4.6 Article

Article http://pubs.acs.org/journal/acsodf Toba-CPD: An Extended Chemical Percolation Devolatilization Model for Tobacco Pyrolysis

期刊

ACS OMEGA
卷 7, 期 41, 页码 36776-36785

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.2c05098

关键词

-

资金

  1. Zhejiang University- Zhejiang China Tobacco Joint Laboratory Fund
  2. Science Foundation of China Tobacco Zhejiang Industrial
  3. [K- 20201802]
  4. [ZJZY2021A009]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The performance of the Bio-CPD model on tobacco pyrolysis was assessed and large deviations were found. To improve the model, a grid-search optimization strategy was used to modify the kinetic parameters and develop the Toba-CPD model, which could well reproduce the pyrolysis of different tobacco types under a wide range of heating rates.
Tobacco features chemical compositions different from that of raw lignocellulosic biomass. Currently, the performance of network models, like Bio-Chemical Percolation Devolatilization (Bio-CPD), on tobacco pyrolysis is unclear, and only global kinetics have been proposed for tobacco devolatilization, which does not have the versatility for a wide range of heating conditions and tobacco types. To address this issue, the present work first assessed the performance of the Bio-CPD model on tobacco pyrolysis through an a priori study, which showed large deviations. Afterward, an extended Chemical Percolation Devolatilization model for tobacco pyrolysis (Toba-CPD) was developed by modifying the kinetic parameters using a grid-search optimization strategy. The process of grid-search optimization strategy is based on the kinetic parameters of the Bio-CPD model and modified with experimental results of 11 tobacco types under a wide range of heating rates. Finally, the performance of Toba-CPD was measured with experimental results which were not used during parameters optimization. Results demonstrated that the Toba-CPD models could well reproduce the pyrolysis of various tobacco types under a wide range of heating rates (R2 > 0.957).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据