4.8 Article

Dynamic modeling of Shell entrained flow gasifier in an integrated gasification combined cycle process

期刊

APPLIED ENERGY
卷 131, 期 -, 页码 425-440

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.06.044

关键词

Shell gasifier; Entrained flow gasifier; Dynamic modeling; IGCC

资金

  1. Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP) - Korean Government Ministry of Trade, Industry Energy [2011T100100425, 2011951010001C]
  2. Korea Evaluation Institute of Industrial Technology (KEIT) [2011951010001C] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Shell coal gasification system is a single-stage, up-flow, oxygen-blown gasifier which utilizes dry pulverized coal with an entrained flow mechanism. Moreover, it has a membrane wall structure and operates in the slagging mode. This work provides a detailed dynamic model of the 300 MW Shell gasifier developed for use as part of an overall IGCC (integrated gasification combined cycle) process simulation. The model consists of several sub-models, such as a volatilization zone, reaction zone, quench zone, slag zone, and membrane wall zone, including heat transfers between the wall layers and steam generation. The dynamic results were illustrated and the validation of the gasifier model was confirmed by comparing the results in the steady state with the reference data. The product gases (H-2 and CO) began to come out from the exit of the reaction zone within 0.5 s, and nucleate boiling heat transfer was dominant in the water zone of the membrane wall due to high heat fluxes. The steady state of the process was reached at nearly t = 500 s, and our simulation data for the steady state, such as the temperature and composition of the syngas, the cold gas efficiency (81.82%), and carbon conversion (near 1.0) were in good agreement with the reference data. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.8
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