4.7 Article

Simplification of devolatilization models for thermally-thick particles: Differences between wood logs and pellets

期刊

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL
卷 274, 期 -, 页码 181-191

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2015.03.131

关键词

Woody biomass; Devolatilization; Thermally-thick particle; Isotropy; Detailed particle simulation; Shrinking core model

资金

  1. Bio4Energy
  2. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
  3. Canon Foundation in Europe

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Many phenomena affects devolatilization of relatively large wood particles, e.g. wood pellets and logs, including mass and heat transfer, chemical reactions and physical transformation such as shrinkage. Many studies investigated the importance of these phenomena through detailed mathematical models at particle scale, but the models need to be simplified at a certain degree to be implemented into large-scale simulation for gasifiers and boilers. This paper first presents how each physical and chemical parameter should be modelled for wood logs (low density and anisotropic) and wood pellets (high density and isotropic) through parametric studies with a detailed particle simulation. They required different sub-models for effective thermal conductivity and heat of reactions due to the difference in isotropy of particles between pellets and logs. Then, we demonstrated that a constitutive equation, i.e. analytical solution of the shrinking core model, is sufficient to express devolatilization rate of thermally-thick particles at the temperature of 1173 K with proper sub-models of physical and chemical parameters. The constitutive equation agreed better with experimental data of wood log than wood pellets, mainly because of the error caused during the consideration of the effect of convective cooling of char layer on thermal conductivity. Both detailed and simplified particle models were validated with the experimental data in an isothermal macro thermogravimeter allowing devolatilization of large particles. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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