PROJECT REPORT GASIFICATION OF HIGH ASH INDIAN COAL USING FLUIDIZED BED GASIFIER

Department of Mechanical Engineering (Chemical Engineering)

Under the Guidance of: Dr. Sadhana Sachan Asst. Professor Chemical Engg.

By: Megha Sharma Rishabh Mathur Krishna Nimesh Deepika Kotal

MOTILAL NEHRU NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

Mechanical Engineering Department (Chemical Engineering) Allahabad 211004

Certificate

This is to certify that the project entitled GASIFICATION OF HIGH ASH INDIAN COAL USING FLUIDIZED BED GASIFIER submitted by MEGHA SHARMA, RISHABH MOHAN MATHUR, KRISHNA NIMESH and DEEPIKA KOTAL of B.Tech, Final Year, Chemical Engineering to the Mechanical Engineering Department (Chemical Engineering), Motilal Nehru National Institute of Technology (Deemed University), Allahabad is the bonafide record of the students own work carried out under the supervision and guidance of Asst. Professor. Dr. Sadhana Sachan.

(Dr. Sadhana Sachan)

Asst. Professor Mechanical Engineering Department (Chemical Engineering) Motilal Nehru National Institute of Technology Allahabad 211004

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

It is a great privilege for us to express our deep sense of gratitude to our guide, Asst. Professor Dr. Sadhna Sachan of Chemical Engineering Department, MNNIT for her stimulating guidance and profound assistance. We shall always cherish our association with her for her constant encouragement and freedom to thought and action that she rendered to us throughout the project. We also feel a great pleasure to thank all the staff members of the department for their cooperation which led to the successful completion of our project work. Finally, we deem it a great pleasure to thank one and all whose valuable suggestion and in time cooperation helped us to carry out this project successfully. We are also thankful to our friends and colleagues for their support.

CONTENTS: 1. Abstract 2. Introduction Advantages of Gasification process over direct combustion process 3. Types of Gasifier On the basis of Gasification of medium Air blown Oxygen blown On the basis of direction of feed Moving bed gasifier Entrained bed gasifier Fluidized bed gasifier 4. Disadvantages of fluidized bed gasifier 5. Types of fluidized bed gasifier Bubbling fluidized bed Circulating fluidized bed 6. Comparison Of Bubbling And Circulating Fluidized Bed Gasifiers 7. Comparison of operational parameter of different types of gasifier 8. Agglomeration in fluidized bed gasifier 9. Types of agglomeration Homogeneous Heterogeneous

Page No.

10.Detecting and Counteracting agglomeration 11.Methods to reduce agglomeration Operation changes to reduce agglomeration Additives Alternative bed material method 12.Simulation of Indian coal gasification in fluidized bed using Aspen plus Properties of Indian coal Factors on which ash agglomeration of coal depends Methods proposed for reducing ash agglomeration of Indian coal Simulation of gasifier showing variation of ash agglomeration with temperature Simulation model description Description of aspen plus model Results Simulation data Simulation curve Conclusion 13.Mathematical modeling Description of model Agglomeration process and model assumption Force balance Adhesive force

 Breaking force Force balance model Viscosity model Factsage modeling Modeling result and discussion Bonding stress Defluidization time prediction Conclusion from graphs

TABLES
Table No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Name of table Comparison of Operational Parameters of Different types of Gasifiers Grades of Indian coal on the basis of calorific value Gross calorific value of Indian coal and comparison with other coals Typical Proximate Analysis of Indian Coal and comparison with other coal Typical Proximate Analysis of Indian Coal and comparison with other country coal Simulation Data Values of parameter used in simulation Composition of ash component at different temperature

DIAGRAMS

Abstract
Subject: Gasification of high ash Indian coal using fluidized bed gasifier
The basic aim of the project is to study the criticality of the Indian coal and the problems associated with it during the gasification in fluidized bed gasifier. Fluidized bed gasifier needs smaller sized feed particles so that it can be aerated with the incoming gasification medium (Air or Oxygen+ Steam). High temperature favours high efficiency but it also favours the defluidization in the gasifier due to the sintering effect (sticky nature) of the ash present in the coal, which is the only main problem in fluidized bed gasifier. Since Indian coal contains high percentage of ash in it so the problem of defluidization is severe with it. Different factors for the ash agglomeration and also a mechanism for coal ash agglomeration is deduced in the project. In the project the properties of Indian coal has been analyzed with other types country coal. Study has been done to know the effect of high ash and also the operating condition (Temperature) on the syngas production efficiency of the gasifier and on the carbon conversion efficiency. To know the effect of temperature Aspen plus simulation has been done. A rigorous model of Coal gasification unit has been developed using the Gibbs free energy minimum method in the RGibbs model. A mathematical modeling has been done to find out the basic forces applied due to which agglomeration takes place and also the variation of temperature on the defluidization time is investigated. Results has been shown which shows that high temperature either have no effect on efficiency after a certain value or it will increase slightly with it but at high temperature fluidization get breaks and agglomeration of ash takes place which is difficult to stop. So an idea has been proposed for the effective improvement of operating condition which will reduce the agglomeration so as to raise carbon conversion and hence the efficiency of fluidized bed gasification.

Introduction:
In todays world petroleum and coal are the main source of energy of which petroleum is the most widely used source of energy in the form of diesel, gasoline etc. With the increase in the price of petroleum and natural gas recently, now the researchers are focusing toward the other alternative source of energy which can be used along with them so that their sustainable use can be done. Coal is the second most widely used energy source. Now days several techniques have been investigated to produce liquid fuels from coal so that the use of petroleum and natural gas can be minimized. Among all processes gasification is the most important and efficient process for producing liquid fuels likes gasoline and diesel etc from the coal. Also the clean gas obtained from a gasifier can fuel a large combined cycle system for electricity Generation. Gasification is the process in which the carbonaceous feed stock is partially oxidized at high temperature in presence of controlled amount of steam and air/oxygen. Coal gasification is a process that converts coal from a solid to a gaseous state. Though the Gasification involves the partial, rather than complete, oxidization of the feed, gasification processes operate in an oxygen-lean environment. Advantages of Gasification process over direct combustion process: 1. Most combustion-based processes such as power plants operate with excess oxygen to ensure complete conversion of the fuel, gasification processes also typically operate above their stoichiometric oxygen-to-fuel ratio to ensure near complete conversion to syngas. The amount of oxygen used in gasification, however, is always far less than that used in combustion and typically is less than half. 2. The mixture under gasifying conditions is fuel-rich; there are not enough oxygen atoms available to fully react with the feed. Consequently, instead of producing CO 2, the carbon in the feed is converted primarily to CO, and the hydrogen in the fuel is converted mostly to H2 rather than H2O. Both CO and H2 are excellent fuels for use in a combustion turbine. 3. The sulfur in fuel produces SOx in combustion processes but is converted to H2S and COS in gasification conditions. Both H2S and COS can be removed from the syngas using technology developed for the natural gas industry to levels of less than 20 ppm, which means that more than 99% of the sulfur can be removed from the fuel and will not be emitted as SOx. 4. For a given throughput of fuel processed, the volume of gas obtained from gasification is much less compared to that obtained from a combustion system. The

reduced volume of gas needs smaller equipment, and hence results in lower overall costs. Types of Gasifier: There are different parameters on the basis of which gasifiers can be classified: 1. On the basis of gasification medium Air-blown, where air is the gasification medium: Air gasification produces a low heating value (5000 to 6000 kJ/kg or 3 to 6 MJ/m3, LHV) gas, which contains about 50% nitrogen and can fuel engines and furnaces. Oxygen-blown, where pure oxygen is the gasification medium: Oxygen blowing is free from diluents like nitrogen. As a result it produces higher (15,000 kJ/kg or 10 to 12 MJ/m3, LHV) heating value gas, which is, however, still leaner than natural gas typically having a heating value of 50,000 kJ/kg (40 MJ/m3). 2. On the basis of direction of feed

Moving Bed: A diagram of a generic moving bed gasifier is shown in figure 2. Moving bed gasifiers are countercurrent flow reactors in which the coal enters at the top of the reactor and air or oxygen enters at the bottom. As the coal slowly moves down through the reactor, it is gasified and the remaining ash drops out of the bottom of the reactor. Because of the countercurrent flow arrangement, the heat of reaction from the gasification reactions serves to pre-heat the coal before it enters the gasification reaction zone. Consequently, the temperature of the syngas exiting the gasifier is significantly lower than the temperature needed for complete conversion of the coal. The residence time of the coal within a moving bed gasifier may be on the order of hours.

Fig 1. Fixed or Moving bed gasifier Moving bed gasifier has the following characteristics: 1. 2. 3. 4. Low oxidant requirements; Relatively high methane content in the produced gas; Production of hydrocarbon liquids, such as tars an oils; High cold gas thermal efficiency when the heating value of the hydrocarbon liquids are included; 5. Limited ability to handle fines. 6. Low throughput 7. Special requirements for handling caking coal. Entrained Flow: A diagram of a generic entrained flow gasifier is shown in figure 4. Finely-ground coal is injected in co-current flow with the oxidant. The coal rapidly heats up and reacts with the oxidant. The residence time of an entrained flow gasifier is on the order of seconds or tens of seconds. Because of the short residence time, entrained flow gasifiers must operate at high temperatures to achieve high carbon conversion. Consequently, most entrained flow gasifiers use oxygen rather than air and operate above the slagging temperature of the coal.

Fig 2. Entrained bed gasifier

Generic characteristics of entrained flow gasifiers include: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. High-temperature slagging operation; Entrainment of some molten slag in the raw syngas; Relatively large oxidant requirements; Large amount of sensible heat in the raw syngas; and Ability to gasify all coal regardless of rank, caking characteristics or amount of fines.

Fluidized Bed: A fluidized bed gasifier is a back-mixed or well-stirred reactor in which there is a consistent mixture of new coal particles mixed in with older, partially gasified and fully gasified particles. The mixing also fosters uniform temperatures throughout the bed. The flow of gas into the reactor (oxidant, steam, recycled syngas) must be sufficient to float the coal particles within the bed but not so high as to entrained them

out of the bed. However, as the particles are gasified, they will become smaller and lighter and will be entrained out of the reactor. It is also important that the temperatures within the bed are less than the initial ash fusion temperature of the coal to avoid particle agglomeration. Typically a cyclone downstream of the gasifier will capture the larger particles that are entrained out and these particles are recycled back to the bed. Overall, the residence time of coal particles in a fluidized bed gasifier is shorter than that of a moving bed gasifier.

Fig 3. Fluidized bed gasifier Generic characteristics of fluidized bed gasifiers include: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Extensive solids recycling; Uniform and moderate temperature; and Moderate oxygen and steam requirements Good for handling low rank coal High throughput

Disadvantages of fluidized bed Gasifier 1. A high level of back mixing is required for having a uniform temperature distribution. 2. Moderate oxygen and steam requirements increased operating costs.

3. Difficulty in handling caking coals increased maintenance. 4. Difficult to obtain high conversion rates for high rank coals increased disposal costs. 5. Agglomeration of ash particles- break fluidization

Types of fluidized bed gasifier: 1. Bubbling fluidized bed gasifier 2. Circulating fluidized bed gasifier

Fig 4. Bubbling fluidized bed COMPARISON GASIFIERS: OF BUBBLING AND

Fig 5. Circulating fluidized bed CIRCULATING FLUIDIZED BED

There are two types of fluidized bed gasifiers: bubbling and circulating. Due to the backmixing of solids as well as particle entrainment, a single bubbling fluidized bed (BFB) cannot achieve high solid conversion (Li et al., 2004). A circulating fluidized bed (CFB), which is known for its excellent heat and mass transfer and longer residence time, can achieve better conversion. Advantages of CFB over BFB for gasification are listed as follows: 1. High gassolid slip velocity ensures good mixing and excellent heat and mass transfer.

2. A CFB can process a wider range of feed particles without the penalty of entrainment loss. In a CFB, small particles are converted in single-pass, or are entrained, separated from the gas, and returned to the gasifier via an external recycle loop. Large particles, which are converted slowly, are recycled internally inside the fast bed until they are small enough for external recycling (Higman and Burgt, 2003). 3. High recirculation rates of solids provide CFBs with a solid heating rate higher than that in bubbling fluidized beds, which in turn reduces the tar production during the heating of the fuels. 4. CFBs have less restriction on the size and shape of fuel than that for bubbling or entrained bed gasifiers. For this reason CFB gasifiers are preferred for biomass or waste-product gasification. 5. CFBs use relatively fine (,400 mm) particles. Such fine particles provide the gasification reactions with very large specific gassolid contact-surface areas. 6. Gas by-passing through the bubbles in a bubbling bed does not occur in CFB gasifiers. Thus, in a CFB gasifier, excellent gassolid contact, large contact surface area, and long residence time all provide favorable conditions for efficient gasification. 7. A CFB gasifier operates at high velocities (4 to 7 m/sec), several times larger than those (1 to 1.5 m/sec) used in a bubbling bed gasifier. Therefore, for a given bed area, one can expect a much larger throughput in a CFB unit 8. The continuous formation and breakdown of clusters in the fast bed enhances the gas solid contact and therefore provides good carbon conversion in a CFB boiler. 9. CFB gasifiers are easy to scale-up and are reliable over a wider range of feedstock. Though entrained bed gasifier is best for handling all type of coals regardless of their ranks, but it requires very much high temperature which is greater than that of the ash fusion temperature. And also the reaction time of feed to get convert into the product inside the gasifier is very less (about 10 sec) so it requires pure oxygen for quick carbon conversion. All these increases the cost for the entrained bed, and also the removal of by- product is difficult. On the other hand fluidized bed gasifier can operate at lower temperature than entrained bed and also it can work with air so need of pure oxygen is not so important. And both gasifiers have near about same efficiencies. The only problem in the fluidized bed gasifier is the agglomeration problem due to which fluidization gets break down and efficiency get decreased. So if we can handle this operational problem than we will be able to increase the efficiency of fluidized bed gasifier. In our project we are focusing on gasification of Indian coal in fluidized bed gasifier as it has high ash percentage and also a low rank coal. So if we are able to minimize the risk of agglomeration of Indian coal and also find the optimum operating temperature than fluidized bed gasifier can be used as an ideal gasifier for the Indian coal gasification.

Table 1. Comparison of Operational Parameters of Different types of Gasifiers:

AGGLOMERATION IN FLUIDISED BED REACTOR: Gas-solid fluidized beds are used in processes such as catalytic reactions, drying, coating and energy conversion. In energy conversion processes, agglomeration often happens when alkali components from the fuel react with silica from the bed material and/or fuel. Together they can form alkali silicates which melt below the typical operating temperatures of about 850 C. The presence of such a liquid phase results in increased particle stickiness and formation of agglomerates. If this effect is not counteracted it can eventually result in defluidization of the bed and a subsequent costly shut-down of the installation.
The formation of agglomerates is a problem frequently encountered in the gasification of caking coals. This is caused by plastic properties which develop when such coals are subjected to temperatures above their softening point. Upon reaching this point, generally between about 370.degree. C. and about 480.degree. C., the coal particles begin to swell and deform due to the formation of bubbles during devolatilization. As the temperature increases, deformation becomes more severe, the coal becomes plastic and sticky, and may eventually become fragile. The sticky particles tend to agglomerate and form coherent solid masses which reduce the gas permeability, and tend to block the reactor and the reactor feed lines.

Fig 6. Scheme of agglomeration Types of Agglomeration: Agglomeration taking place inside a fluidised bed gasifier can be broadly classified into two types: 1. Homogeneous Agglomeration 2. Heterogeneous Agglomeration The homogenous agglomeration occurs at low temperature and could be partly compensated for by erosion of the bed. The heterogeneous agglomeration takes place at high temperatures and often involves interaction between the fuel ash and the bed material. The immobility of the bed particles make the heterogeneous agglomeration a self-accelerated process. The occurrence of hot spots in the bed is the precondition for heterogeneous agglomeration being induced. When silicon is present, alkali metals are the main contributors to heterogeneous agglomeration. Aluminum and iron compounds are able to suppress agglomeration through the high melting point of the eutectics that were formed. Detecting and counteracting agglomeration: Agglomeration in fluidized bed combustion can be a big operational problem, leading to unwanted defluidization and shutdown of the installation. Therefore, the onset of such events has to be reliably detected in an early stage and combined with counteractions to avoid further agglomeration and defluidization. Attractor comparison method has been applied on small-scale circulating fluidized beds, both in cold-flow and during combustion/gasification conditions. The method is sensitive to even small changes in the particle size, as has been shown in cold-flow tests. The monitoring method has shown to correctly indicate the onset of defluidization with an early warning time of about 30 minutes. Attractor comparison has also been used to initiate counteractions to demonstrate the suitability of the method for avoiding defluidization. The agglomeration characteristics and the time until defluidization occurs can vary considerably depending on scale and process conditions, but also for similar operating

conditions on the same scale. In all cases, attractor comparison has shown to detect the approach of defluidization early enough to prevent defluidization if a suitable counteraction strategy is applied. In industrial propylene polymerization technology of Innovene and Chisso, agglomeration of polymer particles in horizontal stirred bed reactors (HSBR) has significant negative impacts on the reactor efficiency. If the hydrodynamic change could be detected early enough, then large chunks may not be formed nor cause an unscheduled shutdown of the plant. A novel non-invasive acoustic emission (AE) technique combined with an attractor comparison method is presented. It is based on the comparison of the time series of AE signals acquired from a normal state with the time series measured during operation of the bed. The nature of the method is to determine whether or not two time series are generated by the same mechanism. A statistical characteristic S is used to test the null hypothesis that the two multidimensional probability distributions are identical. Experiments were carried out at room temperature in a 475 mm i.d. laboratory HSBR. The results demonstrated that the method is sensitive to small changes in the particle size distribution. It is, therefore, indicated that the proposed method not only can offer early and accurate warning, but also has the potential to locate the agglomeration.

Fig 7

Fig 8.

Methods to reduce agglomeration:

Operational changes to reduce agglomeration: A temporary increase of fluidization velocity to promote agglomerate break-up is not a useful method to avoid agglomeration on laboratory-scale. A decrease in operating temperature below the melting points of potassium silicates can be a successful emergency strategy to ensure continued trouble-free operation. However, a subsequent temperature increase leads to further agglomeration, potentially very rapid, with alkali still present in the bed; therefore, some strategy to replace the bed content or neutralize the alkali is necessary. Semicontinuous replacement of bed material is shown to be a successful permanent solution to avoid defluidization. Yet, its application requires careful economic consideration. For larger reactor scales, agglomeration can occur more localized, which justifies several measuring positions. Especially for monitoring transition regions, for example, start-up, the application of a moving reference that has a constant negative time offset to the evaluation window is advantageous. Additives: Coal and biomass can be co-gasified (McLendon et al ), it extends defluidization time significantly. The effect of co-firing straw with coal on agglomeration was also examined. The results show that temperature has the most pronounced effect on the agglomeration tendency. As bed temperature increases, the defluidization time decreases sharply, which

indicates an increasing tendency of agglomeration. When co-firing straw with coal, the defluidization time can be extended significantly. Biomass that can be used are: Sanding waste from furniture manufacture. Co-firing straw with coal Sawdust

Rice husk

Alternate Bed Material Method: It has been observed that a sticky coating, which covered the original bed material and consisted of Ca-K-silicates, was directly responsible for the bed agglomeration during biomass combustion. The melting behavior (stickiness) of these coatings was very sensitive to the potassium content. Our studies have indicated that bed agglomeration could possibly be prevented by introducing low-cost additives such as kaolinite. Kaolin gets transformed to meta-kaolinite particles, which adsorbs potassium species. The process increases temp of agglomeration from 739 and 988 C to 886 and 1000 C .The critical temperatures for agglomeration in a normal quartz bed when firing wheat straw or bark were determined to be 739 and 988 C, respectively. By adding kaolin, 10% w/w of the total amount of the bed, the initial bed agglomeration temperatures increased to 886 and 1000 C, respectively.

Simulation of Indian coal gasification in fluidized bed using Aspen plus

Properties of Indian coal: 1. Indian coal is of mostly sub-bituminous rank, followed by bituminous and lignite (brown coal). 2. The ash content in Indian coal ranges from 35% to 50% and it is low rank coal.

3. positive characteristics: Low Sulfur content High Ash Fusion Temperature Low Iron Content in Ash Refractory Nature of Ash Low chlorine content Low Toxic Trace Elements

Table 2: Grades of Indian coal on the basis of calorific value:

GRADES CALORIFIC VALUE ( kcal/kg)

A B C D E F G

Exceeding 6200 5600-6200 4940-5600 4200-4940 3360-4200 2400-3360 1300-2400

Normally D, E and F grades are available to Indian industries. The lower calorific value of Indian coal is due to the high ash content in it. The grades of coal available to India are inferior to other countries because of less percentage of fixed carbon in it.

Table 3: Gross calorific value of Indian coal and comparison with other coals:
Parameter Lignite (Dry Basis) Indian coal Indonesian Coal

GCV (kcal/kg)

4500

4000

5500

Table 4: Typical Proximate Analysis of Indian Coal and comparison with other coal:
Parameter Indian Coal (%) Indonesian coal (%)

Moisture Ash

5.98 38.63

9.43 13.99 29.79

Volatile Matter 20.70

Fixed Carbon

34.69

46.79

Table 5: Typical Ultimate Analysis of Indian Coal and comparison with other country coal

Parameter Moisture Mineral Matter (1.1*Ash) Carbon Hydrogen Nitrogen

Indian Coal Indonesian (%) coal (%) 5.98 38.63 9.43 13.99

41.11 2.76 1.22

58.96 4.16 1.02

Sulfur Oxygen

0.41 9.89

0.56 11.88

Factors on which ash agglomeration of Coal depends are: 1. In a fluidized bed, Langston and Stephens recognized that the defluidizing tendency or the stickiness of the particles is directly proportional to the area of contact, the adhesive property of the particles, and inversely proportional to their momentum. 2. Mason and Pate felt that agglomeration depends on fluidized bed temperature, bed ash concentration, average particle size, superficial velocity, and bed height. 3. Basu concluded that defluidization of a fluid bed is governed by the sintering characteristics of the bed material. 4. Rehmat and Saxena argued that it is not necessary for every reacting particle to attain the ash fusion temperature in order for agglomeration to occur. Only a few particles are required to reach the ash melting temperature. These particles form the nuclei for the formation of the ash agglomerates, and this process will indeed consume the ash produced from other particles. 5. Agglomerated ash particle is basically composed of the compounds of Al2O3, SiO2, CaO and Fe2O3.

Fig 9: Scheme of agglomerated ash particle in coal gasification

Source: State Key Lab of Coal Conversion, Institute of Coal Chemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Taiyuan, Shanxi 030001 P.R.CHINA.

Methods proposed for reducing ash agglomeration of Indian coal: 1. Use of pressurized circulating fluidized bed gasifier 2. Addition of chemicals to increase the ash melting temperature 3. Blending of Indian coal with some high rank coal like Indonesian coal. 4. Suitable bed material 5. Optimum fluidization velocity. Simulation of gasifier showing variation of ash with temperature: Coal gasification basically involves the thermal conversion of coal at 1400-2800 oF (7001500C) with a limited supply of air and oxygen, into synthesis gas a mixture of carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrogen (H2). A typical gasification system consists of a gasifier unit, a purification system and an energy recovery system but the core of the gasification process is a gasifier, where the hydrocarbon feedstock is converted into syngas in a partial oxidation reaction. The heat and pressure break apart the chemical bonds of the feedstock, forming syngas.

In a gasifier, the carbonaceous material undergoes several different processes: 1. The pyrolysis (or devolatilization) process occurs as the carbonaceous particle heats up. Volatiles are released and char is produced, resulting in up to 70% weight loss for coal. 2. The combustion process occurs as the volatile products and some of the char reacts with oxygen to form carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide, which provides heat for the subsequent gasification reactions. 3. The gasification process occurs as the char reacts with carbon dioxide and steam to produce carbon monoxide and hydrogen. 4. In addition, the reversible gas phase water gas shift reaction reaches equilibrium very fast at the temperatures in a gasifier. This balances the concentrations of carbon monoxide, steam, carbon dioxide and hydrogen. The focus of the project is to develop a rigorous simulation model of gasifier, which can be used to check the overall system performance and helps in finding out feasible operating temperature to achieve better process performance. Syngas production efficiency and carbon utilization is used as gasifier performance parameters. Aspen plus is chosen as the simulation tool because of its capability of solids handling. As the introduction of solids in a process changes the heat and mass balances, even if the solid essentially passes through the process as an inert component. Aspen plus include particular physical property model and accurately represents the solid particle. Simulation Model Description: Wet coal and nitrogen streams are entered into the drier where moisture content of feed coal is reduced to a specified value by transferring water to hot nitrogen stream. Dry coal enters into the gasifier. Air is used as the gasifying agent. In gasifier partial oxidation of coal produces syngas by exothermic chemical reaction. Two phase mixture from the gasifier consisting of combustion gases and ash is fed into the separator. The separator splits the two phase mixture and hence gases are obtained. The block diagram of the gasification process and the Aspen plus model used are shown below:

Fig 10:Block diagram for Gasification of Indian coal in fluidized bed gasifier

Fig 11: Aspen plus Simulation model Flow Sheet for Gasifier

Description of Aspen Plus model:

Operation

Aspen Plus Model

Function

Drying

RStoic

Flash 2 Gasification RYield RGibbs Separation SSplit

Converts a portion of coal to form water. Requires only extent of reaction to be known. Coal 0.0555084 H2O RStoic has single outlet stream so Flash2 is used to separate dried coal from moist nitrogen. Decomposes the coal into its constituent elements. Requires yield distribution of the coal into its components. Simulates gasification of dry coal. Models chemical equilibrium by minimizing Gibbs free energy. Separates combustion gases from ash.

Stream class and sub streams: Stream Class Sub- Stream MIXED MCINCPSD ASH, COAL NCPSD C CIPCD Component H2O, N2, O2, NO2, S, NO, SO2, SO3, H2, HCl, Cl2, CO and CO2

Results: A sensitivity analysis is performed to investigate the effect of gasifier temperature on the syngas production efficiency and carbon utilization. The syngas production efficiency is defined as the ratio of the heating value of the syngas produced by the process to the sum of the heat addition to the gasifier and the heating value of the coal that is consumed in the process. = NH2 LHVH2 + NCO LHVCO / QReactor + NCoal LHVCoal The carbon utilization is the mass percentage of carbon from the coal that is ultimately transferred to the carbon monoxide in the syngas. The temperature is not specified for the Gibbs reactor in the simulation rather the heat duty from the RYield is transferred to the RGibbs as previously discussed. Hence the gasifier temperature is in effect the temperature of the RYield.

Table 6. Simulation Data: Temperature 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300 1350 1400 1450 1500 Fig 12. Simulation Curve: Syngas Efficiency Carbon production 90 95 95.3 95.8 96.7 98.1 98.24 98.4 98.4 98.4 98.5 98.5 98.65 98.65 98.7 98.7 98.7 98.7

38 38 38.6 39.2 39.9 40.8 41.6 41.6 41.7 41.7 41.8 41.8 41.8 41.9 41.9 41.9 41.9

The syngas production efficiency and carbon utilization as a function of gasification temperature is shown in above figure. As the temperature of gasification from 700 0C to 1500 0C the syngas production efficiency increases from 38.6% to 41.2%. The increase in temperature has negligible effect on carbon utilization which remains almost 98.5%. Conclusion: Sensitivity analyses for temperature shows that it has negligible effect on syngas production efficiency and carbon utilization. The Efficiency either increases or remains constant with the increase of temperature. So as we can see temperature has negligible effect on efficiency of gasifier, it increases with increase in temperature, but on the other hand defluidization also

increases with increase in temperature due to sintering effect. So there has to be a need of finding a suitable temperature which can account for both efficiency and fluidization.

Mathematical Modelling:
Description of the model Agglomeration process and model assumptions: Agglomeration formation in bio-fuel fired fluidized bed combustors follows eutectic coating mechanism and collision adhesion mechanism. The agglomeration process can be divided into three steps. First, biomass ash deposits on the surface of sand particles via a combination of attachment of small particles, condensation of gaseous alkali species and chemical reaction of those alkalis on the sand particle surface. Second, as the continuous ash deposition on the sand particles proceeds, the inner layer of the coating is probably homogenized and strengthened via sintering. Third, adhesive particles collide continuously, and liquid eutectic pass among sand formed, controlled by enhanced adhesive inter-particle forces. After collision, the two agglomerates may be separated, or agglomerated, or disintegrated. The agglomeration process is macroscopically influenced by bed temperature, the composition of fuel ash and bed material, particle size of the bed material and fluidization velocity in bio-fuel fired fluidized bed combustors. In order to describe this complex agglomeration process, the assumptions are made as follows: Agglomeration in bio-fuel fired fluidized bed combustors is based on eutectic coating mechanism and collision adhesion mechanism. There is no internal heat source in the bed material particles, and also heat transfer process is not taken into account. Sand particles are spheres with uniform size. The coating is equally distributed on each sphere. The ash content in the bed increases linearly with time. The bonding stress is proportional to mass fraction of liquid phase and inversely proportional to the diameter of particles and the viscosity of liquid phase. Defluidization is a result of competition between the adhesive force and the breaking force on agglomerates. The breaking force on agglomerates is induced by bubbles and is proportional to the excess fluidization velocity.

 When the adhesive force is equal to or more than the breaking force, the bed will defluidize. Force balance model: Adhesive force The agglomeration in fluidized bed is a direct result of sticky liquid phase. The adhesive force caused by bonding between two particles coated by sticky liquid phase, as is illustrated in Fig 1, can be described as: (1) Where, is the bonding stress b is the neck radius.

Figure 13: Schematic diagram of the two sticky particles in the fluidized bed The ash accumulation in the bed contributes to the build-up of the neck. According to the assumptions and mass balance, the thickness of the coating layer as a function of time can be expressed as: (2) Where, n is the number of sand grain d is the size of sand C1 is the proportional constant f is the fuel feed rate fais the weight fraction of ash in the fuel c is the density of coating.

From simple geometry shown in Fig.1 ,the relation between the neck radius and coating layer thickness and the neck growing as a function of time can be derived as: (3) Combining (2) with (3), the following relation formula can be obtained: (4) due to (5) Where W is the sand inventory in the bed and is thedensity of the sand grains. The bonding stress is proportional to mass fraction ofliquid phase and inversely proportional to the viscosity ofthe liquid phase. Thus, the tensile stress of agglomerate can be written as: (6) Where is the viscosity of coatings. Combining Eqs. (1), (2), (4), with (6), the adhesive force can be expressed as: (7) where (8) Breaking force: The breaking force is assumed to be induced by bubblesand is proportional to the excess fluidization velocity,expressed as: (9) Where uis fluidization velocity umfis the minimum fluidization velocity without sintering.

Force balance model: When the adhesive force Fadis equal to or larger thanthe breaking force Fbr, defluidization phenomenon will appear. When Fbr = Fad (10) combining (10) with Eqs. (7) and (9), we obtain the defluidizationtime tdef as: (11) Viscosity model: The viscosity of the coating layer is an importantparameter to calculate the adhesive force between coatedbed material particles. The viscosity depends on temperatureand the composition of liquid phase matter. Themodel for the estimation of viscosity is described andapplied to a number of liquid silicates and silico-aluminatesof simple chemical composition by Urbain et al. Based on the combination of this model and Fact-Sage Equilib model which is used to predict compositionsof liquid phase, the viscosity of liquid phase inbio-fuel fired fluidized bed can be determined. The temperature dependence of viscosity of the liquidphase is described by WemannFrenkel equation as: (12) Where T is temperature parameters of A and Bdepend on the liquid composition. The relationship betweenparameter A and B is shown in the following empiricalequation: lnA = 0.2693B +11.6725 (13) Where parameterB is described by polynomial functionof the slag composition. The slag components are classifiedinto three groups: glass formers (SiO2), Amph amphotericoxides (Al2O3) and Modmodifier oxides (CaO,FeO, MgO, K2O, Na2O, etc.). The parameter B can beexpressed as: (14) Where (15) i = 0,1,2,3 (16)

In the above equations, N, XAmph and XMod are the molefraction of glass formers, amphoteric oxides and modifiersoxide, respectively. The values of these parametersare derived from FactSage modeling. The value of Bi in equation (15) can be obtained by Urbain as follows:

(17) FactSage modelling: FactSage modeling has been established mainly in thefield of complex chemical equilibrium and process simulations.In this work, FactSageEquilib Model is used to predict the proportions of liquid and solid phases for thebiomass ash and bed material blending at specified temperature. The pressure for the FactSage calculation is 1 atm.The temperatures are 1073K, 1123K, 1173K, 1203K and1223K respectively. Fact-Slag A solution is chosen as theoutput solution for liquid phase. Modeling results and discussion: The parameters that will serve for illustrating the trends of the model are summarized in Table 2. The valueof C is obtained by fitting a set of experimental data from the 5kw bubbling fluidized bed.

Table 7

Bonding stress: The appearance and accumulation of liquid phase isthe prime reason for agglomeration in fluidized bed. Thecomponent and proportion of solid, liquid and gas phaseswhich are produced from the reaction between biomassash and bed material can be calculated by FactSage modeling.The components of liquid phase are transferred tothe silicate viscosity calculation model of Urbain, andthen the viscosity of the coating can be figured out. Thecomposition of liquid phase, displayed in Table 2, is presentedby means of viscosity trends in Fig.2 which isdetermined by the modified Urbain model. The maincomposition of liquid phase is SiO2 and K2O. With theruntime and biomass ash increasing, the liquid phaseviscosity increases and then decreases. For the same runtime,the liquid phase viscosity decreases with temperatureincreasing. Fig.2 shows mass fractions of liquid phase from thereaction between wheat stalk ash and bed materials withdifferent bed temperatures and runtime. For the sameruntime, mass fraction of liquid phase increases withtemperature increasing. Mass fraction of liquid phasealso relates with the amount of biomass ash. With theruntime increasing, the mass of biomass ash in the bedand the liquid mass fraction increase. The mass fractionof liquid phase in the bed materials is an important factorfor agglomeration. Therefore, the bonding stress betweentwo particles is defined to be proportional to massfraction of liquid phase, and inversely proportional to thediameter of particles and viscosity of liquid phase in thispaper. The relationship is revealed in the formulation (6). Fig.3 shows the correlations between bonding stressand bed temperature as well as running time. When thetemperature is below 1123K, the bonding stress increaseswith runtime increasing. However, when thetemperature exceeds 1123K, there is a peak for thebonding stress during the first 1.2 hours of the reaction.After that, the trend of the bonding stress is similar to that in the temperature below 1123K. The reason of thepeak appearing is that the compositions of liquid phaseduring the first 1.2 hours are different from that duringthe other periods. Fig.3 shows the composition of liquidphase after one hours and six hours operation respectivelyat 1173K. From this comparison, it can be concludedthat the main composition of liquid phase duringthe first 1.2 hours is SiO 2-Na2O-CaO-MgO-Al2O3. Withruntime increasing, the composition changes and onlycontains SiO 2 and K2O. Then, the viscosity of the liquidphase changes dramatically. In conclusion, the compositionof the liquid phase can greatly influence the bondingstress.

Figure 14: Viscosities of liquid phase vs. runtime at different temperatures

Figure 15: Bonding stress vs. runtime at different temperatures

Table 8. Composition of ash component at different temperature Fig.4 shows the adhesive force Fadas a function ofruntime with different particle sizes. The trend of theadhesive force which increases with increasing particlesize is similar to that of the bonding stress.

Figure 16: Adhesive force vs. runtime with different particle sizes

Figure 17: Comparison of composition for liquid phase at different runtime (1173K) Breaking force It is assumed that the particles of bed material arespheres with uniform size; the coating is equally distributedon each sphere; the content of biomass ash in thebed increases linearly with time. Ash is deposited on thesurface of the bed material, and the coating layer becomeshomogenized and strengthened. The thickness ofthe coating layer increases linearly with the ash contentincreasing.

Figure 18: Breaking force vs. runtime at different temperatures (u=0.31m/s)

Figure 18: Breaking force vs. runtime with different particle sizes (u=0.31m/s) The fluidized flow movement of the solid particles hasa damaging effect on the bond between the particles in afluidized bed. Therefore, it is determined that the breakingforce caused by the fluidized flow movement is proportionalto the difference of the minimum fluidizationvelocity and fluidization velocity. Fig.6 and Fig.7 showthe breaking force profile with the running time at differenttemperatures for different particle sizes. Defluidization time prediction When the adhesive force is equal to or more than thebreaking force, the bed will defluidize. Fig.8 shows thedefluidization time calculated by the model in this workand that in the experimental results. The calculated resultsare in line with the experimental data.

Conclusions

Figure 19: Defluidization time vs. temperature Conclusions from graphs: Temperature has negligible effect on syngas production efficiency and carbon utilization, either efficiency will remain constant or will increase slightly with increasing temperature. As the temperature increases, the sintering effect becomes dominant, resulting in a quick defluidization. Defluidization time decreases with increasing particle size partly due to the smaller surface area and thicker coating layer, and partly owing to the increase in minimum fluidization velocity. As the fluidization velocity increases, the defluidization time can be extended. Trend of the influence of parameters on the defluidization time by the model is the same as the experimental findings A theoretical model has been developed to predict theagglomeration process in bio-fuel fired fluidized bedcombustor. The model is based on the balance mechanismof the adhesive force caused by liquid bonding betweentwo particles and the breaking force induced bybubbles in

the fluidized bed. The modified Urbain modeland chemical equilibrium calculations by FactSage modelingare used to obtain the proportion and viscosity ofliquid phase matter in the bed. This model predictionaccounts for the evolvement of the adhesive force andbreaking force, and demonstrates that the different compositionof ash, the increasing liquid phase matter and thefluidization velocity cause defluidization in fluidized bed.The defluidization time calculated by this model showsgood agreement with that from the experimental data.