ARTICLE IN PRESS

BIOMASS AND BIOENERGY 33 (2009) 97 – 107

Available at www.sciencedirect.com

http://www.elsevier.com/locate/biombioe

CFD modelling of the fast pyrolysis of an in-flight cellulosic

particle subjected to convective heat transfer

K. Papadikis, H. Gerhauser, A.V. Bridgwater, S. Gu

School of Engineering and Applied Science, Aston University, Aston Triangle, Birmingham B4 7ET, UK

art i cle info ab st rac t

Article history: The pyrolysis of a freely moving cellulosic particle inside a 41:7 mg s1 continuously fed
Received 16 August 2007 fluid bed reactor subjected to convective heat transfer is modelled. The Lagrangian
Received in revised form approach is adopted for the particle tracking inside the reactor, while the flow of the inert
23 April 2008 gas is treated with the standard Eulerian method for gases. The model incorporates the
Accepted 24 April 2008 thermal degradation of cellulose to char with simultaneous evolution of gases and vapours
Available online 20 June 2008 from discrete cellulosic particles. The reaction kinetics is represented according to the
Broido–Shafizadeh scheme. The convective heat transfer to the surface of the particle is
Keywords:
solved by two means, namely the Ranz–Marshall correlation and the limit case of infinitely
CFD
fast external heat transfer rates. The results from both approaches are compared and
Fast pyrolysis
discussed. The effect of the different heat transfer rates on the discrete phase trajectory is
Cellulose
also considered.
Particle modeling
& 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Fluidised bed

1. Introduction
Pyrolysis is thermal degradation of organic materials in
absence of oxygen. The primary pyrolysis products of
cellulosic particles are usually referred to as condensable
and noncondensable volatiles and char. The condensable
volatiles are also often classified as liquids, and the non-
condensable volatiles as gases [1]. The liquids are frequently
subdivided into water and organics. Secondary reactions of
the vapours produced result in the formation of secondary
degradation products, and generally reduced organics yields.
The extent of secondary cracking depends in particular on the
hot vapour residence time. The reaction kinetics of cellulose
was originally based on the Broido Shafizadeh scheme [2].
Many researchers question the validity of the classic scheme
[3–6] especially on the initiation of the decomposition with
the formation of ‘‘active cellulose’’. However, researchers
have not yet concluded to a global pyrolysis mechanism
for cellulose and considerable amount of research is still
going on.
Fluidised beds are the most widely used type of reactor for
fast pyrolysis, as they offer a number of advantages, such as
high heat transfer rates and good temperature control. The
hydrodynamics of fluidised beds have been widely investi-
gated, both experimentally and numerically, to allow valida-
tion of the model results. To date most of the computational
research interest has been focused on the simulation of the
fluidised bed hydrodynamics, using either the Eulerian
(continuum) [7] or the Lagrangian (discrete element) [8,9]
model, as well as novel models like that developed by Bokkers
et al. [10] which is based on the modelling of the larger
bubbles as discrete elements that are tracked individually
during their rise through the emulsion phase, which is
considered as a continuum. Due to the significant increase
in computing power of recent years, these models have now
made computational modelling of multiphase granular flows
possible, though it is still very challenging, particularly so for
industrial scale reactor units.
Little attention has been paid to the computational model-
ling of biomass particles tracked through a fluidised bed

Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 1212043582; fax: 44 1213335809.

E-mail address: s.gu@aston.ac.uk (S. Gu).
0961-9534/$ - see front matter & 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2008.04.021
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
98 BIOMASS AND BIOENERGY 33 (2009) 97– 107

Nomenclature T temperature, K
Ti stress tensor of phase i
Ai pre-exponential factor, s1 Tp particle temperature, K
Ap particle surface area, m2 T1 local temperature of the continuous phase, K
CD drag coefficient u continuous phase velocity, m s1
Cp specific heat capacity, J kg1 K1 up particle velocity, m s1
dp particle diameter, m Ui internal energy of phase i per unit mass, J kg1
E activation energy, J mol1 vi velocity vector of phase i ðui ; vi ; wi Þ, m s1
f drag function V volume, m3
fi force acting on phase i
FD drag force per unit particle mass Greek symbols
gx gravitational acceleration, m s2
h convective heat transfer coefficient, W m1 K1 ei volume fraction of phase i
hni enthalpy of phase i at non-equilibrium, J kg1 li bulk viscosity of phase i
k thermal conductivity, W m1 K1 m viscosity, kg m1 s1
Kij interphase momentum exchange coefficient r density, kg m3
mi mass of phase i, kg ri density of phase i, kg m3
m0i volumetric mass source of phase i, kg m3 s1 rp droplet density, kg m3
mp particle mass, kg ti particulate relaxation time
Nu Nusselt number t̄¯ i viscous stresses tensor for phase i
pij interaction forces between phases, kg m2 s2 f shape factor
Pi pressure of phase i, N m2
Pr Prandtl number Subscripts
qi net rate of heat outflow of phase i, kW m3
R universal gas constant, J mol1 K1 D drag
Re relative Reynolds number i; j phase subscripts
Red particle Reynolds number p particle
s path of particle wo wood
S source term
t time, s

reactor during fast pyrolysis, as well as the impact of the
production of vapours and gases on the fluidised bed
hydrodynamics. Although it is not possible to track a large
number of biomass particles discretely in a reactor, a single
particle model could provide some representative informa-
tion not available in a general Eulerian flow model. Several
heat transfer models have been developed to predict the heat
transfer coefficient for a sphere moving in fluidised beds
[11–13] but none of these has been fully incorporated into a
CFD code, so that the effect of the heat transfer from the
bubbling fluidised bed to the surface of a single biomass
particle can be quantified. The innovative work of Brown et al.
[14] was to apply CFD in a laminal entrained flow reactor, to
predict an accurate time–temperature profile of the reactants
and to understand the internal processes of the reactor. For a
fluidised bed this is a difficult task, since there are many
parameters to be considered, such as the momentum
transport from the fluidising gases and the bubbling sand,
the time fractions of contact with the particulate phase as
well as the reaction kinetics of biomass degradation to
vapours, gases and char.
As a first stage of model development, the present study
focuses on the simulation of a single cellulosic particle,
injected into a 41:7 mg s1 reactor, neglecting the presence of
the sand and exposed only to convective heat transfer. The
reactor geometry is based on an existing lab scale 41:7 mg s1
unit in Aston University. The evolution of vapours and
gases are simulated, based on the Broido–Shafizadeh scheme
for cellulose pyrolysis (up to 40–50% of wood composition),
with simultaneous particle tracking into the reactor. In
this way the residence time of the cellulosic particle can
be determined as well as the flow pattern of the released
gases and vapours. The heat transfer from the fluidising
gases to the surface of the cellulosic particle is modelled
using (i) the Ranz-Marshall [15,16] correlation (RMC) and (ii)
the limit case of infinitely fast external heat transfer rates
(IFEHTR).
2. Model description
The 41:7 mg s1 fast pyrolysis reactor of Aston University is
illustrated in Fig. 1. Nitrogen flows through a porous plate at
the bottom of the reactor at a velocity of U0 ¼ 1:2 m s1 and
temperature 773 K. The superficial velocity is more than an
order of magnitude larger than the minimum fluidising
velocity Umf of the reactor, which is typically around
0:08 m s1 using a sand bed with average particle diameter
of 440 mm Geldart B Group [17]. As has been stated previously,
the presence of the sand bed is not taken into account
at this stage of model development and the cellulosic
particle is only exposed to convective heat transfer by the
fluidising gas. The gas velocity chosen for the work here
reported is closer to that of an entrained bed reactor rather
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
BIOMASS AND BIOENERGY
40 mm
Reactor Outlet
260 mm
Injection Point
Porous Plate
Fluidising Gas Inlet
Fig. 1 – Fluidised bed reactor.
than a fluidised bed. This was done for two reasons. With
this velocity magnitude the heat transfer rates using the
Ranz–Marshall model come closer to that of a fluidised
bed as well as a gas velocity of 1:2 m s1 is slightly smaller
of the terminal velocity of the cellulosic particle (in these
conditions 1:6 m s1 ). Therefore, the initial condition for
the simulation was that the gravitational force would be
greater than the drag force exerted on the particle from
the surrounding fluid. Thus, the different heat transfer
rates would result in different particle flight inside the
reactor.
According to Bridgwater [18], the most appropriate biomass
particles sizes for liquid fuel production lie in the range of
100–6000 mm with temperature between 700–800 K. The stu-
died cellulosic particle is chosen to be 500 mm in diameter.
This is more or less the size of the particles, due to feeding
problems, for a small rig like the one studied in this paper,
while bigger rigs and commercial plants use particles from 2
to 5 mm. The particle is injected into the reactor at 303 K and
it is immediately exposed to convective heat transfer. The
initial particle velocity is 0 m s1 relative to the velocity of
the fluidising gas. The particle tracking is modelled using the
Lagrangian method and the density drop of the particle
during pyrolysis is a major parameter as the drag force tries to
overcome gravity. In this way, particle and yield residence
time can be determined.
The commercial CFD code FLUENT 6.2 is used as modelling
framework which includes the equations of particle and fluid
flow motion together with the Ranz–Marshall correlation
(RMC). The reaction kinetics and the solutions of IFEHTR are
implemented in the form of user defined function (UDF)
written in C source code. The masses of the pyrolysis
products are calculated according to the Broido–Shafizadeh
scheme, by being released into the computational domain as
mass sources of the specific phases. Since the flow is treated
as multiphase the UDF has to take into account the
subdomains in which the equations of motion are solved.
The fluid-to-fluid and fluid-to-particle drags are solved using
the drag laws developed by Morsi and Alexander [19], while
33 (2009) 97 – 107 99
the particle motion is calculated using a force balance
method that equates the droplet inertia with the forces
acting on the particle.
2.1. Model assumptions
The implementation of the discrete model for the cellulose
pyrolysis makes certain assumptions regarding the tracked
cellulosic particle. The most crucial of the assumptions is
that the particle is assumed to maintain uniform tem-
perature along its radius. This means that during the heating
of the particle either using the RMC or IFEHTR, the tempera-
ture at the centre of the particle is the same with the
temperature at its surface. This is not however the reality
since the surface of the particle is heated faster and the
heat is conducted along the radius of the particle. An
assumption like that can only be valid for very small particles
with Biot number 50:1. This is not the case though in this
simulation. The Biot number is approximately Bi ¼ 0:17
for a particle diameter of 500 mm and a surrounding fluid
velocity of 1:2 m s1 , and the temperature gradient inside
the particle is significant. A smaller particle diameter could
have been chosen to overcome this problem, however the
effect of heat transfer to the particle trajectory would have
been completely lost, since the drag force exerted on the
particle would easily overcome gravity at the first place. Due
to the fact that a new computational approach for the
pyrolysis of cellulose is modelled, the tracking of the
cellulosic particle inside the reactor was considered to be a
more significant issue at the current stage of the model
development.
The second more significant assumption is that the
cellulosic particle is totally spherical and no volume shrink-
age occurs during the pyrolysis. This will certainly have a
great impact on the density of the particle during the reaction
and consequently to the particle trajectory, which is heavily
dependent on the particle’s density.
Finally, the instantaneous energy absorption associated
with chemical reactions was assumed to be negligible
and it would not significantly affect the particle tem-
perature. Therefore, the enthalpy of reaction was assumed
to be zero.
2.2. Mathematical equations
2.2.1. Multiphase flow governing equations
2.2.1.1. Mass balance. According to [20] the mass of fluid i in
a multiphase system is given by
ZZZ
mi ¼ ei ri dV (1)
VðtÞ
The Lagrangian mass balance on mass mi moving with the
velocity vi is
ZZZ ZZZ
dmi d
¼ i ei ri dV ¼ m0i dV (2)
dti dt
Therefore, the continuity equation for phase i is given by
qðei ri Þ
þ r  ðei ri vi Þ ¼ m0i (3)
qt
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
100 BIOMASS AND BIOENERGY 33 (2009) 97– 107

Conservation of mass requires that the sum of the volumetric The a coefficients are given by
mass sources ðm0i Þ over i phases be zero, therefore 8
>
> 0; 24; 0 0oReo0:1
>
>
>
> 3:690; 22:73; 0:0903 0:1oReo1
X
n >
>
mni ¼ 0 (4) >
>
>
> 1:222; 29:1667; 3:8889 1oReo10
i¼1 >
>
< 0:6167; 46:50; 116:67 10oReo100
a1 ; a2 ; a3 ¼ (14)
>
> 0:3644; 98:33; 2778 100oReo1000
>
>
>
> 0:357; 148:62; 47 500 1000oReo5000
>
>
>
>
2.2.1.2. Momentum balance. The momentum balance for >
> 0:46; 490:546; 578 700 5000oReo10 000
>
>
: 0:5191; 1662:5; 5 416 700 ReX10 000
phase i is given by
qðei ri vi Þ
þ r  ðei ri vi  vi Þ ¼ r  Ti þ ei ri f i þ pij þ m0i vi (5)
qt
where Ti defines the stress tensor, which is expressed through 2.2.1.3. Energy balance. The energy balance for phase i is
the definition of phase pressure and viscous stresses via the given by
identity matrix I. qðei ri Ui Þ
þ r  ðei ri vi Ui Þ
Ti ¼ Pi I þ t̄¯ i (6) qt
qe
¼ r  ei qi  Pi i  Pi r  ei vi þ hni m0i þ ui (15)
The viscous stresses tensor t̄¯ i for phase i is given by qt
where Ui is the internal energy of phase i per unit mass, qi is
t̄¯ i ¼ ei mi ðrvi þ rvTi Þ þ ei ðli  23mi Þr  vi T̄¯ (7)
the net rate of heat outflow of phase i and hni the enthalpy
The product ei ri f i defines the body forces, pij the inter- entering system i at possibly non-equilibrium conditions.
action forces between the phases and m0i vi the momentum
changes due to phase change. The quantity vi defines 2.2.2. Particle motion equations
the velocity vector ðui ; vi ; wi Þ. The interaction pij term is The equation of motion for particles is given by a force
defined as balance which equates the droplet inertia with the forces
X
n X
n acting on the droplet
pij ¼ Kij ðvi  vj Þ (8)
dup gx ðrp  rÞ
i¼1 i¼1 ¼ FD ðu  up Þ þ (16)
dt rp
where Kij is the interphase momentum exchange coefficient
defined as where FD is the drag force per unit particle mass defined as
18m CD Re
ei ej ri f FD ¼ (17)
Kij ¼ (9) rp d2p 24
ti

The particulate relaxation time ti is defined as The drag coefficient CD given by [19] is defined as
24 b3 Red
ri d2i CD ¼ ð1 þ b1 Rebd2 Þ þ (18)
ti ¼ (10) Red b4 þ Red
18mj
where
and the drag function f is given by [19] as
b1 ¼ expð2:3288  6:4581f þ 2:4486f2 Þ (19)
CD Re
f¼ (11)
24 b2 ¼ 0:0964 þ 0:5565f (20)
where
b3 ¼ expð4:905  13:8944f þ 18:4222f2  10:2599f3 Þ (21)
a2 a3
CD ¼ a1 þ þ (12)
Re Re2
b3 ¼ expð1:4681 þ 12:2584f  20:7322f2 þ 15:8855f3 Þ (22)
and
The shape factor f is given by [21] as
rdjup  uj s
Re ¼ (13) f¼ (23)
m S

Fig. 2 – Broido–Shafizadeh mechanism.

 ARTICLE IN PRESS
BIOMASS AND BIOENERGY 33 (2009) 97 – 107 101

The relative Reynolds number is defined by Eq. (13).

2.2.3. Reaction kinetics

The reaction kinetics of cellulose pyrolysis is modelled using
the Broido–Shafizadeh scheme. The mechanism is illustrated
in Fig. 2.
The mechanism utilises the Arrhenius equation which is
defined as

Ki ¼ Ai expðEi =RTÞ (24)

The values of the kinetic parameters were obtained by [2] for

the first three reactions and the parameters for the fourth
reaction are taken from [22].

2.2.4. Heat transfer

The droplet heating law is applied throughout, as the
enthalpy of reaction or particle fusion or particle evaporation
0.01 0.1 0.2 0.23
is assumed to be zero
Time (s)
dTp
mp cp ¼ hAp ðT1  Tp Þ (25) Fig. 3 – Particle position in the reactor at different times
dt
(IFEHTR).
The heat transfer coefficient is evaluated from the well-
known [15,16] correlation:
cellulosic particle starts to convert to the various pyrolysis
hdp 1=2 products. Table 1 shows the simulation parameters.
Nu ¼ ¼ 2:0 þ 0:6Red Pr1=3 (26)
k
Fig. 3 illustrates the particle position in the reactor at
In the limit case of IFEHTR the particle is instantaneously different times, during the fast pyrolysis. The volume fraction
heated to the temperature of the fluidising gas ðTp ¼ TÞ. and the vectors of the velocity magnitude of the produced
vapours, as they are entrained out of the reactor by the
fluidising gas, are illustrated in Figs. 4 and 5, respectively. The
3. Results and discussions loss of volatiles causes a rapid drop in the particle density as
shown in Fig. 6, and consequently the particle is carried out of
3.1. Infinitely fast external heat transfer rates (IFEHTR) the reactor.

In the limit case of IFEHTR, the particle temperature (initially 3.1.1. Reaction kinetics
at 303 K) rises instantaneously to the reactor temperature The rapid heating causes the cellulose to be activated
(773 K). The reaction mechanism, which is extremely tem- extremely fast as shown in Fig. 7, which in turn is converted
perature dependent, is instantaneously initiated and the to the pyrolysis products char, gases and vapours. As the
particle is instantaneously heated to 773 K, only 0.0022 s are
needed for the cellulose to be activated. The production
of vapours, gas and char is almost instantaneously initiated.
Table 1 – Simulation parameters Fig. 8 shows the rate of production of the vapours, gases and
char in respect to the residence time of the cellulosic particle
rwo ¼ 700 kg m3 into the reactor. The total amount of the produced vapours
dp ¼ 500 mm ( 92% of cellulose mass) has been generated in 0.235 s, which
U0 ¼ 1:2 m s1 corresponds to the residence time of the cellulosic particle in
T ¼ 773 K the reactor. The amount of gases produced reach  4% of the
r ¼ 0:457 kg m3 cellulose mass, and the produced char is  2% of the cellulose
m ¼ 3:55  105 kg m1 s1 mass.
E1 ¼ 242:8  106 J kmol1 The Broido–Shafizadeh mechanism is based on cellulose
E2 ¼ 150:7  106 J kmol1 and does not take account of char formation due to the
E3 ¼ 196:8  106 J kmol1 degradation of the lignin component of biomass. This results
E4 ¼ 108:0  106 J kmol1 in the high vapours yields and low char and gas yields. The
A1 ¼ 2:8  1019 s1 final quantity of the produced vapours is highly affected by
A2 ¼ 1:3  1010 s1 their residence time in the reactor. The reason is that
A3 ¼ 3:2  1014 s1 secondary reactions (extra-particle vapour cracking catalysed
A4 ¼ 2:6  106 s1 by char/ash) take place as it is illustrated in the reaction
x ¼ 0:35
kinetics schematic (Fig. 2). Consequently, the higher the
y ¼ 0:65
residence time of the vapours is, the higher the amount of
gas produced. In this case, the vapour residence time is
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
102 BIOMASS AND BIOENERGY 33 (2009) 97– 107

3.06e-06 7.54e-04 2.41e-03 1.11e-02

2.91e-06 7.16e-04 2.29e-03 1.06-02
2.75e-06 6.78e-04 2.17e-03 1.00e-02
2.60e-06 6.40e-04 2.05e-03 9.46e-03
2.45e-06 6.03e-04 1.93e-03 8.90e-03
2.30e-06 5.65e-04 1.81e-03 8.35e-03
2.14e-06 5.27e-04 1.69e-03 7.79e-03
1.99e-06 4.90e-04 1.57e-03 7.23e-03
1.84e-06 4.52e-04 1.45e-03 6.68e-03
1.68e-06 4.14e-04 1.33e-03 6.12e-03
1.53e-06 3.77e-04 1.21e-03 5.56e-03
1.38e-06 3.39e-04 1.09e-03 5.01e-03
1.22e-06 3.01e-04 9.64e-04 4.45e-03
1.07e-06 2.64e-04 8.44e-04 3.89e-03
9.18e-07 2.26e-04 7.23e-04 3.34e-03
7.65e-07 1.88e-04 6.03e-04 2.78e-03
6.12e-07 1.51e-04 4.82e-04 2.23e-03
4.59e-07 1.13e-04 3.62e-04 1.67e-03
3.06e-07 7.54e-04 2.41e-04 1.11e-03
1.53e-07 3.77e-04 1.21e-04 5.56e-03
0.00e-00 0.00e-04 0.00e-00 0.00e-00

0.01 0.1 0.2 0.23

Time (s)

Fig. 4 – Vapours evolution (volume fraction) in the reactor as particle moves to the outlet (IFEHTR).

1.35e+00 1.43e+00 2.00e+00

1.24e+00
1.28e+00 1.36e+00 1.90e+00
1.18e+00
1.21e+00 1.29e+00 1.80e+00
1.12e+00
1.15e+00 1.22e+00 1.70e+00
1.05e+00
9.91e-01 1.08e+00 1.15e+00 1.60e+00
9.29e-01 1.01e+00 1.07e+00 1.50e+00
8.67e-01 9.44e-01 1.00e+00 1.40e+00
8.05e-01 8.76e-01 9.30e-00 1.30e+00
7.43e-01 8.09e-01 8.59e-01 1.20e+00
6.81e-01 7.41e-01 7.87e-01 1.10e+00
6.20e-01 6.74e-01 7.16e-01 1.00e+00
5.58e-01 6.07e-01 6.44e-01 9.00e-00
4.96e-01 5.39e-01 5.73e-01 8.00e-01
4.34e-01 4.72e-01 5.01e-01 7.00e-01
3.72e-01 4.04e-01 4.29e-01 6.00e-01
3.10e-01 3.37e-01 3.58e-01 5.00e-01
2.48e-01 2.70e-01 2.86e-01 4.00e-01
1.86e-01 2.02e-01 2.15e-01 3.00e-01
1.24e-01 1.35e-01 1.43e-01 2.00e-01
6.20e-02 6.74e-02 7.16e-01 1.00e-01
0.00e+00 0.00e-00 0.00e+00
0.00e-00

0.01 0.1 0.2 0.23

Time (s)

Fig. 5 – Velocity vectors of the produced vapours (IFEHTR).

 ARTICLE IN PRESS
BIOMASS AND BIOENERGY 33 (2009) 97 – 107 103

700 2.5
x − velocity
600 Particle Density 2
y − velocity
1.5

Particle Velocity (m/s)

Particle Density (kg/m3)

500
1
400
0.5
300
0

200 −0.5

100 −1

−1.5
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
Particle Time (s)
Particle Time (s)
Fig. 9 – Particle x–y velocity change inside the reactor
Fig. 6 – Particle density change with time (IFEHTR).
(IFEHTR).

0.0 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.507

Time (s)
Fig. 7 – Initial and active cellulose mass fraction with time
(IFEHTR). Fig. 10 – Particle position in the reactor at different times
(RMC).

0.9 Vapours
Char
0.8 Gases sufficiently small to have a large impact on the relative yields
of vapours and gas.
0.7
Mass Fraction

0.6 3.1.2. Particle dynamics

Fig. 9 illustrates how the particle velocity changes during its
0.5
flight in the reactor. The particle position is shown in Fig. 3.
0.4 The cellulosic particle accelerates in the y-direction, as its
0.3 mass is virtually instantaneously reduced sufficiently for its
terminal velocity to become smaller than the superficial
0.2 velocity of the gas in the reactor. The drag force exerted on
0.1 the particle then easily overcomes gravity. The y-velocity
decreases as the particle reaches the reactor’s outlet, due to
0
the directional change of the fluidising gas velocity vectors,
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
and its x-velocity component starts to dominate. The particle
Particle Time (s)
is finally driven out of the reactor in 0.235 s. In the current
Fig. 8 – Char, gas and vapour yields during particle residence simulation, the constant volume of cellulosic particle makes
time in the reactor (IFEHTR). the density drop of the particle faster and more substantial.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
104 BIOMASS AND BIOENERGY 33 (2009) 97– 107

4.98e-07 8.47e-03 1.13e-02 1.14e-02

9.03e-09
4.73e-07 8.04e-03 1.07e-02 1.08e-02
8.58e-09
4.49e-07 7.62e-03 1.01e-02 1.02e-02
8.13e-09
4.24e-07 7.20e-03 9.58e-03 9.66e-03
7.68e-09
7.22e-09 3.99e-07 6.77e-03 9.02e-03 9.10e-03
6.77e-09 3.74e-07 6.35e-03 8.45e-03 8.53e-03
6.32e-09 3.49e-07 5.93e-03 7.89e-03 7.96e-03
5.87e-09 3.24e-07 5.50e-03 7.33e-03 7.39e-03
5.42e-09 2.99e-07 5.08e-03 6.76e-03 6.82e-03
4.97e-09 2.74e-07 4.66e-03 6.20e-03 6.25e-03
4.51e-09 2.49e-07 4.23e-03 5.64e-03 5.68e-03
4.06e-09 2.24e-07 3.81e-03 5.07e-03 5.12e-03
3.61e-09 1.99e-07 3.39e-03 4.51e-03 4.55e-03
3.16e-09 1.74e-07 2.96e-03 3.95e-03 3.98e-03
2.71e-09 1.50e-07 2.54e-03 3.38e-03 3.41e-03
2.26e-09 1.25e-07 2.12e-03 2.82e-03 2.84e-03
1.81e-09 9.97e-08 1.69e-03 2.25e-03 2.27e-03
1.35e-09 7.48e-08 1.27e-03 1.69e-03 1.71e-03
9.03e-10 4.98e-08 8.47e-04 1.13e-03 1.14e-03
4.51e-10 2.49e-08 4.23e-04 5.64e-03 5.68e-04
0.00e+00 0.00e+00 0.00e+00 0.00e+00 0.00e+00

0.0 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.507

Time (s)

Fig. 11 – Vapours evolution (volume fraction) in the reactor as particle moves to the outlet (RMC).

1.31e+00 1.39e+00 2.00e+00 2.00e+00

1.21e+00
1.24e+00 1.32e+00 1.90e+00 1.90e+00
1.15e+00
1.09e+00 1.18e+00 1.25e+00 1.80e+00 1.80e+00
1.03e+00 1.11e+00 1.18e+00 1.70e+00 1.70e+00
9.69e-01 1.05e+00 1.11e+00 1.60e+00 1.60e+00
9.08e-01 9.83e-00 1.04e+00 1.50e+00 1.50e+00
8.48e-01 9.17e-00 9.74e-01 1.40e+00 1.40e+00
7.87e-01 8.52e-00 9.04e-01 1.30e+00 1.30e+00
7.27e-01 7.86e-00 8.34e-01 1.20e+00 1.20e+00
6.66e-01 7.21e-00 7.65e-01 1.10e+00 1.10e+00
6.06e-01 6.55e-01 6.95e-01 1.00e+00 1.00e+00
5.45e-01 5.90e-01 6.26e-01 9.00e-01 9.00e-01
4.84e-01 5.24e-01 5.56e-01 8.00e-01 8.00e-01
4.24e-01 4.59e-01 4.87e-01 7.00e-01 7.00e-01
3.63e-01 3.93e-01 4.17e-01 6.00e-01 6.00e-01
3.03e-01 3.28e-01 3.48e-01 5.00e-01 5.00e-01
2.42e-01 2.62e-01 2.78e-01 4.00e-01 4.00e-01
1.82e-01 1.97e-01 2.09e-01 3.00e-01 3.00e-01
1.21e-01 1.31e-01 1.39e-01 2.00e-01 2.00e-01
6.06e-02 6.55e-02 6.95e-01 1.00e-01 1.00e-01
0.00e+00 0.00e+00 0.00e+00 0.00e+00 0.00e+00

0.0 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.507

Time (s)

Fig. 12 – Velocity vectors of the produced vapours (RMC).

This easily explains the fast increase in the y-velocity of the
particle, since it is heavily dependent on the particle density.
3.2. Heat transfer using the RMC
3.2.1. Particle heating
The particle position at different times as well as the volume
fraction contour plots and velocity vectors are illustrated in
Figs. 10–12, respectively. In contrast to the IFEHTR case, the
inclusion of convective heat transfer to its surface gives rise
to slower heating. According to Eq. (25), the temperature rise
on the particle is a function of the particle mass. This means
that the sooner the reaction mechanism is initiated and the
mass of the particle drops, the faster the heating of the
particle is going to be. Fig. 13 shows that the particle
temperature smoothly rises up to 700 K in 1.2 s, while, in the
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
BIOMASS AND BIOENERGY 33 (2009) 97 – 107 105

800 next 0.3 s the particle is rapidly heated up to 773 K. This effect
750 is caused by the rapid density drop of the particle when the
Particle Temperature
reaction takes effect, and due to the fact that only external
700
heat transfer resistance is considered. If conduction inside
650 the particle is taken into account, the average heating would
Temperature (K)

be slower due to the considerable temperature difference at

600
the surface and at the centre of the particle. The effect of
550 convective heat transfer on the particle density is illustrated
500 in Fig. 14. The particle density remains at about 700 kg m3 for
the first 1.2 s, where its temperature is still below 700 K, and
450
then rapidly drops down as the particle temperature exceeds.
400
350 3.2.2. Reaction kinetics
Fig. 15 shows that the percentage of char reached  3:5% of
300
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 cellulose mass. The char yields however have slightly
Particle Time (s) increased compared to the IFEHTR case since the particle
spends a greater period of time in the temperature range of
Fig. 13 – Particle temperature rise with time (RMC). 300–700 K, where as reported by Di Blasi [1] char yields tend to
be higher. Cellulose is totally activated in about 1.2 s, while in
the previous case, only 0.0025 s are required. The vapours
700 produced before the exit of the particle from the reactor reach
 91% of cellulose mass, and noncondensable gases are  5%.
600
3.2.3. Particle dynamics
Particle Density (kg/m3)

500 Fig. 16 illustrates the x–y velocities of the particle during its
motion in the reactor. Unlike the case of infinitely fast heat
400 transfer rates, the case of convective heat transfer to the
Particle Density particle results in a fall down to the bottom of the reactor,
300 since its density remains unchanged for almost 1.2 s. The
initial cellulose density of 700 kg m3 is high enough for
200 gravity to overcome drag. The boundary condition on the inlet
of the reactor is set to ‘‘reflect’’, which means that the particle
100
was assumed to elastically collide with the perforated plate at
the bottom of the reactor, using a restitution coefficient of 0.9.
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 This is the reason why a slight bouncing of the particle,
represented like a saw function, is visible for a period of 1.2 s
Particle Time (s)
in Fig. 16. After the rapid effect of the reaction mechanism on
Fig. 14 – Particle density change with time (RMC). the density of the particle, the latter starts its flight in the
reactor until it reaches the reactor outlet. Again the particle
accelerates in the y-velocity direction, since the decrease of
particle density allows the drag force to overcome its gravity.
As the particle is directed to the outlet of the reactor, the x-
velocity of the fluidising gas again starts to dominate, thus
the particle is easily driven out of the reactor in 1.575 s.

4. Conclusions

The fast pyrolysis of a single discrete cellulosic particle

Fig. 15 – Fast pyrolysis products mass fraction (RMC).
subjected to convective heat transfer has been simulated
using a commercial CFD code. Different heat transfer condi-
tions result in different pyrolysis product yields which are
highly dependent on the residence time of the particle and
the pyrolysis products themselves. The particle trajectory
found to be highly dependent on the heat transfer rate from
the fluidising gases to the particle, as well as its physical
characteristics and their rate of variation during the pyrolysis.
The computational significance of the model is that the
reaction kinetics of biomass can be associated with discrete
particles that can freely move in the computational domain of

106
2
x − velocity
Particle x velocity (m/s)
1.5
0.5
−0.5
−1
0 0.2
2
y − velocity
Particle y velocity (m/s)
−1
−2
0 0.2
Fig. 16 – Particle x–y velocity change inside the reactor (RMC).
the reactor using commercial software. In contrast with the
single particle models developed so far, the discrete phase
modelling of the biomass pyrolysis can predict the particle
position inside the reactor, its residence time as well as the
residence time of the vapours produced inside the reactor.
The results demonstrate that Lagrangian (discrete phase)
approach is able to simulate the fast pyrolysis process with
simultaneous evolution of the pyrolysis products together
with the particle tracking. In the multiphase flow simulation,
the produced Eulerian phases (vapours, gas) are able to
interact with the primary phase (fluidising gas), so that the
flow pattern and residence time of the pyrolysis products can
be determined. This modelling work paves way for develop-
ment of a complete fast pyrolysis model which may include
the challenging tasks, such as incorporating momentum
transport and heat transfer from fluidised sand to pyrolysing
biomass particles.
R E F E R E N C E S
[1] Di Blasi C. Modelling the fast pyrolysis of cellulosic particles
in fluid-bed reactors. Chemical Engineering Science
2000;55:5999–6013.
[2] Bradbury AGW, Sakai Y, Shafizadeh F. A kinetic model for
pyrolysis of cellulose. Journal of Applied Polymer Science
1979;23:3271–80.
[3] Varhegyi G, Jakab E, Antal MJ. Is the Broido–Shafizadeh model
for cellulose pyrolysis true? Energy Fuels 1994;8:1345–52.
[4] Milosavljevic I, Suuberg EM. Cellulose thermal decomposition
kinetics—global mass loss kinetics. Industrial Engineering
and Chemistry Research 1995;34:1081–91.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
BIOMASS AND BIOENERGY 33 (2009) 97– 107
0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6
Particle Time (s)
0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6
Particle Time (s)
[5] Mamleev V, Bourbigot S, Yvon J. Kinetic analysis of
the thermal decomposition of cellulose: the main step of
mass loss. Journal on Analysis of Applied Pyrolysis
2007;80:151–65.
[6] Mamleev V, Bourbigot S. Modulated thermogravimetric in
analysis of decomposition kinetics. Chemical Engineering
Science 2005;60:747–66.
[7] Pain CC, Mansoorzadeh S, Gomes JLM, de Oliveira CRE. A
numerical investigation of bubbling gas–solid fluidized bed
dynamics in 2-D geometries. Powder Technology
2002;128(1):56–77.
[8] Apte SV, Mahesh K, Lundgren T. A Eulerian—Lagrangian
model to simulate two-phase/particulate flows. Centre
for Turbulence Research, Annual Research Briefs,
2003.
[9] Kafui KD, Thornton C, Adams MJ. Discrete particle-conti-
nuum fluid modelling of gas–solid fluidised beds. Chemical
Engineering Science 2002;57:2395–410.
[10] Bokkers GA, Laverman JA, Van Sint Annaland M, Kuipers
JAM. Modelling of large-scale dense gas–solid bubbling
fluidised beds using a novel discrete bubble model. Chemical
Engineering Science 2006;61:5590–602.
[11] Agarwal PK. Transport phenomena in multi-particle sys-
tems-IV. Heat transfer to a large freely moving particle in gas
fluidized bed of smaller particles. Chemical Engineering
Science 1991;46:1115–27.
[12] Parmar MS, Hayhurst AN. The heat transfer coefficient for a
freely moving sphere in a bubbling fluidised bed. Chemical
Engineering Science 2002;57:3485–94.
[13] Collier AP, Hayhurst AN, Richardson JL, Scott SA. The heat
transfer coefficient between a particle and a bed (packed or
fluidised) of much larger particles. Chemical Engineering
Science 2004;59:4613–20.
[14] Brown LA, Dayton CD, Nimlos RM, Daily WJ. Design and
characterization of an entrained flow reactor for the study of
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
BIOMASS AND BIOENERGY 33 (2009) 97 – 107 107

biomass pyrolysis chemistry at high heating rates. Energy
and Fuels 2001;15:1276–85.
[15] Ranz WE, Marshall WR. Evaporation from drops, Part I.
Chemical Engineering Progress 1952;48:141–6.
[16] Ranz WE, Marshall WR. Evaporation from drops, Part II.
Chemical Engineering Progress 1952;48:173–80.
[17] Geldart D. Types of gas fluidization. Powder Technology 1973;
7:285.
[18] Bridgwater AV. Principles and practice of biomass fast
pyrolysis processes for liquids. Journal of Analytical and
Applied Pyrolysis 1999;51:3–22.
[19] Morsi SA, Alexander AJ. An investigation of particle trajec-
tories in two-phase flow systems. Journal of Fluid Mechanics
1972;55:193–208.
[20] Gidaspow D. Multiphase flow and fluidization: continuum and
kinetic theory descriptions. New York: Academic Press; 1994.
[21] Haider A, Levenspiel O. Drag coefficient and terminal velocity
of spherical and nonspherical particles. Powder Technology
1989;58:63–70.
[22] Liden AG, Berruti F, Scott DS. A kinetic model for the
production of liquids from the flash pyrolysis of biomass.
Chemical Engineering Communications 1988;65:207–21.