Die Ressourcenuniversitt. Seit 1765.

Department of Energy Process Engineering

and Chemical Engineering

Development of a Kinetic Fluidized Bed Gasifier

Model for Application in Flowsheet Simulation
Matthias Gootz,
Lars- Erik Grtner

Supervision:

Prof. Dr.-Ing. Bernd Meyer

Prof. Dr.-Ing. Christian Hasse

Leipzig, 13.11.2012

TU Bergakademie Freiberg I Department of Energy Process Engineering and Chemical Engineering

Reiche Zeche I 09596 Freiberg I Germany I Phone +49(0)3731/39-4511 I Fax +49(0)3731/39-4555
Email evt@iec.tu-freiberg.de I Web www.iec.tu-freiberg.de

Content

I. Introduction

II. Model development

III. Model validation

IV. Simulation results

V. Conclusion
2

Introduction

Gasification
Coal for power generation and chemicals production
Commercially available technology

Flowsheet simulation with Aspen Plus

Implementation of gasifier model into larger flowsheet
simulation

Coal gasification kinetics

Determined by physico- chemical effects
Implementation with user- defined subroutine in
FORTRAN77
Kinetic entrained flow gasifier model with subroutine
already developped at TUBAF
3

Introduction

Main objectives
Development of fluidized bed gasifier model using the
continiously stirred tank reactor model (RCSTR)
Comparison of two kinetic rate equation types:
Langmuir- Hinshelwood (LH)
N- th order

Reasons
RCSTR suitable for representation of fluidized bed gasifier
Few literature on gasifier simulation with RCSTR and LH
kinetics available
LH more suitable than n- th order equations over broad
operating ranges

II

Model development: Kinetics

Heterogeneous reactions
C + O2 CO2
2C + O2 2CO
C + H2O CO+ H2
C + CO2 2CO

Physico- chemical effects

Pore diffusion
Surface area evolution

N- th order
Langmuir- Hinshelwood
Homogeneous reactions
2CO + O2 2CO2
2H2 + O2 2H2O
CH4 + 2O2 CO2 + 2H2O
CO + H2O CO2 + H2
5

II

Model development: Aspen Plus

High- TemperatureWinkler- Gasifier
Pilot plant Wesseling

Unconverted char,
fines, ash
Separation

Rawgas

Solids

Ssplit

Freeboard
zone

Rawgas,
fines

Gasification
Separation

RCSTR

Air/ O2
Steam

Generation rate of
components

Freeboard
zone

Properties,
Calculator
user input

Kinetics

Subroutine

Solids Gas

Recycle

Air/ O2
Steam

Fluidized
bed

Coal
Air/ O2
Steam

Fluidized
bed

Air/ O2

Recycled solids

Combustion of
volatiles
Volatiles

Unconverted char,
ash

Coal

Generation rate of
components

Drying,
Devolatilization

RGibbs

Gasification

Products of combustion
RYield

Char

RCSTR

Char

Char
decomposition

RStoic

Air/ O2
Steam

III

Model validation: Case setup and results

Validation case setup

Pressurized air/ steam gasification of Rhenish brown coal [1]
Gasifier temperatures and synthesis gas composition given

Simulation validation
1100

T
XC

Observation
Low XC at high reactor
temperatures for LH
simulation

1000

T Densebed
T Freeboard
XC
XC

0.9
0.8
0.7

900

0.6

800

0.5

700

0.4

600

0.3

500

0.2

400

0.1

300

0
LH

[1] Hamel et. al. Modeling of pressurized fluidized bed gasification in

comparison with experimental data from a commercial scale and pilot scale
HTW-gasification plant. Proceedings of 4th International Symposium on Coal
Combustion, Beijing(1999), pages 411 420, 1999.

N- th order

Literature

Cases

XC

T
XC

N-th order:

T in C

LH:

1200

III

Model validation: Results

CH4
CO2
H2O
CO
H2

CH4
CO2
H2O
CO
H2

Syngas components in m(STP)/h

Simulation results
LH:
N-th order:

10000

CH4
CH4
CO2
CO2
H2O
H 2O
CO
CO
H2
H2

9000
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
LH

Interpretation

N- th order
Cases

Literature

Energy balance is solved for lower temperatures

(Aspen Plus: Standard Enthalpy of Formation is used)
CO
HR,0 = -111 kJ/mol
[2]
CO2
HR,0 = -393 kJ/mol
[2]
[2] Chemgapedia: Standardbildungsenthalpien einiger Verbindungen.
http://www.chemgapedia.de/vsengine/supplement/Vlu/vsc/de/ch/11/aac/vorlesung/kap_8/vlus/thermodyn
amik_thermochemie.vlu/Page/vsc/de/ch/11/aac/vorlesung/kap_8/kap8_4/kap8_4a.vscml/Fragment/faed7b
2f1d262b91a3e6062626e0d88c-34.html. Accessed 11.10.2012.

III

Model validation: Langmuir- Hinshelwood

14

CH4
CH4
H2O
H2O
H2
H2
CO
CO
CO2
CO2
O2
O2

12
Reactor height in m

10
8

14
12
10

0
0.4 0.00001

0.1

0.2
0.3
Concentration in mol/mol

Freeboard

CC-O2
O2
CC-H2O
H2O
CC-CO2
CO2
H2-O2
O2
H2-

Densebed

0.0001

0.001
0.01
Rh in kmol/(ms)

0.1

Observations:
Homogeneous reactions should proceed faster
C- CO2 and C- H2O reactions too slow Inhibition by CO

Low conversion due to inhibition, but high

temperatures due to fast combustion

III

Model validation: N- th order

14

CH4
CH4
H2O
H2O
H2
H2
CO
CO
CO2
CO2
O2
O2

12

Reactor height in m

10
8

14
12
10

0
0.4 0.00001

0.1

0.2
0.3
Concentration in mol/mol

Freeboard

CC-O2
O2
CH2O
C- H2O
CC-CO2
CO2
H2H2-O2
O2

Densebed

0.0001

0.001
0.01
Rh in kmol/(ms)

0.1

Observations:
Char oxidation slower than with LH kinetics
C- CO2 and C- H2O reactions are faster

Faster endothermic reactions cause high conversion

at low temperatures
10

IV

Simulation results: Variation of air feed stream

0.9

0.9

900

0.8

0.8

0.7

800

0.7

700

0.6

700

0.6

0.5
600

0.4

500
400
300
-10%

T Densebed

0.3

T Freeboard

0.2

XC
XC

0.1
0

-5%

0%

5%

10%

Change from original air feed stream

LH

T in C

800

XC

T in C

900

1000

0.5
600

0.4

500
400
300
-10%

T Densebed

0.3

T Freeboard

0.2

XC
XC

0.1
0

-5%

0%

5%

10%

Change from original air feed stream

N- th order

Observations:
Higher air feed stream raises gasifier output results,
but output parameters are still underpredicted

Conclusion:
No advantages of LH equations over n- th order
equations in present simulation
11

XC

1000

IV

Simulation results: Range of application (LH)

1000

1
0.9
0.8

600

0.7

400

0.6
0.5

200

0.4

0.3

-200
-400

T Densebed
T Freeboard
XC
XC

XC

T in C

800

0.2
0.1
0

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Fraction of air fed to combustion xComb

Combustion of volatiles in separate Gibbs reactor

Less air used for coal gasification than in reality
Unrealistic distribution of gasification agents between zones

12

Conclusion

Gasifier model
Use with different reaction kinetics data and rate
equations possible
Failure to satisfyingly predict gasifier output
parameters

LH and n- th order simulation

No recommendation can be made for present simulation

Improvements necessary
Suitable rate parameters (from orginial coal) for
heterogeneous reaction kinetics
Revision of homogeneous reaction equations
External volatiles combustion needs to be transferred to
RCSTR
13

Conclusion

Future developments
Adjustment to different
fluidization regimes
[3]

Combination RCSTRs with

Plug Flow Reactor

Extension for use of fuel

blends

[3] D. Kunii and O. Levenspiel, Fluidization Engineering, second ed., ButterworthHeinemann, 1991.

14

Conclusion

Thank you for your attention.

15