4.7 Article

Improved numerical approaches to predict hydrodynamics in a pilot-scale bubbling fluidized bed biomass reactor: A numerical study with experimental validation

Journal

ENERGY CONVERSION AND MANAGEMENT
Volume 156, Issue -, Pages 53-67

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.enconman.2017.11.005

Keywords

Hydrodynamics; Heat transfer; Mixing and segregation index; Pilot-scale bubbling fluidized bed gasifier; User defined functions; Biomass gasification

Funding

  1. Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) [IF/01772/2014]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A computational 2-D Eulerian-Eulerian approach was developed to simulate the hydrodynamics and heat transfer of a biomass gasification process in a pilot-scale bubbling fluidized bed reactor. The mathematical model was validated under experimental results collected from fluidization curves gathered at different temperatures in a pilot-scale reactor (75 kWth). Own user defined functions (UDFs) were developed in C programming and included to improve drag and heat transfer phenomena, as well to minimize deviations between experimental and numerical data found in previous works. Mesh selection was achieved by comparing solid fraction and pressure drop contours with grids comprised of different number of cells. A comparative study for particle diameter and inlet gas velocity was conducted for three different biomass feedstocks' and their impact in the mixing and segregation index was studied. Mixing and segregation index were measured by implementing the standard deviation concept. Results indicated that UDFs significantly improved the mathematical model predictions on the reactor's fluidization curves. Biomass and sand particles size and density showed direct influence on the solids distribution along the bed height. Smaller biomass particles revealed faster heat conduction and improved mixing properties.

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