Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Plenary Lecture
Biomass Combustion
J Swithenbank, YB Yang, C Ryu, J Goodfellow,
S Shabangu, N V Russell, F M Lewis*, V N Sharifi
Sheffield University Waste Incineration Centre (SUWIC), Department of Chemical and
Process Engineering, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S1 3JD, UK
* 535 East Mariposa Ave, El Segundo, CA 90245- 3013, USA
ABSTRACT
Sustainable cities require the generation of electrical energy from carbon dioxide neutral biomass crops and
suitable fractions of wastes that cannot be economically reused or recycled. The energy content of these
solid materials can be recovered by burning directly or after processing into refuse-derived fuel (RDF).
Alternatively, the combustion process can be staged by the production of intermediate fuels using either
pyrolysis or gasification. Co-processing of the biomass with coal generally increases plant utilisation and
thus reduces costs.
The design, operation and maintenance of solid fuel combustion, pyrolysis or gasification plants requires
detailed understanding of the processes occurring within a reacting packed bed of solids, or combustion of
the derived liquids or gaseous fuels. Both of the latter can be modelled using well-established computational
fluid dynamic codes (CFD). Previously, there has not been available a validated, comprehensive and
fundamentally based code for mathematically modelling the combustion/pyrolysis/gasification process
within a packed bed of solid particles on a stationary or moving grate. Bearing in mind that pyrolysis and
gasification are sub-sets of combustion we have developed a generalised model of bed combustion. This
code known as FLIC solves iteratively the flow field within a reacting bed of randomly packed particles,
including radiant heat transfer. The equations governing the processes of drying, pyrolysis, de-volatilisation
and char burnout within the particles are evaluated. Since the burning of volatiles and CO in the channels is
mixing limited, flame reactions also occur in the gas phase above the bed. The conditions evaluated at the
surface of the bed are the boundary conditions for conventional CFD modelling of the mixing and reactions
in the secondary combustion zone in the freeboard above the bed and in the gas clean-up system. This
permits the evaluation and minimization of emissions such CO, VOCs, NOx, heavy metals and dioxins. In
fact, dioxins from incinerators now only contribute 3% of the total UK dioxin emissions.
Pyrolysis of biomass/waste can generate a storable char fuel. This is achieved by heating a bed of the
material slowly in a closed container to about 500C from which air is excluded. This decomposes the
organic material to release liquid products that can be condensed then purified and burned to efficiently
generate heat and power. The carbon char remaining is a valuable fuel that can be easily separated whilst it
is still hot from any inert material that was originally present. This storable fuel can be transported and used
when the renewable energy that it contains is required. The char from pyrolysis contains much of the
original carbon and has a high-energy content.
The validation of our reacting bed modelling code (FLIC) has been achieved by measurements in a pot
burner using various biomass materials. Additionally, a small ball instrument that has been specially
developed to contain instruments has complemented these measurements by withstanding temperatures up to
1000oC for well over an hour. This novel device passes through industrial moving grate furnaces with the
fuel and records parameters such as oxygen concentration, vibration and several temperatures onto a
computer memory chip. The ball is recovered from the ash pit and the information is downloaded onto an
Excel spreadsheet for detailed analysis and verification of the FLIC predictions.
Our new gasification concept offers the prospect of achieving the goal of high efficiency power generation
from char, coal or various biomass sources by utilizing ultra superheated steam (USS). The method uses
low-grade steam from sources such as process cooling, waste incineration and local industry, and then
enhances it to a temperature above 1600C. This is achieved by adding oxygen to the steam to form
"artificial air"; gas is then burned in this artificial air to produce an ultra-superheated steam flame. Char,
biomass or powdered coal are injected coaxially into the high temperature steam flame where they react in
about a second to produce a gas that is free of tar and consists largely of CO, H2 and CH4. Significantly, the
high temperature steam provides the enthalpy for the endothermic gasification reactions. This feature
ensures that tar formation is avoided and any ash is cooled below its melting point before it arrives at the
reactor walls. This process provides a route to the future hydrogen fuel based economy.
These innovative technologies form part of an integrated consortium programme towards sustainability.
BACKGROUND
Worldwide, there is a progressive change to use a greater proportion of our total energy
consumption as electrical energy and citizens in developed countries now use up to about
1 kW of electricity per person. This corresponds to about 2.4 tonnes of coal per person per
year. At the same time, citizens bring into being up to one tonne of municipal waste each
year having an energy equivalent of 300 kg of coal plus even larger quantities of agricultural
and industrial wastes. Bearing in mind that these wastes are largely biomass, the recovery of
energy from the waste would not add very much to the net atmospheric CO2 level. Thus
recovering energy from waste helps to mitigate the climate change problem. Furthermore,
dedicated agricultural production of biomass for energy generation is increasing in popularity.
Sustainable cities therefore require the generation of electrical energy from biomass including
suitable fractions of waste that cannot be economically reused or recycled. The integration of
these fuels with clean coal technology can also result in better utilization of the generation
plant and thus reduce the cost of the electricity produced.
INTRODUCTION
The combustion of biomass can be accomplished either on a grate, in a fluidised bed, or as
entrained particles. This presentation addresses the phenomena involved in their combustion
on a static or moving grate. The four
principle stages involved are: drying,
Bed Combustion Zones
pyrolysis/devolatilisation, oxidation
of the volatile material and char
combustion, finally leaving any
Drying
residual ash. These processes can
Pyrolysis
take place in separate stages as in
Oxidation to CO2 & H2O
pyrolysers or gasifiers however these
Reducing CO2 Oxidation
Biomass
are both subsets of the overall
to CO
to CO2
combustion process; hence they can
Char
all be modelled with a comprehensive
Ash
combustion model. It is also relevant
Char reaction
to point out that the total energy
here reduces NOx
available is independent of the
process stages used, however the
conversion of the energy into
electricity may be more efficient for
certain processes.
Figure 1
The design and operation of plants involving these processes requires the development of a
mathematical model that is preferably based on the fundamental principles of physics and
chemistry. The reliability of the model must be checked experimentally and the discussion
below presents studies that have been carried out to achieve these aims.
Mathematical Description of Biomass Combustion on a Packed Bed
A packed bed is an assembly of individual particles and consists of a solid phase (the
particles) and a gas phase (gases flowing through the gaps between the particles). Theoretical
calculation of the mass and heat transfer inside a packed bed is made complicated by three
major factors:
1) The temperature profile inside a single particle is highly 3 dimensional (not 1-D in
respect of the radial distance), especially for very thermally thick particles (the Biot
number = hsdp/p >>1);
2) The number of individual particles in a bed is huge prohibiting calculations based on
solving for individual particles; and
3) Lack of models calculating the mixing rate between the under-grate combustion air
and the volatile gases released from solid devolatilization.
Other uncertainties include irregularity of the particle shapes, the process rate and channelling
in the bed, etc. For a moving bed, theoretical calculations are further complicated by the
movement and mixing of individual particles which are governed by friction between
particles (dependent on particle shape and orientation), gravity, type of the grate and its
moving pattern during bed operation.
To make the mathematical calculation possible for a packed bed, it is assumed that the major
bed properties, i.e., temperatures of gas and solid phases inside the bed, gas compositions (O2,
H2, CO, CO2, etc.) and solid compositions (moisture, volatiles, fixed carbon and ash) can be
described pseudo one-dimensionally as functions of bed height. It is also assumed that the
bed can be treated as a porous medium where mass and heat transfer take place between the
solid and gas phases and the shape of the particle is spherical (the surface-volume averaged
diameter is used). Under such assumptions, the individual bed processes (moisture
evaporation, devolatilisation and char burning) can be viewed taking place layer by layer,
from the bed top to the bottom. Employing numerical methodology, the whole bed is divided
into many small cells along the bed height and inside each cell the major bed parameters are
assumed uniform. One benefit of this approach is that by reducing the cell size (hence
increasing the cell number), calculation can be made on a size-scale much smaller than the
fuel particles. This means that the non-isothermal behaviour of the single particles can be
accounted for to some extent.
Transport equations for gas and solid phases. Peters (1995) has summarised the basic
governing equations for both the gas and solid phases in a moving bed. For a stationary bed,
the gas-phase equations can be written as follows:
( )
Gas continuity:
g Vg
x
= Ssg
(1)
where Vg is the gas velocity and x the coordinate along the bed height (x=0 at the bed
bottom). The source term Ssg is the conversion rate from solid to gas due to moisture
evaporation, devolatilisation and char combustion.
Gaseous species transport:
g Yig
t
) + ( g Vg Yig ) =
g Vg Yig
+ Syig
D ig
x
x
(2)
Yig represents mass fractions of individual species (e.g. H2, H2O, CO, CO2, CmHnOl, ). The
source term Syigaccounts for mass sources of the individual species during evaporation,
devolatilization and the combustion of volatile gases and char.
The fluid dispersion coefficient Dig is considered to consist of diffusion and turbulent
contributions and is given by the following equation (Wakao & Kaguei 1982)
Dig = E0 + 0.5dpVg
(3)
g H g
t
) + ( g Vg H g ) =
x
Tg
+ Sa hs (Ts - Tg ) + Qh
g
x
x
(4)
where Hg represents gas enthalpy, g the thermal dispersion coefficient, and Qh the heat gain
of the gas phase due to combustion. The thermal dispersion coefficient g consists of
diffusion and turbulent contributions in a similar way as species dispersion, and can be
expressed as [20]:
g = 0 + 0.5dpVg g Cpg
(5)
(1 ) p
Solid continuity:
(1 ) p Vs
x
= - Ssg
(6)
where p is the particle density and Vs solid velocity due to the downward movement of the
bed caused by mass loss.
Conservation of solid-phase species:
(1 ) p Yis
(1 ) p Vs Yis
x
= - Syis
(7)
where Yis represents mass fractions of particle compositions (moisture, volatile, fixed carbon
and ash) and Syis the source term. Syis accounts for the loss of the individual components
(moisture, volatile, fixed carbon and ash) during evaporation, devolatilisation and char
combustion.
The energy equation for the solid-phase is:
(1 ) p H s
t
) + ((1 ) p Vs H s ) =
x
q r
Ts
+ Qsh (8)
s
+ Sa hs (Tg - Ts ) +
x
x x
where Hs presents the solid-phase enthalpy, s is the effective thermal conductivity of the
solid bed, and qr denotes the radiative heat flux. The source term Qsh accounts for the heat
generation due to heterogeneous combustion.
Radiation Heat Transfer in the Bed. Radiation is the major mechanism of heat transfer
between solid particles in a packed bed, and a proper model has to be developed to simulate
the process. The already widely used flux model (Smoot & Pratt 1979) for gaseous and
entrained-flow combustion is the first choice, although development of a more appropriate
model is needed in the future. A two-flux radiation model is presented in the following:
dI +x
1
1
= - (ka + ks) Ix+ +
ka Eb +
ks ( Ix+ + Ix- )
dx
2
2
dI x
1
1
= - (ka + ks) Ix- +
ka Eb +
ks ( Ix+ + Ix - )
dx
2
2
(9a)
(9b)
where Ix+, Ix-, represent the two radiation intensities. ka and ks denote the absorption and
scattering coefficients respectively. Eb is black-body radiation.
ks is assumed zero as the first approximation, and ka is taken as ( Shin & Choi, 2000)
ka =
1
ln( )
dp
(10)
More details of the model description can be found in Yang et als work (2001, 2002, and
2003).
Mixing Rate of the Under-grate Air with Volatile Combustible Gases Released from Solids
Gaseous fuels released from the devolatilization process have first to mix with the
surrounding air before their combustion can take place. Obviously the burning of the volatile
hydrocarbon gases is limited not only by the reaction kinetics (temperature dependent) but
also by the mixing-rate of the gaseous fuel with the under-fire air. The mixing rate inside the
bed is assumed to be proportional to energy loss (pressure drop) through the bed and by
recalling the Ergun equations can be expressed as:
R mix = Cmix g { 150
D g (1 )2 3
d 2p
+ 1.75
Vg (1 )1 3
d p
CO 2
C
}
} min{ fuel ,
Sfuel SO 2
(11)
here Cmix is an empirical constant, Dg the molecular diffusivity of the combustion air, Vg the
air velocity, dp the particle diameter, the local void fraction of the bed, C the mass fractions
of the gaseous reactants and S their stoichiometric coefficients in the reaction.
The actual reaction rates of volatile species are taken as the minimum of the temperaturedependent kinetic rates and their mixing-rates with oxygen:
R = Min[Rkinetic, Rmix]
(12)
Figure 2a)
Figure 2c)
Figure 2b)
All the moisture in the bed is evaporated at about half of the whole bed length.
Figure 2c) shows the volatile matter profile inside the bed. The devolatilisation process
occurs also within a narrow layer and all the volatile material in the bed is also released at
about half of the bed length. Figure 2d) shows the individual process rates along the bed
length. Moisture evaporation occurs as soon as the fuel is pushed into the burning chamber
and exposed to freeboard flame radiation. However, it is not until at 2 meters from the fuel
entrance that the top part of the bed has dried out and the temperature is raised above the
I
450
II
Test one
Test two:T
1400
400
Process rates, kg/m2.hr
1600
II
Tmax
Moisture
evaporation
350
1200
Volatile rele
300
1000
250
800
200
Char burn-
600
150
100
400
50
Tmin
200
0
0
4
6
Distance along bed length, m
10
threshold for volatile matter release. The subsequent volatile release is intense due to the
freshness of the fuel. After that, the devolatilisation rate drops to a stable level. At 6 meters
from the fuel entrance, the volatile release rate rises again, due to the dried-out nature of the
local bed leading to the raised bed temperature, before finally being reduced to zero. The
char starts to burn after the initial intensive release of the volatile matter from the solids and
the burning rates undergo a slow increase as the fuel moves along the bed. At 6 m from the
fuel entrance, the char burning rate rises sharply due to the total release of the volatile matter
and therefore the full access to the under-grate air supply that is no longer consumed by
combustion of volatile gases. The whole combustion process is complete at 7.5 meters along
the bed length. Figure 2d) also indicates that the whole burning process is divided into three
stages: I the ignition stage; II the main stage; and III the final char burnout stage.
The Ball Instrument. To investigate the local combustion behaviour in a full-scale moving
grate incinerator (burning largely biomass) for a range of operating conditions, we have
developed a 'ball instrument' that passes
through the bed with the waste. This small
ball instrument contains instruments and
withstands temperatures up to 1000oC for well The
over an hour (Yang et al. 2001). This novel Ball Instrument
device passes through industrial moving grate passes through
furnaces with the fuel and records parameters the burning
such as oxygen concentration, vibration and bed
several temperatures onto a computer memory
chip. The ball is recovered from the ash pit and
the information is then downloaded onto an
Excel spreadsheet for detailed analysis and
verification of the FLIC predictions.
FLIC code predictions generally compare very well with the data, but the measured
temperature within the bed again shows that the process is dominated by many violent
transient fluctuations from 300C to 1000C along the bed. It was deduced that these
fluctuations were due to the formation and collapse of channels within the bed. A vibration
transducer installed within the ball instrument confirmed this concept since the temperature
Volatile
wt%
74
65.7
Fixed carbon
wt%
11.7
10.4
Size
mm
12
12
30
3.5
57.4
9.1
30.7
3.6
32.2
9.85
12
40
3.2
49.1
7.7
26.3
3.0
27.5
9.0
12
50
2.7
41.0
6.3
21.8
2.5
23.0
8.1
12
Burning rate,dry
Moisture content:
350
kg/m2.hr
C
H
O
LCV
wt% wt% wt% MJ/kg
39.8 4.7 41.2 13.4
35.3 4.1 36.7 11.6
10%-10mm (WC,Gort
1995)
300
30%-10mm (WC,Gort
1995)
250
200
150
100
30%
40%
50
50%
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Figure 5 shows the relationship between combustion stoichiometry and under-grate air
flowrate at different moisture levels in the bio-fuel. It is seen that the higher the airflow rate
and wetter the fuel, the richer the
Air to fuel st oichiometric rat io
combustion will become. For
M oisture :
2.5
each moisture level, there is a
8.3%(M arie
critical flow rate below which
50%
40%
2000)
2.0
30%(Gort
30%
the combustion becomes a
1995 )
20%
10%
10%
this
gasification process (overall air
1.5
combustion
work
to fuel stoichiometric ratio <1)
30%this
1.0
work
where a net production of
40%this
combustible gases (CO, CH4,
work
Gasificat ion
0.5
50%t his
etc.)
would result. This critical
work
0.0
flow rate decreases with increase
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
in the fuel moisture level, i.e.,
Primary air mass f low, kg/m2.s
wet fuels tend to be combusted
and dry fuels gasified if similar
conditions are applied.
Figure 5. Combustion stoichiometry vs. airflow rate at different
moisture levels. Lines calculations using FLIC; Symbols
experimental data from this work and references.
CO (vol%, dry)
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
Primary air mass flow, kg/m2.s
0.5
0.6
sustainability targets. A series of pyrolysis tests were conducted initially using wood cubes in
the temperature range of 350C - 700C with a heating rate of 10oC/min. The pyrolytic
products from the tests were then analysed.
Experimental Method The reactor system built was a batch type packed bed pyrolysis unit
shown in Figure 8. It consisted of a reactor in a temperature-controlled furnace followed by
two liquid condenser/traps. The stainless-steel reactor, 12.5cm diameter 50 cm high, is
placed inside a furnace whose inner temperature (To) was controlled by a temperature
controller. Nitrogen gas was supplied from below the reactor to purge the volatile gases
released from the sample during pyrolysis. The volatile gases and nitrogen leaving the reactor
passed through two water-cooled condensers to separate oil vapour from the gas stream. The
oil was collected in a disposable plastic container at the bottom of each trap.
The concentrations of CO, CO2 and O2 in the off-gas after the condensers were monitored by
gas analysers and recorded by the data logger. The flow rate of the sampling gas was l.0
l/min. Gas samples were also taken into glass bottles for further analysis of their chemical
composition using an off-line gas chromatograph.
EXTRACT
FURNACE
T1
REACTOR
T5
T2
BED SECTION
OF SAMPLES
T3
To
NITROGEN
OIL
OIL CONTAINERS
Sample
Proximate
analysis
Ultimate
analysis
Lower heating
value
DATA LOGGER
THERMOCOUPLES
CONDENSER
SAMPLING BOTTLE
GAS ANALYSER
(CO, CO2, O2)
T4
WATER
Pinewood cubes of
size 2cm
Moisture 8.86%,
Volatile matter
78.86%,
Fixed carbon
12.08%,
Ash 0.20%
C 47.9%, H 6.2%,
O 38.3%
17.8 MJ/kg (dry)
10
TEMPERATURE
CONTROLLER
At the beginning of a pyrolysis experiment, the reactor was charged with feed material,
typically 100 - 400g in weight, and was placed inside the furnace. Then, the furnace was
heated up to the final temperature at the given heating rate with a fixed flow rate of nitrogen.
Once the furnace attained the set value of To, it was maintained for 2 hours to allow sufficient
time to complete pyrolysis.
Characterisation of Wood. The waste sample at the reported initial stage of the experiments
consisted of cubes of pinewood of size 2cm. Table 2 shows the properties of this material
acquired from the proximate, ultimate and calorific value analyses.
100
Weight (%)
80
60
40
20
-dX/dTWOOD
0
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Temperature (oC)
Char
24.5%wt
Liquid
collected
in the traps
45.8%wt
Gas
CO, CO2, H2, H2O, CH4,
Hydrocarbons
29.7%wt
The mass yield, higher heating value (HHV) and corresponding energy yield of char from
various final temperatures are plotted in Figure 11. The energy yield was calculated simply
11
by multiplying the calorific value with the mass yield. The mass yield of char was 33% at
350oC, and decreased with increasing the final temperature. The decrease in the mass yield
over 500oC slowed down. However, the HHV of char increased with increasing temperature,
from 30.9MJ/kg at 350oC to 33.3MJ/kg at 700oC. Since the HHV of char was much higher
than that of the original wood, the energy yield ranged from 49% - 33%.
60
Energy Yield
Calorific Value
Yield, %
30
25
Mass Yield
20
20
10
15
40
30
2.0
35
wood
1.5
H/C ratio
50
40
1.0
350oC
400oC
500oC
0.5
0
300
400
500
600
700
600oC
700oC
10
800
0.0
Final Temperature ( C)
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
O/C ratio
Figure 12 shows a plot of H/C versus O/C ratios, also known as the Van Krevelen diagram.
The char became more carbonaceous at high temperatures. The carbon content in the char at
350oC was 77%, which was 53% of the original carbon in the wood sample. It became 89%
at 700oC, which was 40% of the original carbon in the wood sample. At the final temperature
of 500oC, the carbon content of char was 83.1% (43% of original carbon), while the hydrogen
content was 3.8% (15% of original hydrogen). The decrease in H/C and O/C ratios was close
to a linear relationship.
100
36
VM
60
28
FC
Weight (%)
32
40
24
20
20
HHV
80
16
350
400
500
600
700
Final Temperature ( C)
12
iii)
The calorific value of char was over 30 MJ/kg, which was as high as coal.
As discussed above, in addition to the well-reported value of the pyrolysis liquids as a fuel
oil, the use of the storable char as feedstock for a gasifier required investigation. Its
behaviour was therefore studied in our unique gasification system.
ULTRA SUPER-HEATED STEAM GASIFICATION
Introduction. The conversion efficiency of solid fuel via steam raised in a boiler into
electricity using steam turbines is only about 20% to 45% depending on the temperature and
pressure of the steam. Gasification of solid fuels for IGCC systems produces gas to run gas
turbines that are used to produce power together with steam turbines. This enables enhanced
efficiency in the conversion of energy from solid fuels and the overall efficiency of a
conventional integrated gasification combined cycle is about 51%. In this case, the heat
required for the gasification reaction is generated by the reaction of about 15% of the fuel
with oxygen. A new process is proposed that uses low-grade steam from an incinerator as the
starting point for an ultra superheated steam gasification system for solid fuels. The overall
efficiency of the proposed process is about 60%, which is superior to the sum of the separate
processes of electricity from a steam boiler together with an independent biomass
gasification-based electricity generator.
When used as an embedded CHP
Ultra Superheated Steam
Steam
system, the energy complex can
for Sustainable Processes
produce power and heat from biomass
(and coal) for a sustainable city at an
efficiency of about 85%. If the plant is
Steam at 1600C
installed in a city, the biomass can be
derived from waste, thus disposing of
waste that cannot be effectively reused
or recycled.
The aim of this aspect of the research
Thermocouple
project is the development of the novel
gasification process that utilises ultrasuperheated steam (Figure 14).
Figure 14
Experimental investigation. The new gasification concept offers the prospect of achieving
the goal of high efficiency power generation from various biomass (or coal) energy sources
by utilizing Ultra Superheated Steam (USS). The concept first reduces the biomass including
wastes such as wood waste (and coal) to a fine powder that can be reacted in a small
residence time and therefore a small volume. The process uses low-grade steam from sources
such as waste incineration, process cooling, and local industry, and then enhances it to a
temperature above 1600C. This is achieved by adding oxygen to the steam to form "artificial
air"; gas is then burned in this artificial air to produce an ultra-superheated steam flame. The
biomass (or coal) is injected coaxially into the high temperature steam flame where it reacts in
about one second to produce a gas that is free of tar and consists largely of H2, CO and CH4.
Significantly, the high temperature steam provides the enthalpy for the endothermic
gasification reactions. This feature ensures that any ash is cooled below its melting point
before it arrives at the reactor walls. This is important since the high alkali content of
biomass ash results in a low melting point and hence a high tendency to form slag.
The USS gasifier can be envisaged as being composed of two distinct main parts, namely:
1. The USS generator (a conventional burner where the gasification also commences).
2. The gasifier (which is the shell where the reactions proceed).
The USS Burner. The North American Manufacturing Company manufacture the burner
selected for the generation of USS and subsequent USS gasification (Figure 15). Its design
13
capacities are a maximum airflow of 0.0322 m3/s and a heat output of 120 kW. Its
construction features include air and gas inlets into the burner and a standard quarl that is
about 230 mm long.
This burner was chosen because, being manufactured for dual fuel operation it could be easily
adapted for the USS gasification by replacing the liquid fuel pipe with one suitable for the
supply of granular material for the gasification of solids, or by just using the burner as
supplied for the gasification of liquids such those from pyrolysis, or slurry material made
from these oils combined with char.
This burner was adapted to feed in particulate materials by removing the liquid fuel inlet pipe,
and replacing it with a pipe with a wider bore, connected to the funnel and vibrating feeder
system as shown in Figure 15.
The USS Gasifier. The rational design of a gasifier requires the best possible understanding
of the fundamental chemical and physical
processes that occur: Pressure is one of the
operating variables of interest in the
investigation of USS gasification. In the
gasifier design stage, high pressure USS
gasification was considered but the extent of
the initial pressure was limited by the rapid
construction and operation feasibilities. This
then limited the pressure operation of the
gasifier to near atmospheric for the
preliminary tests, where the material to be
gasified is fed into the gasifier by gravity.
The gasification chamber is a cylindrical mild
steel shell lined with a 50mm thick fused
alumina based castable refractory with high
abrasion resistance. The refractory inside
diameter = 285 mm. A catch pot at the bottom
collects ash or slag. The USS gasification was
carried out using methane as the gaseous fuel
for the generation of USS and propane was
used to fire the pilot burner. The yield of gas
was measured by collecting samples for GC
analysis and also evaluating the ash content.
A photograph of the equipment is shown in
Figure 15.
Figure 15
The theoretical calculations were carried out to estimate the gas yield from USS gasification.
The Boudouard, water-gas and hydrogasification reactions occur simultaneously. The
predicted yield at equilibrium was used for carbon gasification using steam at 1 atm and
2131K (which is the adiabatic flame temperature for a stoichiometric USS flame). The results
are:
Volume fraction of CO =
54.8%
0.0%
Volume fraction of CO2 =
45.2%
Volume fraction of H2 =
Volume fraction of H2O =
0.001%
0.007%
Volume fraction of CH4 =
Chemical equilibrium calculations based on minimising Gibbs free energy are shown in the
figure 16. These show higher levels of CO2 as observed in the tests.
14
Figure 16
THE INTEGRATION OF FLIC WITH FLUENT
In order to design industrial plant based on the various processes discussed above, integrated
process modelling techniques are required. These are include advanced procedures such as
the recognition and modelling of the channels that form in packed beds of particles such as in
moving grate combustion systems. Such an
assortment of particles is illustrated in Figure 17.
The flow distribution through such a bed takes
place along channels and the results of
calculations (that have been verified by
measurements) is illustrated in Figures 18 a) and
b). These show the calculated flow in a vertical
section and that measured across the bed surface
respectively. The formation of such burning
channels can also be seen clearly by looking at
the flames on the surface of a burning bed of
coal or other particles. This phenomenon is also
Figure 17
included in the FLIC model.
Measurement of channelling in a
pot bed without combustion
V/V0
Figure 18 a)
Figure 18 b)
FLIC thus provides a boundary condition for the FLUENT CFD calculation of the flow in the
freeboard above the burning bed. However, FLIC requires information on the radiation heat
transfer from the freeboard. Thus the calculation procedure must be performed by the
15
simultaneous (iterative) solution of both FLIC and FLUENT. This procedure for the biomass
combustion in a large incinerator is illustrated in Figures 19 a). Figure 19 b) shows the
temperature distribution through the plant. Figure 19c) shows that a flat heat transfer
distribution used to initiate the iterative procedure leads to convergence after about four
cycles. Figure 20 shows the converged results of the combined reacting flow calculation.
F L U E N T /F L IC m o d e l in te g ra t io n
W ATER W ALL
B O IL E R
TUBES
W ASTE
FLUENT
( G a s F lo w M o d e l)
M GAS, T GAS, V GAS
SECONDARY
A IR
Q RAD
GRATE
F L IC
(M o d e l fo r W a s te B e d )
ASH
P R IM A R Y A IR
Figure 19a)
S im u la t io n R e s u lt s
G A S F L O W F IE L D
FRO M FLUENT
Gas Properties
G A S R E LE A SE D A TA
F R O M F L IC
T e m p e ra tu re
V e lo c it y
D is ta n c e a l o n g b e d
IN C ID E N T R A D IA T IO N
FRO M FLUENT
Radiation
W A S T E C O M B U S T IO N
F R O M F L IC
D is ta n c e a l o n g b e d
Figure 19b)
1 6 00
1 6 00
1 4 00
1 4 00
1 2 00
1 0 00
0 (a s s u m e d )
1
2
3
4 th u pd a te
800
600
400
0 .5
1 .5
2 .5
3 .5 th
1 2 00
1 0 00
800
600
400
10
D is ta nc e a lo n g b e d le n g th(m )
10
D is ta n c e a lo n g b e d le n g th (m )
Figure 19c)
16
O2 MASS FRACTION
CO MASS FRACTION
O2 MASS FRACTION
Figure 20
CONCLUSION
The combustion/pyrolysis/gasification of biomass on both static and moving beds has been
investigated. The fundamental processes have been studied and an understanding has been
gained of the complexities involved. New mathematical models of these phenomena now
give a basis for integrated modeling that can provide design data for industrial exploitation of
energy from biomass.
Acknowledgments:
The authors would like to thank the following organizations for their financial and technical
support for the above research programmes: UK Engineering and Physical Science Research
Council (EPSRC), Onyx Environmental trust and the UK Incineration Industry.
Nomenclature
Av
pre-exponent factor in devolatilization rate, s-1
C
constant; molar fractions of species (fuel, oxygen)
Cfuel
fuel concentration, kg/m3
Cpg
specific heat capacity of the gas mixture, J/(kg K)
Cmix
mixing-rate constant
Dg
Dig
dp
Dr
Ds
Ev
particle diameter, m
in-flow dispersion coefficient in bed, m2/s
particle mixing coefficient due to random movements of particles in the bed, m2/s
activation energy in devolatilization rate, J/kmol
Hg
Hs
hs
kv
17
Qcr
Qh
Qsh
qr
R mix
S
stoichiometric coefficients in reactions
Sa
particle surface area, m2
Ssg
conversion rate from solid to gases due to evaporation, devolatilisation and char burning,
kg/m3s
Syig
Syis
time instant, s
Tg
gas temperature, K
Ts
Vg
solid temperature, K
superficial gas velocity (vector), m/s
Yis
mass fractions of particle compositions (moisture, volatile, fixed carbon and ash)
system emissivity
g
sb
s
effective thermal conductivity of the solid bed, W/mK
References:
Beis S.H.; Onay O and Kockar O.M., Fixed-bed pyrolysis of safflower seed: influence of pyrolysis
parameters on product yields and compositions, Renewable Energy, 2002, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 21-32
Gort, R, On the Propagation of a Reaction Front in a Packed Bed: Thermal Conversion of Municipal
Waste and Biomass, Academic Dissertation, University of Twente, 1995.
Peters B, A detailed Model for Devolatilization and Combustion of Waste Material in Packed Beds, 3rd
European Conference on Industrial Furnaces and Boilers (INFUB), Lisbon, Portugal, 18 21 April,
1995.
Pyle, D. L. and Zaror, C. A., Heat transfer and kinetics in the low temperature pyrolysis of solids,
Chem Eng Sci, Vol.39, No.1, pp.147-158, 1984.
Shin, D and Choir, S, The combustion of simulated Waste Particles in a Bed, Combustion and Flame,
Vol.121, pp.167-180, 2000.
Smoot, L D and Pratt, D T, Pulverized-coal Combustion and Gasification, Plenum Press, 1979.
Wakao, N and Kaguei, S, Heat and Mass Transfer in Packed Beds, Gorden & Breach Science
Publishers, 1982.
Williams P.T. and Besler S., The influence of temperature and heating rate on the slow pyrolysis of
biomass, Renewable Energy, Vol.7(3), pp.233-250, 1996
Yang Y B, Goodfellow J, Ward D, Gan S, Swithenbank J and Nasserzadeh V, Cutting Wastes From
Municipal Solid Waste Incinerator Plants, Trans IChemE, Vol 81, Part B, pp.143-155, May 2003.
Yang Y B, Nasserzadeh V, Goodfellow J, and Swithenbank J, Simulation of Channel Growth in a
Burning Bed of Solids, Trans IChemE, Vol 81, Part A, pp.221-232, 2003.
Yang Y B, Nasserzadeh V, Goodfellow J, Goh Y R, and Swithenbank J, Parameter Study on the
Incineration of Municipal Solid Waste in Packed Beds, Journal of Institute of Energy, September,
2002.
Yang Y B, Goh Y.R, Zakaria R, Nasserzadeh V, Swithenbank J, Mathematical modelling of MSW
incineration on a travelling bed, Waste Management 22 (2002) 369-380.
Yang Y B, Goodfellow J, Goh Y, Nasserzadeh V and Swithenbank J, Investigation of Channel
Formation Due To Random Packing In a Burning Waste Bed, Trans IChemE, Vol 79, Part B, 2001.
18