Switchgrass ultimate stresses at typical biomass conditions available for processing

Yu, Manlu; Womac, A. R.; Igathinathane, C.; Ayers, Paul D.; Buschermohle, Michael J.

doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2005.10.005

Cited by 40 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, it was reported that higher moisture content biomass required greater energy inputs for size reduction. Yu et al (2006) reported that size reduction of switchgrass based on shear stress is more efficient than size reduction based on tensile stress and noted that shear stress of switchgrass was less affected by moisture content than tensile stress. Igathinathane et al (2008) reported a significant increase in cutting energy requirements for switchgrass with high moisture (51%) in comparison to low moisture (9%) using a shear based knife grid for size reduction using a linear grid of knifes.…”

Section: Physical Pretreatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Switchgrass for bioethanol and other value-added applications: A review

Keshwani

2009

Bioresource Technology

371

195

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Physical Pretreatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Switchgrass for bioethanol and other value-added applications: A review

Keshwani

2009

Bioresource Technology

371

195

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Hence, the case study assumed the harvesting period of 120 days between January 1 to April 30 when the harvestable yield is between 11 and 20 Mg ha ‐1 (dry basis) 16. The moisture content variation in the crop was between 15% and 60% based on moisture variation ranges proposed for switchgrass 7,18. The farm equipment performance data for Miscanthus were adapted from the European literature, as explained in detail in Shastri et al 11.…”

Section: Case Study: Miscanthus Production In Southern Illinoismentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of distributed storage and pre‐processing on Miscanthus production and provision systems

Shastri

Rodríguez

Hansen

et al. 2011

Biofuels Bioprod Bioref

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Distributed storage and pre-processing of biomass feedstock at satellite storage locations (storage depots) has been proposed in literature to reduce costs and improve effi ciency of the supply system. The performance of such a system, however, has not yet been rigorously quantifi ed and compared with conventional alternatives. This work presents such an analysis using the BioFeed optimization model. BioFeed is a system-level model that optimizes the important feedstock production activities and determines the optimal system confi guration on a regional basis. The BioFeed model was fi rst modifi ed to enable modeling of mechanical pre-processing, such as pelletization and grinding, at the input or the output of storage facilities, which can be mandatory or optional.The model was used to study different Miscanthus production scenarios in southern Illinois. The results showed that making storage pre-processing mandatory increased the total cost by up to 16-53% as compared to the base case. However, it reduced the farmers' share of the total cost by up to 13-39%. The exact values depended on the particular pre-processing technology and scenario modeled. The most cost-effective system consisted of a combination of pre-processing on the farms as well as at the storage facilities. The study recommended that biomass output from a hammer mill should be the biorefi nery delivery specifi cation; the hammer mills should be installed at the input of the storage facilities, but pre-processing at the storage facility should be optional. This led to the minimum total cost of 46.4 $ Mg −1 .

show abstract

“…It was also reported that higher moisture content biomass required greater energy inputs for size reduction. Yu et al reported that size reduction of switchgrass based on the application of shear stress to the particles is more efficient than size reduction based on tensile stress [300]. Igthinathane et al used a linear knife grid device to reduce the particle size of switchgrass and found that high-moisture switchgrass required increased shear stress and cutting energy.…”

Section: Mechanical Comminutionmentioning

confidence: 99%