首页> 外文OA文献 >Modelling of Biomass Steam Gasification in a Bubbling Fluidized Bed Gasifier
【2h】

Modelling of Biomass Steam Gasification in a Bubbling Fluidized Bed Gasifier

机译:鼓泡流化床气化炉中生物质蒸汽气化的建模

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

This thesis presents the numerical simulation study of the biomass-steam gasification in a bubbling fluidized bed (BFB) gasifier including the mathematical model development and the experimental validation of the model developed. The study focused on two main areas on developing the mathematical model: a one-dimensional (1D) non-isothermal reaction kinetics model and a two-dimensional (2D) model consisting of the reaction kinetics model for gasification reactions and two-dimensional CFD model for hydrodynamics characteristics.The biomass gasification with steam as the gasification agent at elevated temperatures can be considered to include two main stages: initial pyrolysis and subsequent gasification reactions. In the first stage, the pyrolysis reactions of the biomass occurred instantaneously for a short duration decomposed into volatile gases, char and tar at the bottom of the gasifier filled with the bed materials. In the subsequent stage of gasification, reactions occurred among the gasification agent (steam), the volatile gases and the char evolved from the initial stage of pyrolysis at high temperatures. The producer gas from biomass-steam gasification mainly consists of CO, H2, CO2, CH4 and H2O and least quantities of higher hydrocarbons at elevated operating temperature. Hence the reactions such as Steam Gasification reaction, Water Gas-Shift reaction, Methanation reaction, Bouduard reaction, and Steam Methane Reforming reaction were considered. The final gas composition of the producer gas was affected by the products of pyrolysis process which were quantified with a product distribution function of temperature developed from experimental results in this work.The development of the subsequent gasification reaction model was based on two-phase theory of gases and solids consisting of the particle-lean bubble phase and the particle-rich emulsion phase which were distributed homogeneously when the gas velocity through the bed was in excess of the minimum fluidization velocity. In the two-phase theory model, the heat and mass transfer rates were related to the fluidization characteristics of the bed. Therefore, understanding and quantitatively description of the hydrodynamics of the gas-solid within the gasifier were important which were adopted from literature for the development of the 1D model for the gasification process in the BFB.In the 1D gasification model, the non-linear partial differential equations (PDEs) describing the mass and energy balances (for both phases) with the reactions kinetics based on Arrhenius correlations were numerically solved using a solver function from the PDE modules of Matlab software with properly defined initial and boundary conditions. In the development of the 2D gasification model, the developed reaction kinetics model was integrated into the 2D CFD Eulerian-Eulerian granular kinetic model called Gasification embedded 2D CFD model using CFD ANSYS FLUENT 12.1 package. In this 2D model, the built-in ‘laminar finite-rate’ model was adopted to describe the chemical kinetics using Arrhenius reaction kinetics expressions. The momentum equation considered laminar viscous model for laminar flow at low steam to biomass (S/B) ratio (lower than 0.6) and k-ε turbulence viscous model for transient to turbulent flow regime for high S/B ratio. These were solved using a Phase Coupled SIMPLE solver algorithm based on FVM.To provide validation data for the developed biomass gasification models, experiments were undertaken on the 100kW DFB gasifier at the University of Canterbury. In the experiments, it had been found that the simulation results from the initial pyrolysis model were in close agreement with the experimental data with discrepancies of ±1.0% (mol/mol) for H2, ±0.8% (mol/mol) for CO, ±0.6% (mol/mol) for CO2 and ±0.3% (mol/mol) for CH4. After this, the gasification agent steam was introduced for normal gasification operation under various operation conditions (temperature, S/B ratio). The experimentally measured producer gas compositions for the operating conditions of 680-780oC, 1 atmospheric pressure and S/B ratio of 0.53 ranged from 17.9% to 28.3% for H2, from 35.7% to 38.5% for CO, from 23% to 28.8% for CO2 and from 13% to 15% for CH4 (mol/mol on dry basis). Under the above operation conditions, the discrepancies between the experimentally measured producer gas compositions and the predicted results using the 1D model were, respectively, 4.5% for H2, 1.4% for CO, 7.5% for CO2 and 1.2% for CH4 (mol/mol on dry basis). For the 2D model, the discrepancies were, respectively, 2.4% for H2, 2.9% for CO, 4.9% for CO2 and 0.8% for CH4 (mol/mol on dry basis). However under the operating conditions of 780oC and S/B ratio of 0.53, the predicted CO2 and H2 concentrations from the 2D model were, respectively, 8.6% (mol/mol on dry basis) higher and 4.8% (mol/mol on dry basis) lower than the measured value. The experimentally measured producer gas compositions for the operating conditions of 710oC and S/B ratio of 0.33-0.84 ranged from 24.4% to 32% for H2, from 32.7% to 44.2% for CO, from 15% to 21.8% for CO2 and from 13.6% to 16.4% for CH4 (mol/mol on dry basis). The discrepancies between experimentally measured producer gas compositions and the model predicted results for the above operating conditions were 1.6% for H2, 2.7% for CO, 1.8% for CO2 and 0.6% for CH4 (mol/mol on dry basis) for the 1D model while those for the 2D model were 4% for H2, 1.6% for CO, 1% for CO2 and 1.6% for CH4 (mol/mol on dry basis).From the model validation, it was found that the 1D model results and 2D model simulation results were closely in agreement and show small discrepancy with the experimental results. In addition, the 1D model uses less computing time than the 2D model; therefore, the 1D model has been used to investigate the effects of operating conditions (temperature and S/B ratio) on the producer gas composition. It was observed that the gas concentration of CO, CO2 and CH4 in the producer gas decreased while the H2 increased with increasing operating temperature in the examined range from 680-780oC. Similarly the gas concentration of H2 and CO2 in the producer gas increased while CO and CH4 decreased with increasing S/B ratio in the examined range from 0.33-0.84.The 2D model can be used to predict gas distribution within the gasifier thus it can be used to gain better understanding of the gasification process and effect of gasifier configuration and operating conditions on the gasifier performance. Further studies are proposed for improvements on the 2D model.
机译:本文介绍了鼓泡流化床(BFB)气化炉中生物质-蒸汽气化的数值模拟研究,包括数学模型的建立和模型的实验验证。该研究集中在开发数学模型的两个主要领域上:一维(1D)非等温反应动力学模型和由气化反应的反应动力学模型和二维CFD模型组成的二维(2D)模型在高温下,以蒸汽作为气化剂的生物质气化可以认为包括两个主要阶段:初始热解和随后的气化反应。在第一阶段,生物质的热解反应在短时间内瞬时发生,在充满床料的气化炉底部分​​解为挥发性气体,焦炭和焦油。在随后的气化阶段中,从高温热解的初始阶段开始,气化剂(蒸汽),挥发性气体和焦炭之间发生反应。来自生物质蒸汽气化的生产气主要由CO,H2,CO2,CH4和H2O组成,在升高的工作温度下,少量的高级碳氢化合物组成。因此,考虑了诸如蒸汽气化反应,水煤气变换反应,甲烷化反应,Bouduard反应和蒸汽甲烷重整反应之类的反应。产生气的最终气体组成受热解产物的影响,热解产物通过实验中得到的温度的产物分布函数进行量化。后续气化反应模型的建立是基于热解的两相理论。当通过床的气体速度超过最小流化速度时,由贫颗粒的气泡相和富颗粒的乳液相组成的气体和固体均匀分布。在两相理论模型中,传热和传质速率与床的流化特性有关。因此,对于气化炉内气固两相的流体动力学的理解和定量描述对于在BFB气化过程的一维模型的开发中被文献采用是重要的。在一维气化模型中,非线性部分利用Matlab软件PDE模块中的求解器函数,在正确定义的初始条件和边界条件下,使用基于Arrhenius相关性的反应动力学对描述质量和能量平衡(两个相)的微分方程(PDE)进行了数值求解。在二维气化模型的开发中,使用CFD ANSYS FLUENT 12.1软件包将开发的反应动力学模型集成到称为气化嵌入式2D CFD模型的2D CFD Eulerian-Eulerian颗粒动力学模型中。在此2D模型中,采用内置的“层流有限速率”模型使用Arrhenius反应动力学表达式来描述化学动力学。动量方程考虑了层流粘性模型,用于低蒸汽与生物质(S / B)比(低于0.6)时的层流;对于高S / B比,瞬态到湍流状态,考虑了k-ε湍流粘性模型。使用基于FVM的相耦合SIMPLE求解器算法对这些问题进行了求解。为了为已开发的生物质气化模型提供验证数据,在坎特伯雷大学的100kW DFB气化炉上进行了实验。在实验中,发现初始热解模型的模拟结果与实验数据非常吻合,H2的误差为±1.0%(mol / mol),CO的误差为±0.8%(mol / mol),对于CO2为±0.6%(mol / mol),对于CH4为±0.3%(mol / mol)。此后,引入气化剂蒸汽以在各种操作条件(温度,S / B比)下进行正常的气化操作。在680-780oC,1个大气压和0.53的S / B比的条件下进行实验测量的生产气成分,H2为17.9%至28.3%,CO为35.7%至38.5%,23%至28.8%对于CO2,CH4为13%至15%(以干基计,mol / mol)。在上述操作条件下,实验测量的生产气成分与使用1D模型预测的结果之间的差异分别为H2为4.5%,CO为1.4%,CO2为7.5%和CH4为1.2%(mol / mol (以干基计)。对于2D模型,差异分别为H2为2.4%,CO为2.9%,CO2为4.9%和CH4为0.8%(以干基计,摩尔/摩尔)。但是,在780oC和S / B比为0.53的操作条件下,二维模型预测的CO2和H2浓度分别为比测量值高8.6%(以干基计mol / mol)和低4.8%(以干基计mol / mol)。在710oC和S / B比为0.33-0.84的操作条件下,实验测得的生产气成分对H2为24.4%至32%,对于CO为32.7%至44.2%,对于CO2为15%至21.8%,而对于CH4(摩尔/摩尔,以干基计)为13.6%至16.4%。对于一维模型,实验测量的生产气成分与上述操作条件的模型预测结果之间的差异为:H2为1.6%,CO为2.7%,CO2为1.8%和CH4为0.6%(基于干摩尔/摩尔)而二维模型的H2为4%,CO为1.6%,CO2为1%,CH4为1.6%(以干基计,摩尔/摩尔)。通过模型验证,发现一维模型的结果和二维模型仿真结果与实验结果基本吻合,差异很小。此外,一维模型使用的计算时间少于二维模型。因此,一维模型已用于研究操作条件(温度和S / B比)对生产气体成分的影响。观察到,在所研究的680-780oC范围内,随着操作温度的升高,生产气体中CO,CO2和CH4的气体浓度降低而H2升高。同样地,在0.33-0.84的范围内,随着S / B比的增加,生产气中H2和CO2的气体浓度增加,而CO和CH4的气体浓度降低.2D模型可用于预测气化炉内的气体分布,因此可以用于更好地了解气化过程以及气化炉配置和操作条件对气化炉性能的影响。建议进一步研究以改进2D模型。

著录项

  • 作者

    Gopalakrishnan Prasanth;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2013
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 en
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号