Coal gasification in a pilot-scale fluidized bed reactor. 3. Gasification of a Texas lignite

Rhinehart, R. Russell; Felder, Richard M.; Ferrell, J.K.

doi:10.1021/ie00070a020

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since 1979 a devolatilized Western Kentucky bituminous coal (Purdy et al, 1981), a New Mexico subbituminous coal (Purdy et al, 1984), and a Texas lignite (Rhinehart et al, 1987b) have been gasified. Typical proximate and ultimate analyses of the feedstocks are shown in Table I.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…occur in the freeboard region. Devolatilization yields were calculated from pilot-plant data (Rhinehart, 1985;Rhinehart et al, 1987b) and fitted with the equation Mi/MiaS = + B¡T where M¡ (kg/h) is the devolatilization yield of species i, Mdaf (kg/h) is the dry ash free coal feed rate, and T (K) is the devolatilization temperature. Tables V and VI list values of A¿ and B¡ for the New Mexico subbituminous coal and the Texas lignite, respectively.…”

Section: Devolatilization Coal Drying and Devolatilizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evolution of hydrogen sulfide in a fluidized bed coal gasification reactor

Ma¹,

Felder²,

Ferrell³

1989

Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

maximum sorbent utilization efficiency.These pilot test results indicate that S02 capture by entrained hydrated lime particles occurs by two different mechanisms: a gas/solid reaction mechanism for particles which do not interact with droplets; a gas/solid/droplet reaction mechanism for particles interacting with water droplets.Accordingly, the sorbent injection process performance may be improved by enhancing either of these two reaction mechanisms. The lime properties may be improved to enhance the sorbent's intrinsic activity for the gas/solid reaction mechanism. The humidifier may be designed to provide increased particle-droplet interactions to promote

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Devolatilization Coal Drying and Devolatilizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolution of hydrogen sulfide in a fluidized bed coal gasification reactor

Ma¹,

Felder²,

Ferrell³

1989

Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…of a FBC is usually air or air/steam. 24 However, mixtures of air or air/steam and propane are also used for certain applications. 25 The bed material can be sand particles or a combination of sand and char.…”

Section: Multiphase Reactor Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, a FBC is acting like a highly nonlinear system including several interacting chemical substances in various physical states. The main working fluid of a FBC is usually air or air/steam . However, mixtures of air or air/steam and propane are also used for certain applications .…”

Section: Multiphase Reactor Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sequential Modeling of Coal Volatile Combustion in Fluidized Bed Reactors

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A sequential model to predict the combustion behavior of a coal’s volatile matter during coal gasification, simulated by propane in a combustor is introduced and evaluated. For this, an industrial fluidized bed combustor is divided into several submultiphase reactors based on the physical behavior of interacting phases. This is achieved by considering the volatile gas as a completely mixed stream passing through the emulsion phase and as plug flow through the bubble phase. To simulate the events inside each subreactor, two models were used: a dynamic two-phase model for hydrodynamic characterization (called the hydrodynamic submodel) and a reaction kinetic submodel for obtaining the chemical evolution of subreactors. Also, an energy balance and temperature-dependent distribution of bubble sizes were embedded in the model. Considering the physical and chemical characteristics of the system, it has become possible to specify the proper number of simulation stages by introducing a new dimensionless number. The model was compared to several sets of experimental measurements in terms of the most important operating parameters derived from the literature, and an excellent consistency was achieved. The main motivation behind the current study was to provide a reliable, yet easy-to-achieve, modeling and simulation methodology by fundamental chemical engineering concepts to predict aspects of the behavior of volatile matter in processes producing energy from coal. This work opens up a new way of modeling coal’s volatile matter combustion, especially for its optimization and scale up.

show abstract

“…In the phenomenological modeling of an FBCG, once the model structure is fixed, then a large number of kinetic, thermodynamic, and heat and mass transport related parameters appearing in the model need to be determined either by conducting experiments or by simulation. Some notable representative studies as also reviews pertaining to the phenomenological modeling (including computational fluid dynamics modeling) of the fluidized bed gasification can be found in refs − .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Artificial Intelligence-based Modeling of High Ash Coal Gasification in a Pilot Plant Scale Fluidized Bed Gasifier

Patil-Shinde

Kulkarni

et al. 2014

Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The quality of coalespecially its high ash contentsignificantly affects the performance of coal-based processes.Coal gasification is a cleaner and an efficient alternative to the coal combustion for producing the syngas. The high-ash coals are found in a number of countries, and they form an important source for the gasification. Accordingly, in this study, extensive gasification experiments were conducted in a pilot-plant scale fluidized-bed coal gasifier (FBCG) using high-ash coals from India.Specifically, the effects of eight coal and gasifier process related parameters on the four gasification performance variables, namely CO+H 2 generation rate, syngas production rate, carbon conversion, and heating value of the syngas, were rigorously studied. The data collected from these experiments were used in the FBCG modeling, which was conducted by utilizing two artificial intelligence (AI) strategies namely genetic programming (GP) and artificial neural networks (ANNs). The novelty of the GP formalism is that it searches and optimizes both the form and parameters of an appropriate linear/nonlinear function that best fits the given process data. The original eight-dimensional input space of the FBCG models was reduced to three-dimensional space using the principal component analysis (PCA) and the PCA-transformed three variables were used in the AI-based FBCG modeling. A comparison of the GP and ANN-based models reveals that their output prediction accuracies and the generalization performance vary from good to excellent as indicated by the high training and test set correlation coefficient magnitudes lying between 0.92 and 0.996. This study also presents results of the sensitivity analysis performed to identify those coal and process related parameters, which significantly affect the FBCG process performance. 49 These measures are expected to result in a high coal conversion 50 efficiency and lower environmental impact. 1 The gasification of 51 coal is such a promising clean coal technology. 2 The typical 52 thermal efficiencies of the conventional pulverized-fuel (PF)-53 fired power stations are approaching 37%, whereas supercritical 54 PF units can achieve net efficiencies of 47%. 3 In comparison, 55 power generation using an integrated gasification combined-56 cycle (IGCC) system has achieved thermal efficiencies of 57 approximately 47%, 4 and it is believed that the efficiencies 58 exceeding 50% are possible in the near future. 3,5 The newer gas 59 turbine concepts and increased process temperatures are 60 targeting efficiencies up to 65%. 5 61 The gasification technology, being environment-friendly, is a 62 potential alternative to the conventional coal combustion-based 63 power generation. The conventional thermal power plants with 64 steam cycles alone cannot achieve the high efficiency targets, 65 and hydrogen production from the combustion plants is not 66 feasible. These limitations are not applicable to the gasification 67 technologies and they possess several other advantages as well

show abstract

Coal gasification in a pilot-scale fluidized bed reactor. 3. Gasification of a Texas lignite

Cited by 9 publications

References 10 publications

Evolution of hydrogen sulfide in a fluidized bed coal gasification reactor

Evolution of hydrogen sulfide in a fluidized bed coal gasification reactor

Sequential Modeling of Coal Volatile Combustion in Fluidized Bed Reactors

Artificial Intelligence-based Modeling of High Ash Coal Gasification in a Pilot Plant Scale Fluidized Bed Gasifier

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About