4.7 Article

Modelling solid-convective flash pyrolysis of straw and wood in the Pyrolysis Centrifuge Reactor

期刊

BIOMASS & BIOENERGY
卷 33, 期 6-7, 页码 999-1011

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2009.03.009

关键词

Flash pyrolysis; Ablative; Solid convective; Pyrolysis centrifuge reactor; Wheat straw; Pine wood; Modelling; Bio-oil; Biocrude

资金

  1. Technical University of Denmark
  2. DONG Energy A/S
  3. Vattenfall A/S
  4. FLSmidth A/S
  5. Hempel A/S
  6. Energinet.dk
  7. Danish Research Council for Technology and Production Sciences
  8. Danish Energy Research Program
  9. Nordic Energy Research Program
  10. EU

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Less than a handful of solid-convective pyrolysis reactors for the production of liquid fuel from biomass have been presented and for only a single reactor a detailed mathematical model has been presented. In this article we present a predictive mathematical model of the pyrolysis process in the Pyrolysis Centrifuge Reactor, a novel solid-convective flash pyrolysis reactor. The model relies on the original concept for ablative pyrolysis of particles being pyrolysed through the formation of an intermediate liquid compound which is further degraded to form liquid organics, char, and gas. To describe the kinetics of the pyrolysis reactions the Broido-Shafizadeh scheme is employed with cellulose parameters for wood and modified parameters for straw to include the catalytic effect of its alkali-containing ash content. The model describes the presented experimental results adequately for engineering purposes for both wood and straw feedstock even though conditions for ablative pyrolysis from a reaction engineering point of view are not satisfied. Accordingly, even though the concept of an ablatively melting particle may constitute a limiting case, it can still be used to model flash pyrolysis provided that the reacting particle continuously shed the formed char layer. (C) 2009 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

4.7
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