TexacoConocoCorning

Dow ChemicalDupont

Enitechnologie

Exxon - MobilIFP

IntevepMitsubishi

PraxairSasolShell

StatoilSynetix

TotalfinaelfUOP

computer automated radioactive particle tracking … automated radioactive particle tracking (carpt)...

Documents