skip to main content
DOE PAGES title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: A comparison of simple global kinetic models for coal devolatilization with the CPD model

Abstract

Simulations of coal combustors and gasifiers generally cannot incorporate the complexities of advanced pyrolysis models, and hence there is interest in evaluating simpler models over ranges of temperature and heating rate that are applicable to the furnace of interest. In this paper, six different simple model forms are compared to predictions made by the Chemical Percolation Devolatilization (CPD) model. The model forms included three modified one-step models, a simple two-step model, and two new modified two-step models. These simple model forms were compared over a wide range of heating rates (5 × 103 to 106 K/s) at final temperatures up to 1600 K. Comparisons were made of total volatiles yield as a function of temperature, as well as the ultimate volatiles yield. Advantages and disadvantages for each simple model form are discussed. In conclusion, a modified two-step model with distributed activation energies seems to give the best agreement with CPD model predictions (with the fewest tunable parameters).

Authors:
 [1];  [1]
  1. Brigham Young Univ., Provo, UT (United States)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Univ. of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)
OSTI Identifier:
1362067
Alternate Identifier(s):
OSTI ID: 1326230; OSTI ID: 1396663
Report Number(s):
DOE-UTAH-DENA-0002375-FLETCHER-0008; DOE-UTAH-RICHARDS-0002
Journal ID: ISSN 0016-2361; PII: S0016236116306986
Grant/Contract Number:  
NA0002375
Resource Type:
Accepted Manuscript
Journal Name:
Fuel
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Volume: 185; Journal Issue: C; Journal ID: ISSN 0016-2361
Publisher:
Elsevier
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT; 20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS; 97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING; coal pyrolysis; coal-fired boilers; CPD modeling; heating rates

Citation Formats

Richards, Andrew P., and Fletcher, Thomas H. A comparison of simple global kinetic models for coal devolatilization with the CPD model. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2016.07.095.
Richards, Andrew P., & Fletcher, Thomas H. A comparison of simple global kinetic models for coal devolatilization with the CPD model. United States. doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2016.07.095.
Richards, Andrew P., and Fletcher, Thomas H. Mon . "A comparison of simple global kinetic models for coal devolatilization with the CPD model". United States. doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2016.07.095. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1362067.
@article{osti_1362067,
title = {A comparison of simple global kinetic models for coal devolatilization with the CPD model},
author = {Richards, Andrew P. and Fletcher, Thomas H.},
abstractNote = {Simulations of coal combustors and gasifiers generally cannot incorporate the complexities of advanced pyrolysis models, and hence there is interest in evaluating simpler models over ranges of temperature and heating rate that are applicable to the furnace of interest. In this paper, six different simple model forms are compared to predictions made by the Chemical Percolation Devolatilization (CPD) model. The model forms included three modified one-step models, a simple two-step model, and two new modified two-step models. These simple model forms were compared over a wide range of heating rates (5 × 103 to 106 K/s) at final temperatures up to 1600 K. Comparisons were made of total volatiles yield as a function of temperature, as well as the ultimate volatiles yield. Advantages and disadvantages for each simple model form are discussed. In conclusion, a modified two-step model with distributed activation energies seems to give the best agreement with CPD model predictions (with the fewest tunable parameters).},
doi = {10.1016/j.fuel.2016.07.095},
journal = {Fuel},
number = C,
volume = 185,
place = {United States},
year = {2016},
month = {8}
}

Journal Article:
Free Publicly Available Full Text
Publisher's Version of Record

Citation Metrics:
Cited by: 7 works
Citation information provided by
Web of Science

Save / Share: