Hydrodynamic study on gasification of

biomass in a fluidized bed gasifier

S.BASKARA SETHUPATHY
*

Asst.Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Velammal Engineering College, Chennai-600066
Tamil Nadu, India.
Ph: 9445633381; energysethu@gmail.com

E. NATARAJ AN
Professor, Institute for Energy Studies, Anna University, Chennai -600 025
Tamil Nadu, India.
Ph: 91-9566011846; enat123@gmail.com


ABSTRACT

Current scenario of energy insecurity urges us to realize the importance of alternate energy sources. In country
with variety of vegetation like India, Biomass finds its place of which fluidized bed gasification of biomass
could be more effective. This paper emphasizes the importance of a fluidized bed gasifier for energy conversion
of agro-residues for useful purposes. Coconut Shell and Ground nut shell of gross calorific value 19.43MJ /kg
and 14.91 MJ /kg respectively are taken for the study. The particle size is restricted not to exceed 3mm. Various
empirical correlations involved in fluidization are studied and their interdependence is detailed. From various
published data, importance of inert materials and their relative proportions with biomass fuels are studied and
optimum biomass to sand ratio is fixed as 10 to 15% by mass. Equations for predicting the minimum
fluidization velocities of these mixtures are also discussed. Variations of Fluidization parameters such as
minimum fluidization velocity, bubble rise velocity, expanded bed height with respect to temperature,
equivalence ratio, particle size is studied and their quantification is analyzed. A 108 mm internal diameter and
1400 mm high FBG is used for the study. Fuel is fed through screw feeder and air is supplied through blower. In
the down stream side cyclone separator is placed after which the sampling and burner lines are connected. A
regression model is developed and the feasibility of gasifying coconut shell and groundnut shell are discussed.
Earlier and present work of coconut shell gasification proves fluidized bed gasification is more appropriate for
agro residues.

Keywords: Gasification; Biomass; Fluidized bed; Agro residues; Gas yield.
1. Introduction

With respect to global issues of sustainable energy and reduction in greenhouse gases, biomass is getting
increased attention as a potential source of renewable energy. Biomass is not yet competitive with fossil fuels.
Fossil fuel contributes to the major part of worlds total energy consumption. According to the World Energy
Assessment report, 80% of the worlds primary energy consumption is contributed by fossil fuel, 14% by
renewable (out of which biomass contributes 9.5%) and 6% by nuclear energy sources [1-3]. A sustainable
energy future requires combination of factors such as renewable resources and advanced energy technology.
Biomass refers to all organic materials that are originated from plants. Biomass is being traditionally used as
energy source especially for cooking and heating particularly in the developing countries. Different biomass
conversion processes produce heat, electricity and fuels. Biomass integrated gasification/combined cycle
systems are of prime importance as modern technologies. Among all biomass conversion processes, gasification
is one of the promising ones. The energy efficiency in case of gasification is higher than that of combustion
[4-5].
2. Gasification
Gasification can be defined as a thermo chemical conversion of carbonaceous material under reducing
atmosphere to a combustible gas with reasonable calorific value. In a gasifier, the carbonaceous material
undergoes three processes. The pyrolysis process occurs as the carbonaceous particle heats up. Volatiles are
S.Baskara Sethupathy et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)
ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 4 No.01 January 2012 316

released and char is produced. The process is dependent on the properties of the carbonaceous material and
determines the structure and composition of the char, which will then undergo gasification reactions. Partial
combustion occurs as the volatile products and some of the char reacts with oxygen to form CO2 and CO, which
provides heat for the subsequent gasification reactions. The most Relevant gasification reactions, and their
Reaction Enthalpy are as follows,
2
kJ /mol 131 h
2
H CO O C
298
+ +
+ = A
(1)
2CO CO C
kJ /mol 172 h
2
298
+
+ = A
(2)
4
kJ /mol 75 - h
2
CH 2H C
298
+
= A
(3)
There is three oxidants to apply; air, steam and pure oxygen. The latter is affected with high economic and
energy costs and is not considered useable in commercial applications. Since the use of pure oxygen is
expensive, but offering considerable advantages as smaller downstream equipments, lowered compression
energy, the use of oxygen enriched air combines the advantages in a less expensive medium [6-7].
The amount of air added the biomass is very important for the composition of the producer gas. More added air
as oxidant reduces the efficiency, and increases the yield of gaseous products. A ratio of one corresponds to
stochiometric combustion. ER =0 corresponds to pyrolysis, ER =0.25 0.50 correspond to gasification and
ER >1 corresponds to combustion.

3. FLUIDIZATION
Fluidization is defined as the process by which solid particles are transformed into a fluid like state through
suspension in a gas or liquid. Fluidized beds have been applied widely in processes involving gasification,
pyrolysis and combustion of a wide range of particulate materials including biomass. Advantages of fluidization
include high heat transfer, uniform and controllable temperatures, favorable gassolid contacting and the ability
to handle a wide variation in particulate properties.

Fluidized bed is a column enclosing a collection of solid particles which rest on a perforated plate. A fluid is
passed up through the supporting plate and through the bed of particles ultimately exiting from the top of the
column. At low flow rates the particles experience the drag force of the fluid flow through the interstices but
remain fixed by their weight. There is a flow rate at which the drag force balances the weight and the particles
are suspended in the flow. This suspension behaves in many ways like a dense liquid, leading to the terms
fluidized particles and fluidization. The ability to have solid particles behave as a liquid has been exploited in a
number of technologies, our immediate concern is the use of fluid beds for Gasification [8-12].

An increase of the fluid rate flow rate above that for incipient fluidization produces expansion of the suspension.
This additional expansion may occur uniformly, called homogeneous or particulate fluidization, or through the
appearance of bubbles, called bubbling, aggregative or heterogeneous fluidization. The bubbles are relatively
stable structures which rise through the bed, have sharp boundaries and are almost completely free of particles.
Further increase in fluid flow produces larger bubbles, and if the column is sufficiently narrow the bubbles can
fill the cross-section and become slugs. Yet further increases can lead to the breakdown of bubbling and
eventually to the transport of the whole bed out of the column [7]. After achieving incipient fluidization
increasing the fluid flow velocity does not result in any significant increase in the pressure drop as the bed
expands to reduce the resistance to flow. Finally at conditions of entrainment the pressure drop decreases as the
entrained particles offer little resistance to flow. Fig1. below depicts the pressure drop with gas velocity.













Fig1. Pressure drop across a fluidized bed as function of fluid velocity



S.Baskara Sethupathy et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)
ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 4 No.01 January 2012 317

3.1. Hydrodynamics of Fluidized bed

All types of particles cannot be fluidized satisfactorily. The particle size is an important parameter for
fluidization. The particles can be classified according to classification based on density and particle size.
Category (C) whose particle size diameter is less than 30 microns are extremely difficult to fluidize. Category
(A) with the range of 20100microns referred to as powders, whose beds expand considerably when minimum
fluidized gas velocity is exceeded, are again difficult to fluidize. Category (B) whose range of particle size is
400500microns are better candidates for fluidization [8-9].

3.1.1 Bulk density

Bulk density is the overall density of loose material including interparticle distance separation. It is defined as
overall mass of material/unit volume. It is measured simply by pouring weighed quantity of sample of particles
through a funnel into a graduated cylinder and volume occupied determines the bulk density. For groundnut
shell the bulk density is calculated as 297.72 kg/m
3
.


3.1.2 Sieve size D
P
:

The width of the minimum square aperture through which the particle will pass.

3.1.3 Volume diameter D
V
:

It is the diameter of a sphere having the same volume as that of the particle.

D
v
=1.13 D
p
(4)

3.1.4 Surface Volume diameter D
SV
:

It is the diameter of a sphere having the same external surface area /volume as the particle.
D
sv
=0.87 D
p
(5)
3.1.5 Sphericity ():
It is defined as ratio surface area of equivalent volume sphere to the surface area of the particle.
=D
sv
/D
v
(6)
3.1.6 Voidage ():

A mass of material has particles resting on each other due to force of gravity to form a packed bed. Depending
on the shape of particles and packing characteristics, however, a certain volume of space in between the
particles remains unoccupied, such space is called voidage. It is defined as,

=
voids rticles Volumeofpa
ume Voidagevol
+
(7)

3.1.7 Minimum fluidization velocity U
mf
:
The minimum velocity required to fully support the solids is called as minimum velocity of complete
fluidization. It is given as,
( ) ( )
2
2 3
2 2
3 2
3
75 . 1 1 150
mf
mf
sv g
mf
mf
sv g mf g p sv g
U
D
U
D g D
c

c
c

(8)



S.Baskara Sethupathy et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)
ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 4 No.01 January 2012 318

3.2. Equations for mixtures of sand and biomass

Various works report the studies on the fluidization of mixtures of biomass and sands. The biomass materials
used are rice husk, sawdust and groundnut shell powder, and the sands employed are of two different densities
and particle sizes. Experiments are carried out in a 5 cm ID fluidized bed column to determine the minimum
fluidization velocities. The percentage of biomass materials in the mixtures studied is 2, 5, 10 and 15% by
weight. Equations are developed for predicting the U
mf
values of these mixtures [8-9].

2 1
2 2 1 1
w w
w w
eff
+
+
=

(9)
1
2
1
2
2
1
1
w
w
eff
dp
dp
kdp dp
(

|
|
.
|

\
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
=

(10)

( )

1650
2
,
g dp
U
g eff
eff
m mf

=
(11)

2
1
2
2
1
1
2 2
1
2

|
|
.
|

\
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
w
w
eff
dp
dp
dp k dp

(12)

And k
1
is given as,

36 . 0 20
1
1
+ = dp k (13)

The equations are also tested for their validity against the data in current literature on U
mf
values of mixtures of
biomass and sands and also mixtures of particles of different sizes. Biomass materials used are rice husk,
sawdust and groundnut shell powder. The other solid material used is sand of two different densities and particle
sizes. Densities of the sands are 2500 and 2700 kg/m
3
and average particle sizes are (-600+355 m) and (-
355+250m), respectively. The average dimensions of the rice husks are 2 mm wide, 1 mm thick and 10 mm
long. The average particle size of the sawdust is (-1000+800 m) and the average particle size of the groundnut
shell powder is (-1200+800 m).It is found that the proposed equations quite satisfactorily predict the U
mf

values for mixtures of different particle densities and sizes. The following Table 1. gives the comparison of
experimental and predicted minimum fluidization velocities for mixtures of sands of two different sizes. An
experimental error analysis for the experimental and predicted values shows that the equations predict the
experimental values quite satisfactorily up to about a 10 wt% of the biomass in the mixture and for a 15 wt% of
biomass gives lower values as compared to the experimental values.

Table 1. Comparison of experimental and predicted minimumfluidization velocities for mixtures of sands of two different sizes.

Xb
(%)
U
mf
x 10
-2
m/s
Relative
error %
Coefficient
of
determination
Experimental
Cheung
et.al
Predicted
2 8.0 8.2 8.0 0
0.98
5 8.3 8.21 8.25 0.60
10 8.8 8.25 8.7 1.14
15 9.4 8.3 9.2 2.13

Hence biomass to sand ratio of 10% is taken for our study and U
mf
values were calculated for different biomass
sand mixtures. Equations (4) (13) were used and the values are tabulated in Table 2.





S.Baskara Sethupathy et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)
ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 4 No.01 January 2012 319


Table 2. MinimumFluidization velocities for different sand to Biomass sizes

Sand Biomass
Dp
eff
(m)

eff
(kg/m
3
)
Predicted
U
mf
(m/s)
Diameter
(m)
Density
(kg/m
3
)
Diameter
(m)
Density
(kg/m
3
)
500 2500 1000 500 232.9 2300 0.0548
1000 2500 2000 500 478.4 2300 0.2095
1500 2500 3000 500 736.5 2300 0.4092

In our experiment an average sand size of 1100 m is taken and average biomass (both coconut shell and
groundnut shell) is taken as 2000 m and the U
mf
is calculated as 0.2477m/s.

3.3. Theoretical study of Fluidized bed gasification

To study the characteristics of FBG with various operating parameters such as Temperature, Particle size, Gas
velocity and bubble size datas from literatures are suitably assumed. The details of earlier work are summarized
in table 3. Using Microsoft Excel scenarios the variations are tabulated and presented with suitable graphs
(Fig. 2 & Fig. 3). The correlations are used as presaid in the paper. The main parameters fluidization velocity,
expanded bed height and bubble rise velocity are found out as the output from scenarios. The average particle
size of sand is taken as 1100m and for biomass say groundnut and coconut shell powder the average particle
size is taken as 2000m. Density of sand and Biomass is taken as 2500 and 500 kg/m
3
respectively and assumed
to be constant. From ultimate analysis of fuels the stiochiometric air required is calculated. From those values
the minimum fuel feed required for gasification is found out.

The fluidized bed dimensions are arrived and corresponding values of minimum height at incipient fluidization
is found out. And generally the H
mf
value is twice as that of the bed diameter for deep beds and only half of
diameter in shallow bed [7-9]. Here the value of H
mf
is taken as same as bed diameter 0.15 m and the readings
are calculated thereof. The Voidage is assumed to be 0.45 corresponding to the stand particle of average
sphericity 0.86. Generally the bubble size ranges 30 % in excess with the bed diameter and the gas velocity
should be twice as that of the incipient fluidization velocity. Considering the following data are used for the
theoretical study,

1. Effective mean diameter D
eff
: 528.54 m

2. Effective density of particle
p
:2300 Kg/m3

3. Air Viscosity at 25 C : 0.0000184 Kg/ms

4. Density of Gas
g
at 25C : 1.185 Kg/m3

5. Bed Diameter D
B
: 0.15 m

6. Bed Height at incipient fluidization Hmf : 0.15m

7. Bed Voidage at U
mf
(
mf
) :0.45

8. Minimum fluidization velocity U
mf
:0.2477 m/s

9. Gas Fluidization Velocity U :0.495 m/s



S.Baskara Sethupathy et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)
ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 4 No.01 January 2012 320

Particle Dia Variation Chart
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.5
Dpeff=367 Dpeff=440 Dpeff=528.5 Dpeff=634 Dpeff=761
U
m
f

i
n

m
/
s
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
E
x
p
a
n
d
e
d

b
e
d

h
e
i
g
h
t

i
n

m

&

B
u
b
b
l
e

r
i
s
e

v
e
l
o
c
i
t
y

i
n

m
/
s
Umf Bubbl e_ri se_vel oci ty Expanded_Bed_Hei ght


Fig 2. Variation of U
mf
, Expanded bed height and Bubble rise velocity with Particle diameter

Gas Velocity Variation Chart
0.0000
0.0500
0.1000
0.1500
0.2000
0.2500
0.3000
U=0.495 U=0.594 U=0.7128 U=0.8554 U=1.026
E
x
p
a
n
d
e
d

B
e
d

H
e
i
g
h
t

i
n

m
1.00
1.10
1.20
1.30
1.40
1.50
1.60
1.70
1.80
1.90
B
u
b
b
l
e

r
i
s
e

V
e
l
o
c
i
t
y

i
n

m
/
s
Expanded_Bed_Hei ght Bubble_rise_vel ocit y


Fig 3. Variation of Expanded bed height and Bubble rise velocity with Gas Velocity


As the particle diameter is increased by 20%, U
mf
value increases by 35 % but bubble rise velocity and
expanded bed height shows a decreasing trend bout 7%. As the inlet air temperature increases by 5C the
variations of U
mf
plot shows a decreasing trend about 0.8 %. Whereas bubble rise velocity and expanded bed
height shows an increasing trend of 0.18%.

When the Gas velocity increases by 20% bubble rise velocity increases by 12% and expanded bed height
proportionally increases by 10%. As the particle diameter increases the fluidization velocity also increases since
the drag force exerted by the particle is more and hence more lifting force is required. But bubble rise velocity
and expanded bed height decreases since the interparticle forces become less dominant and hence it prevent
bubble forming phenomenon. When temperature of gas increases the viscosity and density varies which
correspondingly decreases the fluidization velocity [15]. Viscosity increases with temperature and density
decreases with temperature. Bubble rise velocity increases and expanded bed height also shows an increasing
trend. From literatures gas bubble diameter usually sizes 30% in excess with bed diameter. As the gas velocity
increases it increases the bubble rise velocity and bed height since the air excess directly lead to bubble
formation and proportionally increases the expanded height [16-21].

4. Experimental Setup

The experimental setup consists of the fluidized bed column 104 x 1400 mm in size. Fuel is fed through screw
feeder and air is supplied through blower. In the down stream side, Cyclone separator, Tar separator (water
scrubber), Diesel bath, Dryer and burner with sampling probes are placed. The entire bed is insulated with
refractories and heater is placed at the base of the bed say 75mm height. The schematic of the experimental
setup is shown in Fig 4 .


S.Baskara Sethupathy et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)
ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 4 No.01 January 2012 321




















Fig 4. Experimental uidized bed gasication system. 1 control panel; 2 air blower; 3 Variable displacement drive motor; 4 biomass
hopper; 5 steamgenerator; 6 Thermo couple; 7 free board; 8 Suction blower; 9 flare; 10 cyclone; 11 blower motor; 12 water
scrubber; 13 water inlet; 14 to gas chromatography; 15 burner; 16 dry filter; 17 fluidized bed gasifier.

4.1. Materials
Biomass materials used in the present work are groundnut shell and coconut shell. Inert material used here is
sand with bulk density of 1473.44 kg/m
3
and average particle size 1100 m. Biomass particles of different
ranges 1, 2 and 3mm has taken for the experiment. The fuel samples have been tested for its ultimate analysis
and chemical formula of Groundnut shell and Coconut shell are calculated as shown in table 4.

Table 4. Ultimate analysis of Fuel samples

Composition Coconut Shell Groundnut Shell
Carbon 53.73 51.43
Hydrogen 6.15 6.06
Nitrogen 0.86 0.58
Oxygen 38.45 38.82
Sulphur 0.2 0.22
Ash 0.61 2.89
Chemical
Formula
(a.f basis)
C
1.603
H
2.4567
O C
1.388
H
2.368
O


4.2. Preliminary experimental procedure

The stiochiometric air fuel ratio required for combustion of Coconut and groundnut shell is calculated from (14)
( )
|
.
|

\
|
+ + = S O H C ma 8 / 8
3
8
23
100
.
(14)
For an equivalence ratio of 0.3 the fuel feed rate is calculated by mass balances and found to be 18.55 and 19.4
kg/h respectively. Biomass feed rate was determined over a range of screw speeds prior to testing. Pressure
readings are measured using a manometer and temperature is measured using K- type thermocouples as
positioned. The outlet producer gas composition is to be measured using Calomat6, Oxymat61 and Ultramat23
gas analyzers. A complete experimentation phase to be carried out considering the theoretical aspects studied so
far, and earlier experimentation works done in this area.

Conclusion

Fluidized bed gasification is global research area with complex hydrodynamics. Hence more research is needed
for better computation and prediction of gasifier performance. Present work details theoretical aspects of
biomass gasification and a procedural approach for determining the fluidization characteristics. Previous works
insists biomass to sand ratio less than 10% (mass basis) gives better fluidization. A comparative study of
S.Baskara Sethupathy et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)
ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 4 No.01 January 2012 322

biomass fed gasification in a fluidized bed done so far is made and it reveals that operating performance of FBG
mainly depends on bed temperature, particle size, superficial gas velocity, equivalence Ratio and fuel quality
etc. major hindrances faced are agglomeration, excessive tar formation, poor fluidization and bed corrosion etc.

References

[1] P.M.Lv, Z.H.Xiong and J .Chang (2004), An experimental study on biomass airsteamgasification in a fluidized bed , Bioresource
Technology, Vol. 95, pp. 95-101.
[2] S.Rapagana, N.J and and A.Kiennemann (2000), Steam-gasification of biomass in a fluidized-bed of olivine particles, Biomass &
Bioenergy, Vol. 19, pp. 187-197.
[3] M.M.Hoque, S.C.Bhattacharya (2001), Fuel characteristics of gasified coconut shell in a fluidized and a spouted reactor, Energy,
Vol. 26, pp. 101-110
[4] L.E.Fryda, K.D.Panapoulos and E.Karkaras (2008), Agglomeration in fluidized bed gasification of biomass, Powder Technology,
Vol. 181, pp. 307-320.
[5] David Ross. (2007), Axial gas profiles in a bubbling fluidized bed biomass gasifier, Fuel, 86, pp. 1417-1429.
[6] Geldart, D.,(1986) Gas fluidization Technology, University of Bradford, UK.
[7] Heiping Cui. (2007), Fluidization of biomass particles: A review of experimental multiphase flow aspects, Chemical engineering
science, Vol. 62, pp. 45-55.
[8] Howard, J .R.(1989), Fluidized Bed Technology, New York.
[9] Kunii D, Levenspiel O. (1969, Fluidization engineering. New York: Wiley.
[10] Natarajan, E., A. Nordin and A. Rao (1998), Overview of Combustion and Gasification of Rice Husk in Fluidized Bed Reactors,
Biomass & Bioenergy, Vol. 14, pp. 533-546.
[11] K.G.Mansaray, A.E.Ghaly (1999), Air gasification of rice husk in a dual distributor type fluidized bed gasifier, Biomass &
Bioenergy, Vol. 17, pp. 315-332.
[12] Rao T.R. (2001), Minimumfluidization velocities of mixtures of biomass and sands, Energy, Vol. 26, pp. 633-644.
[13] Demirbas A. (2005), Potential applications of renewable energy sources, biomass combustion problems in boiler power systems and
combustion related environmental issues. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 31:pp.17192.
[14] Stanislav V, Vassilev, David BLKA, Christina G, Vassileva (2010), An overview of the chemical composition of biomass. Fuel 89:
pp.913933.
[15] Kucuk MM, Demirbas A, (1997). Biomass conversion processes. Energy Conversion Management; 38(2) : 151-65.
[16] J enkins BM, Baxter LL, Miles J r. TR, Miles TR (1998) Combustion properties of biomass. Fuel Processing Technology, 54: 1746.
[17] Furimsky E 1998,.Gasification of oil sand coke: Review. Fuel Processing Technology , 56:26390.
[18] Demirbas A,2004,Combustion characteristics of different biomass fuels. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science , 30: 219 30.
[19] Beenackers AACM,1999, Biomass gasification in moving beds, a review of European technologies. Renewable Energy , 16:118086.
[20] Babu SP.1995, Thermal gasification of biomass technology development: end of task report for 1992 to 1994. Biomass and Bioenergy
9: 515.
[21] Ergudenler A, Ghaly AE,1992, Quality of gas produced fromwheat straw in a dual-distributor type fluidized bed gasifier. Biomass
and Bioenergy 3: 41930.
S.Baskara Sethupathy et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)
ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 4 No.01 January 2012 323