4.6 Article

Compartment Modeling and Flow Characterization in Nonisothermal Underground Coal Gasification Cavities

Journal

INDUSTRIAL & ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY RESEARCH
Volume 51, Issue 12, Pages 4493-4508

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ie200410u

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Characterization of reactant gas flow patterns in the underground coal gasification (UCG) cavity is important, because the flow is highly nonideal and likely to influence the quality of the product gas. In our earlier work [Daggupati et al., Energy 2010, 35, 2374-2386], we have demonstrated a computational fluid dynamics (CFD)-based modeling approach to analyze the flow patterns in the cavity. A compartment model (network of ideal reactors) for the UCG cavity was developed based on the CFD simulation results. These studies were performed assuming that the UCG cavity is isothermal. In reality, large temperature gradients may prevail under certain conditions and, in turn, may influence the flow patterns. In this work, we consider different possible nonisothermal scenarios in the UCG cavity and propose a simplified compartment modeling strategy to reduce the computational burden. We also examine the effect of various operating and design parameters such as coal spalling, feed flow rate, feed temperature, and orientation of the inlet nozzle. All these effects are quantified by determining the corresponding compartment model parameters. The sensitivity of the compartment model parameters, with respect to the changes in various conditions, is studied. Furthermore, we validate the compartment modeling approach by comparing predicted conversions for a water-gas shift reaction with that of reaction-enabled CFD simulations under nonisothermal conditions. The results presented here provide adequate insight into the UCG process and can be conveniently used in the development of a computationally inexpensive phenomenological process model for the complex UCG process.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available