4.7 Article

Hydrogen production by silica membrane reactor during dehydrogenation of methylcyclohexane: CFD analysis

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY
Volume 46, Issue 37, Pages 19768-19777

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.05.046

Keywords

Hydrogen production; CFD modeling; Membrane reactor; Silica membrane; Methylcyclohexane dehydrogenation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A comprehensive computational fluid dynamic model has been developed to predict the behavior of a membrane reactor in dehydrogenation of methylcyclohexane for hydrogen production, showing the membrane reactor outperforms the equivalent traditional reactor in terms of complete conversion and high hydrogen recovery rate under different operating parameters.
A comprehensive computational fluid dynamic model has been developed using COMSOL Multiphysics 5.4 software to predict the behavior of a membrane reactor in dehydrogenation of methylcyclohexane for hydrogen production. A reliable reaction kinetic of dehydrogenation reaction and a permeation mechanism of hydrogen through silica membrane have been used in computational fluid dynamic modeling. For performance comparison, an equivalent traditional fixed bed reactor without hydrogen removal has been also modeled. After model validation, it has been used to evaluate the operating parameters effect on the performance of both the silica membrane reactor and the equivalent traditional reactor as well. The operating temperature ranged between 473 and 553 K, pressure between 1 and 2.5 bar, sweep factor from (similar to)6.22 to 25 and feed flow rate from 1 to 5 x 10(-6) mol/s. The membrane reactor performed better than the equivalent traditional reactor, achieving as best result complete methylcyclohexane conversion and 96% hydrogen recovery. (c) 2020 Hydrogen Energy Publications LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available