Document Type : Research Paper


1 Chemical Engineering Department, University of Technology, Baghdad, Iraq

2 Chemical Engineering Department / University of Technology / Baghdad /Iraq

3 Mechanical Engineering and Energy Processes, Southern Illinois University, USA


The importance of using EBR has been renewed recently due to the sharp increase in heavy feedstocks sent to refineries and the hydrocracking process. Most of these feedstocks have a non-Newtonian behavior. The performance of this type of reactor using non-Newtonian liquid is complicated and has not been covered well yet. Hence, the present work is devoted to elucidating the effect of the non-Newtonian behavior of fluid on the hydrodynamic properties of a three-phase (gas-liquid-solid) reactor under operating conditions of different values ​​of gas velocity (2, 4, 6) cm/sec, liquid velocity (0.9, 1.39, 1.8, 2.3) cm/sec, and recycle ratio (1.5, 2, 2.5). The study observed the effect of non-Newtonian behavior using polymethyl Cellulose (PMC) at different concentrations (0.1, 0.2, 0.3, and 0.4) wt%. The pressure gradient method was used to elucidate the minimum liquid fluidization velocity and to estimate hold up, while the imaging method was used to measure the bubble's size. The results showed that the higher the gas velocity, the lower the minimum liquid fluidization velocity. As the intensity of the non-Newtonian behavior increased, gas velocity showed the opposite effect. The results also showed that increasing the velocity of liquid and gas and the intensity of the non-Newtonian increase the gas hold-up. The bubbles characteristics, represented by bubble size results, show that small bubbles appear at low gas velocities, and these bubbles collapse as gas and liquid velocities increase as well as liquid viscosity.

Graphical Abstract


  • The effect of non-Newtonian behavior on minimum fluidization velocity, phase hold-up, and bubble diameter in such a reactor was investigated.
  • The effect of gas and velocity and reflux ratio was considered.
  • Increasing the gas velocity leads to a lower liquefaction velocity. It also decreases with the intensification of non-Newtonian behavior. An increase in the recycle ratio leads to a decrease in the minimum liquefaction velocity.
  • The size of the bubbles increases with gas velocity and PMC concentration, while it decreases with the increase in the gas velocity and the recycle ratio.
  • The increase in gas hold-up coincided with increased gas and liquid velocities and apparent viscosity.


Main Subjects

[1]  S. Cressman, C. Boyer, J.J. Colyar, J.M. Schweitzer, and J.C. Viguie, Improvements of ebullated-bed technology for upgrading heavy oils, Oil & Gas Sci. and Tech., 55 (2000) 397-406.‏ doi:10.2516/OGST:2000028
[2]  A. Chander, A. Kondo, SC. Big, A. K Dalai,, and D. K Fora. Hydrodynamic characteristics of cocurrent upflow and downflow of gas and liquid in a fixed bed reactor, Fuel., 80 (2001) 1043-1053. doi:10.1016/S0016-2361(00)00170-8‏ 
[3]  H. Al-Sadiqi, B. Gourich, C. Vial, and H. Delmas. Residence time distribution measurements in an external-loop airlift reactor: Study of the hydrodynamics of the liquid circulation induced by the hydrogen bubbles, Chem. Eng. Sci., 66 (2011) 3125-3132. ‏
[4]  H. Fogler, Scott. Elements of Chemical Reaction Engineering, 3rd edn. Printice-Hall, Inc, New Jersy 1999.‏
[5]  F. G. Froment., Kenneth B. Bischoff, and Juray De Wilde. Chemical reactor analysis and design. New York: Wiley., 2(1990)
[6]  G. R. Caicedo, M. G. Ruiz, J. J. P. Marqués, and  J. G. Soler. Minimum fluidization velocities for gas–solid 2D beds, Chem. Eng. and Processing: Process Intensification., 41 (2002)761-764.

[7]  Z. Fu, J. Zhu, S.Barghi, Y.Zhao, Z. Luob  and C.Duan, Minimum fluidization velocity of binary mixtures of medium particles in the Air Dense medium fluidized bed, Chem. Eng. Sci., 2 (2019)194-201. doi:10.1016/J.CES.2019.06.005

[8]  R.S. Ruiz, F. Alonso, J.Ancheyta Pressure and temperature effects on the hydrodynamic characteristics of ebullated-bed systems, Catalyst Today., 109 (2005) 205-213.
[9]  M. F. Abid,  Z. Y. Shanain, and K. N. Abed. Experimental and analysis study on dispersion of phases in an Ebullated Bed Reactor. Oil & Gas Sci. and Tech., 74 (2019) 20.
[10]    M. F. Abid,  S. M. Ahmed, H. H. Hasan, D. Al-Mously, and S. Barghi,. Hydrodynamic Study of an Ebullated-bed Reactor in the H-oil Process, Iranian J. of Sci. and Tech., Transactions A: Science., 43 (2019) 829-838.
[11]    N. J. Alderman , Non-Newtonian Fluids: Guide to Classification and Characteristics, Report number: ESDU Data Item 97034 Affiliation: ESDU International plc (1997).
[12]    M. Nishikawa, H. Kato, and K. Hashimoto. Heat transfer in aerated tower filled with non-Newtonian liquid. Industrial & engineering chemistry process design and development., 16 (1977)133-137.
[13]    JF. T. Richardson. Sedimentation and fluidization, Transactions of the Inst. of Chem. Eng., 32 (1954) 35-53.‏
[14]    D. Pjontek, and A. Macchi. Hydrodynamic comparison of spherical and cylindrical particles in a gas–liquid–solid fluidized bed at elevated pressure and high gas holdup conditions. Powder technology. 253 (2014) 657-676.‏
[15]    H. Miura, and Y. Kawase; Hydrodynamics and Mass Transfer in Three-Phase Fluidized Beds with Non-Newtonian Fluids. Chem. Eng. Sci., 52 (1997) 4095–4104.
[16]    S. Venkatachalam,  A. Palaniappan, and K. Kandasamy. Hydrodynamic Studies on Three-Phase Combined (Internal & External) Loop Airlift Fluidized Bed Reactor Using Newtonian and non-Newtonian Liquids: Minimum Fluidization Velocity and Liquid Holdup. International Journal of Chemical Reactor Engineering., 9 (2011) doi: 10.1515/1542-6580.2473
[17]    V. Sivakumar, K. Senthilkumar and T. Kannadasan. Prediction of liquid holdup and solid holdup in three-phase fluidized bed: air/newtonian and non-newtonian liquid systems. Chemical and Biochemical Engineering Quarterly., 22 (2008) 401-410.
[18]    V. Elgozali, Linek, M. Fialova, O. Wein, and J. Zahradnık. Influence of viscosity and surface tension on performance of gas–liquid contactors with ejector type gas distributor. Chemical Engineering Science., 57 (2002) 2987-2994.‏ doi: 10.1016/S0009-2509(02)00165-3
[19]    A. Schumpe, & W.D. Deckwer. Gas holdups, specific interfacial areas, and mass transfer coefficients of aerated carboxymethyl cellulose solutions in a bubble column. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Process Design and Development., 21 (1982) 706-711. doi:10.1021/I200019A028
[20]   S. Khare, and K. Niranjan. The effect of impeller design on gas hold-up in surfactant containing highly viscous non-Newtonian agitated liquids. Chemical Engineering and Processing: Process Intensification., 41 (2002) 239-249.‏
[21]        S. V. Dharwadkar, S. B. Sawant, and J. B. Joshi. Gas hold‐up in highly viscous pseudoplastic non‐newtonian solutions in three phase sparged reactors. The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, 65(1987) 406-411.‏
[22]        K.Ho, and W. K. Lee. Circulation liquid velocity, gas holdup and volumetric oxygen transfer coefficient in external‐loop airlift reactors. Journal of Chemical Technology & Biotechnology, 56 (1993(51-58.‏
[23]        G. Kelkar, and Y. T. Shah. Gas holdup and backmixing in bubble column with polymer solutions. AIChE journal., 31 (1985) 700-702. ‏ doi:10.1002/AIC.690310424
[24]        Molina, A. Contreras, and Y. Chisti. Gas holdup, liquid circulation and mixing behaviour of viscous Newtonian media in a split-cylinder airlift bioreactor." Food and Bioproducts Processing,77(1999) 27-32.
[25]   W. T. Tang and L. S. Fan. Steady state phenol degradation in a draft‐tube, gas‐liquid‐solid fluidized‐bed bioreactor. AIChE Journal, 33 (1987) 239-249.‏
[26]   M. W. Haque, K. D. P. Nigam, V. K. Srivastava, J. B. Joshi, and K. Viswanathan. Studies on mixing time in bubble columns with pseudoplastic (carboxymethyl) cellulose solutions. Industrial & engineering chemistry research, 26 (1987) 82-86.‏