4.6 Article

Process Simulation of Steam Gasification of Torrefied Woodchips in a Bubbling Fluidized Bed Reactor Using Aspen Plus

Journal

APPLIED SCIENCES-BASEL
Volume 11, Issue 6, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/app11062877

Keywords

steam gasification; biomass; bubbling fluidized bed; Aspen Plus simulation; hydrogen production

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A comprehensive process model is proposed to simulate the steam gasification of biomass in a bubbling fluidized bed reactor, and validated with experimental data. The model accurately predicts hydrogen production, gas yield, and carbon conversion efficiency under different operating conditions.
A comprehensive process model is proposed to simulate the steam gasification of biomass in a bubbling fluidized bed reactor using the Aspen Plus simulator. The reactor models are implemented using external FORTRAN codes for hydrodynamic and reaction kinetic calculations. Governing hydrodynamic equations and kinetic reaction rates for char gasification and water-gas shift reactions are obtained from experimental investigations and the literature. Experimental results at different operating conditions from steam gasification of torrefied biomass in a pilot-scale gasifier are used to validate the process model. Gasification temperature and steam-to-biomass ratio promote hydrogen production and improve process efficiencies. The steam-to-biomass ratio is directly proportional to an increase in the content of hydrogen and carbon monoxide, while gas yield and carbon conversion efficiency enhance significantly with increasing temperature. The model predictions are in good agreement with experimental data. The mean error of CO2 shows the highest value of 0.329 for the steam-to-biomass ratio and the lowest deviation is at 0.033 of carbon conversion efficiency, respectively. The validated model is capable of simulating biomass gasification under various operating conditions.

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