Perspective

pubs.acs.org/journal/ascecg

Overview of Computational Fluid Dynamics Simulation of Reactor-

Scale Biomass Pyrolysis
Qingang Xiong, Yang Yang, Fei Xu, Yaoyu Pan, Jingchao Zhang, Kun Hong,*,
Giulio Lorenzini,*, and Shurong Wang*,#

Jiangsu Provincial Engineering Laboratory for Biomass Conversion and Process Integration, Jiangsu Provincial Engineering
Laboratory for Advanced Materials of Salt Chemical Industry, Huaiyin Institute of Technology, 1 East Meicheng Road, Huaian,
Jiangsu 223003, China

Department of Civil Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 N. Charles Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21218, United States

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Iowa State University, 2025 Black Engineering Building, Ames, Iowa 50011, United States

Holland Computing Center, University of NebraskaLincoln, 1400 R Street, Lincoln, Nebraska 68588, United States

Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Parma, Str. dellUniversita 12, Parma, Parma 43124, Italy
#
State Key Laboratory of Clean Energy Utilization, Zhejiang University, 38 Zheda Road, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310027, China

ABSTRACT: Computational uid dynamics (CFD) has been

widely used in both scientic studies and industrial applications
of reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis. In this Perspective, the state-
of-the-art progress in CFD modeling of reactor-scale biomass
pyrolysis was summarized and discussed. First, because of the
importance of biomass pyrolysis reaction kinetics to the
predictability of CFD, the commonly used pyrolysis reaction
kinetics in CFD modeling of reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis
were reviewed. The characteristics of each reaction kinetics were
described. Then, the theoretical basis and practical applications
of three main CFD modeling approaches, i.e., porous media model, multiuid model, and discrete particle model for simulating
reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis were presented. The activities and progresses with respect to each CFD modeling approach for
reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis were reviewed. Aspects such as experimental validation, modeling speed, and capability were
discussed. Finally, the paper was concluded with comments on future directions in CFD modeling of reactor-scale biomass
pyrolysis.
KEYWORDS: Computational uid dynamics, Biomass pyrolysis, Reactor-scale, Porous media model, Multiuid model,
Discrete particle model

INTRODUCTION
The increased depletion of fossil fuel reservation and continued
concern on environmental pollution has led to the increase of
searching for alternate clean energy sources in recent years.
Biomass, with its abundance all over the world and nearly zero
emission of greenhouse gases, has received substantial interest in
past decades for energy security and sustainability.1 Pyrolysis, a
thermochemical route that employs external heat to break down
the chemical bonds within biomolecules and decompose biomass
into dierent products for further utilizations, is an attractive
approach to convert low energy-density raw biomass into high
energy-density products such as bio-oil.2 Compared with
biological approaches, pyrolysis can process a large amount of
raw biomass in a very short period.3 Additionally, pyrolysis is also
viewed as the rst stage in other thermochemical conversion
processes, e.g., gasication and combustion, in which the actual
biomass decomposition process will have signicant inuence on
the subsequent gasication or oxidation processes.4,5
In general, biomass pyrolysis is studied at three separate scales,
i.e., molecular scale to reveal chemical kinetics,6 particle scale to
identify fundamental intraparticle transport phenomena,7 and
reactor scale to draw guidelines for practical operations.8 Because
of the relevant spatiotemporal scales, studies at molecular and
particle scales are very fundamental, whose scopes are mainly on
microstructures aiming to provide baseline information under
relatively simple conditions. Studies at reactor scale, however, are
majorly driven by realistic conditions and oriented to industrial
levels for reactor design, scale-up, and optimization. In this
Perspective, we focus on the activities devoted to reactor-scale
biomass pyrolysis.
It has been largely recognized that reactor-scale biomass
pyrolysis is very complicated as multiphase ows are inherently
coupled with complex chemical reactions.1012 The complexity
of reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis can be virtually seen in Figure
1. On one hand, more than one phase exists in reactor-scale
biomass pyrolysis, which includes complex interphase inter-
Received: October 31, 2016
Revised: January 2, 2017
Published: March 9, 2017

XXXX American Chemical Society A DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.6b02634

ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. XXXX, XXX, XXXXXX
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of biomass pyrolysis in a typical chemical reactor9 (with permission from Elsevier for use in this paper). Copyright 2014
Elsevier.
actions and phase transitions. On the other hand, reactor-scale
biomass pyrolysis still involves processes occurring at molecular
and particle scales, which make the integrated process highly
multiscale. Intraparticle heterogeneous mass, ow, and temper-
ature distributions interact with hydrodynamics in surrounding
gas. Finally, for a typical biomass feedstock, considerable
components are subject to a great number of interconnected
reactions. These complexities have inherently hindered harness-
ing the power from biomass pyrolysis.
Experiment13 and numerical simulation14 are the two main
approaches in the investigation of reactor-scale biomass
pyrolysis. Though experiment is indispensable to the ultimate
design and optimization of reactors for biomass pyrolysis, its
relatively high cost and long development cycle still face great
challenges. In addition, under harsh conditions such as high
temperature and pressure, accurate measurements of in-reactor
quantities are rather dicult. With the rapid development of
computer hardware, numerical simulation, also called virtual
experiment, becomes increasingly popular in the studies of
reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis to complement real experiment
to reduce both development cost and time.15 Therefore, using
numerical simulation, useful guidelines and trends can be
obtained in a relatively economical manner.
Computational uid dynamics (CFD),16 a well-established
branch of numerical simulation, has found extensive applications
in various complex problems. As mentioned earlier, one of the
key aspects of reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis is complex
multiphase ows, which is very suitable to be studied by CFD.
In fact, so far, a sheer volume of problems on reactor-scale
biomass pyrolysis have been studied with CFD17 and the
understanding of the underlying complicated mechanisms has
been advanced to an unprecedented level. So far, almost all types
of reactors for biomass pyrolysis, e.g., xed beds, bubbling beds,
risers, vortex reactors, and auger reactors, etc., have been
investigated using CFD. Thus, it is highly necessary to review the
state-of-the-art status of the activities on CFD modeling of
reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis and highlight future directions.
This Perspective, to the best of our knowledge, is the rst time
to summarize comprehensively the state-of-the-art progress in
CFD modeling of reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis. In the
following, dierent commonly used reaction kinetics that have
been used with CFD to describe biomass devolatilization
eectively, an important issue in CFD modeling of reactor-
B DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.6b02634
Perspective
scale biomass pyrolysis, are rst summarized. Then, a review of
activities on the use of the three main CFD models, i.e., porous
media model (PMM), multiuid model (MFM), and discrete
particle model (DPM) to reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis is
presented. Finally, the paper is concluded with highlights on
future directions for improvement and development of CFD
modeling of reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis.
COMMONLY USED REACTION KINETICS FOR CFD
SIMULATION OF REACTOR-SCALE BIOMASS
PYROLYSIS
For a typical biomass feedstock, the actual chemical reactions
associated with biomass pyrolysis are very complex whose
fundamental mechanisms are still far from comprehensive
understanding.18 It has been supposed that thousands to millions
of elementary reactions are involved in the overall biomass
pyrolysis process.19 However, in a typical CFD simulation of
reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis, it is very dicult, even if
impossible, to consider such great amount of chemical reactions.
Thus, in a practical CFD modeling of reactor-scale biomass
pyrolysis, the selection of a proper reaction kinetics to describe
the biomass devolatilization and subsequent secondary tar
cracking is critical.20 It should be not only as accurate as possible
because chemical reactions can inuence the ultimate reactor
performance signicantly but also computationally aordable as
solution of a reaction kinetics containing thousands to millions of
elementary reactions is not realistic. So far, in most CFD
modeling of reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis, the most common
types of reaction kinetics employed are the so-called lumped
global kinetics, which usually include a limited number of
reactants and products and reaction steps. Meanwhile, in recent
years, several relatively complex reaction kinetics aiming to
reproduce the overall biomass pyrolysis reaction process have
been proposed. In this section, we will summarize and discuss the
characteristics of dierent categories of reaction kinetics. It is
worth noting that in most CFD simulations of reactor-scale
biomass pyrolysis, the solution of reaction kinetics is decoupled
with the solution of hydrodynamics through the so-called time-
split approach.21 In such an approach, the partial dierential
equations of ow eld are solved rst without the source terms
from chemical reactions. Then the intermediately obtained ow
variables are used to solve the ordinary dierential equations for
chemical reactions to obtain reaction-related source terms.
ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. XXXX, XXX, XXXXXX
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering Perspective

Table 1. Popular Set of Kinetic Parameter Values and Stoichiometric Coecients for Scheme D32
Stoichiometric coecient for char formation Pre-exponential factor Activation energy
Component Reaction (Y) (A (s1)) (E (J/mol))
Cellulose Activation of biomass 2.8 1019 2.424 105
Biomass decomposition to tar 3.28 1014 1.965 105
Biomass decomposition to char and 0.35 1.3 1010 1.505 105
gas
Hemicellulose Activation of biomass 2.1 1016 1.867 105
Biomass decomposition to tar 8.75 1015 2.024 105
Biomass decomposition to char and 0.6 2.6 1011 1.457 105
gas
Lignin Activation of biomass 9.6 108 1.076 105
Biomass decomposition to tar 1.5 109 1.438 105
Biomass decomposition to char and 0.75 7.7 106 1.114 105
gas
Tar Tar cracking to gas 4.28 106 1.08 105

Finally, the obtained source terms are employed to update
corresponding ow variables.
Single-Component Single-Step Reaction Kinetics. The
single-component single-step reaction kinetics was rst proposed
by Shazadeh and Chin,22 primarily used to account for the
decomposition of wood. The single-step reaction to produce gas,
tar, and char is modeled either by competitive or noncompetitive
subreactions as follows. For the competitive reaction type, one
example of the kinetics is
Rg
wood gas
Rt
wood tar
Rc
wood char
where Rg, Rt, and Rc are the reaction rates for gas, tar, and char,
respectively. In the following, this type of scheme will be named
Scheme A1. Scheme A1 has been used by Lamarche et al.23 and
Ratte et al.24 in their CFD simulations of reactor-scale biomass
pyrolysis. For large particles, Scheme A1 is adjusted to a
noncompetitive single-step reaction kinetics to simplify further
the wood decomposition process as
R
wood g gas + t tar + cchar
where g, t, and c are the so-called stoichiometric coecients
representing the mass fractions of products. In the following, this
scheme will be named Scheme A2. Scheme A2 has been
employed by many researchers in their CFD simulations of
reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis, such as Liang and Kozinski25 and
Hofmann and Antal.26
It can be seen that single-component single-step reaction
kinetics is very simple and easy to couple with CFD. However,
because of its oversimplication, the eects of biomass
compositions and secondary decompositions are not involved,
which can produce signicant errors from the chemical side.
Single-Component Multistep Reaction Kinetics. It has
been widely accepted that during biomass pyrolysis, unignored
amount of products will undergo secondary cracking resulting in
structural repolymerization.27 Besides, evidence also has shown
that during the process of primary decomposition, virgin biomass
will rst melt to form an intermediate stage called activated
biomass.28 These two types of reactions can signicantly aect
the overall reaction rates and nal products. Thus, eorts have
been devoted to take consideration of these two additional
reactions.
To account for the eects of initial biomass melting, the most
popular way is to introduce the activated stage of biomass during
the primary decomposition process, such as
Ra R
wood virgin woodactivated g gas + t tar + cchar
(2.3)
For the secondary cracking reactions, one example is
Rg
wood gas
Rt
wood tar
Rc
wood char
(2.1) Rs
tar gas (2.4)
In the following, the category of single-component multistep
reaction kinetics will be named Scheme B. Scheme B has been
used by many authors in their CFD simulations of reactor-scale
biomass pyrolysis, e.g., Ghabi et al.29
Multicomponent Single-Step Reaction Kinetics. The
multicomponent single-step reaction kinetics was majorly
proposed to involve the eects of primary components, i.e.,
cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin.30 Thus, multicomponent
(2.2) single-step reaction kinetics can be viewed as independent single-
component single-step reaction kinetics for each primary
component. An example of multicomponent single-step reaction
kinetics is
R m1
celloluse g1gas + t1tar + c1char
R m2
hemicelloluse g2 gas + t2 tar + c2char
R m3
lignin g3gas + t3tar + c3char (2.5)
In the following, the type of multicomponent single-step reaction
kinetics will be named Scheme C. The use of Scheme C is rare.
To the best of our knowledge, it was only used by Romagnosi et
al.31 in their CFD simulation of reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis.
Multicomponent Multistep Reaction Kinetics. Within
the scope of lumped reaction kinetics for biomass pyrolysis,
multicomponent multistep reaction kinetics is viewed as the
most accurate and feasible for practical applications. It was rst
proposed by Miller and Bellan32 to dierentiate the rate disparity
among cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin. It also accounts for
the secondary cracking of tar. Thus, multicomponent multistep
C DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.6b02634
ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. XXXX, XXX, XXXXXX
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
Figure 2. Relatively complex reaction kinetics for biomass pyrolysis used by Mellin et al.36 (with permission from Elsevier for use in this paper).
Copyright 2014 Elsevier.
reaction kinetics can be formulated directly through the
combination of Scheme B and C, which will be named Scheme
D in the following. Many studies have used Scheme D in their
CFD simulations of reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis, for example,
Xue et al.33 and Xiong et al.34 A popular set of values for kinetic
parameters and stoichiometric coecients for Scheme D can be
seen in Table 1.32
Relatively Complex Reaction Kinetics. The predictability
of CFD for reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis is highly dependent
on the accuracy of pyrolysis reaction kinetics. Though lumped
reaction kinetics are relatively easy to use, their accuracy is still
questioned as too much extent of simplications is introduced.
Thus, in recent years, researchers such as Ranzi et al.35 proposed
relatively complex but more comprehensive reaction kinetics for
biomass pyrolysis. One of such relatively complicated reaction
kinetics can be seen in Figure 2. In the following, the type of
relatively complex reactions kinetics is named Scheme E.
D DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.6b02634
Perspective
In recent years, because of the increase of computational
power, the number of studies9 using Scheme E in CFD
simulation of reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis increases obviously.
Though Scheme E considers components and reaction steps in
more detail, its execution with CFD is rather complicated.
Moreover, because of its high complexity, its generality is very
limited.
POROUS MEDIA MODELING OF FIXED-BED
BIOMASS PYROLYSIS
In xed-bed biomass pyrolysis reactors, biomass particles remain
stationary or semistationary and gas phase ows majorly through
the voids between biomass particles. External heats are usually
supplied by the contacted heated walls and transferred to the
inner region of the bed for biomass particles to decompose.
Driven by the resulted pressure gradient, devolatilized gas leaves
ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. XXXX, XXX, XXXXXX
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
biomass particles and merges into the mainstream ow toward
the reactor exit.
Based on the ow characteristics in xed-bed biomass
pyrolysis, porous media model37 has been widely employed to
simulate the related gas ow. The general mathematical
formulations of PMM for the gas phase are
Mass equation
gg
+ (gg Ug) = R gs
t (3.1)
Momentum equation
(gg Ug)
+ (gg UgUg)
t Simulations were extended to 2D by Ghabi et al.,29 Olaleye et
g al.,43 and Borello et al.,44 in which the pyrolysis of spherical
= (gg) gpg Ug + gs + gg g biomass particles in cylindrical xed beds was simulated with
K (3.2)
Energy equation
(gg CpgTg)
+ (gg CpgTgUg)
t
= (gqg) + Hgs + Hg (3.3)
Species equation
gg Ygk
+ (gg YgkUg) = (gJgk ) + R gk
t (3.4)
where g, g, Ug, pg, Tg, and Ygk are the local volume fraction,
density, velocity, pressure, temperature, and mass fraction of
species k of gas, respectively. g and Cpg are the viscosity and heat
capacity, and g is the gravitational acceleration. g, qg, and Jgk are
the shear stress, conductive heat tensor, and diusive tensor.
Generally, g, qg, and Jgk are modeled with the Newtons,
Fouriers, and Ficks laws. Rgs, gs, Hgs, Hg, and Rgk are the mass
from heterogeneous gassolid reactions, momentum transfer
due to heterogeneous gassolid reactions, convective gassolid
heat transfer, heat adsorbed by gas phase, and mass from
reactions for species k, respectively. In PMM, the resistance
between gas and solid phases is modeled using Darcys law
through K. K can be obtained by empirical correlations such as
the Ergun equation. 38 The mass, energy, and species
conservation equations for solids can be formulated similarly
without convection terms as solids remain stationary.
During the derivation of PMM for simulation of xed-bed
biomass pyrolysis, usually the following hypothesis have been
employed as model assumptions. First, solid spatial dimensions
are considered constant during pyrolysis. This is based on the fact
that during xed-bed biomass pyrolysis, no signicant shrinkage
phenomena have been observed.39,40 The second, also the most
important assumption is that porous structure within each
computational grid is viewed as homogeneous. Though at
microscale, a porous structure should be far from homogeneous,
an accurate description of the eects of microscale porous
heterogeneity is still highly challengeable for both experimental
and numerical approaches. The third assumption that has been
widely used in PPM simulation of xed-bed biomass pyrolysis is
that local solid physical properties such as thermal conductivity
and heat capacity change only with local conversion extent. Such
an assumption has been widely proved to yield acceptable
predictions.
Perspective
Simulations without Solving Gas Momentum Equa-
tion. In the early stage of simulating xed-bed biomass pyrolysis
using PMM, the momentum equation was usually not included.
The velocity was assumed to be in plug ow or zero, or calculated
directly by gas pressure gradient. In the studies of Cozzani et al.41
and Park et al.,42 pyrolysis of biomass in cylindrical beds was
modeled. In these studies, the bed was modeled in the radial and
axial directions, respectively, using the plug-ow assumption and
CrankNicholson discretized nite-dierence method. The
temporal variations of temperature and product yields were
obtained and validated with a laboratory experiment.39 The
numerical study showed that higher heating rate can enhance the
temperature gradient and produce distinct thermal fronts for
biomass to degrade.
Scheme B. Convective and radiative heat transfers were given to
the sidewalls, whereas the outlet was modeled as nongradient.
The resulted partial dierential equations were solved by the
nite volume method with the biconjugate gradient stabilized
method. The temporal evolutions of thermal and reacting fronts
inside the bed were quantitatively discussed and lower pyrolysis
temperature was found to result in higher tar yield. It was also
reported that higher temperature favors gas production. A similar
work was conducted by Lamarche et al.23 for simulation of an
indirectly heated cylindrical xed bed with both Scheme A1 and
A2. Upwind and central dierence schemes were used to
discretize convective and diusive terms, respectively. After
validation with experiment, the inuence of wall temperature,
reactor size, moisture content and type of biomass on conversion
was studied. It was found that wood pellets are easier to be
pyrolyzed.
Gas velocity was assumed to be zero by Sharma and Rao45 and
Batra and Rao,46 where a xed bed equipped with ns was
simulated in 1D with Scheme A2. Fixed sidewall temperature was
given, and the discretized equations were solved through nite
dierence approach. The simulated temperature distributions
agree well with experimental measurements. The eects of the
number of ns, heat rate, and wall heat transfer rate coecient
were investigated. It was found that with the increases in number
of ns, the temperature variation decreases and the pyrolysis
process completes faster. Increased heating rate and wall heat
transfer rate coecient were also found to be benecial to
completion of pyrolysis. The same modeling strategy was
employed in the 2D simulation of an annular bed.47 In this work,
reaction constants are the function of temperature and heating
rate and physical properties were obtained directly from
experiment. The inner wall was given xed temperature whereas
the outer wall was assigned as convective. Grid spacing along the
radial direction is nonuniform, and the conservation equations
were solved using the nite volume method. The predicted mass
loss was found to agree qualitatively with experiment, and a
sensitivity study on the eects of char conductivity, void
conductivity, and reaction rate constant was conducted.
In the work conducted by Liang and Kozinski, 25 a
thermogravimetric system was simulated in 2D with Scheme
A2 where the gas velocity was determined by the local pressure
gradient. The predicted weight loss agrees well with experiment
and the eects of heating rate and porosity were studied. The
same approach was also applied to the 2D simulation of a
cylindrical bed for wood pyrolysis48 with Scheme B and the
E DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.6b02634
ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. XXXX, XXX, XXXXXX
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
Figure 3. Fixed-bed biomass pyrolysis simulated using XDEM conducted by Mahmoudi et al.55 (a) Experimental validation of the temperature proles;
(b) spatiotemporal distribution of particle temperature (with permission from Elsevier for use in this paper). Copyright 2013 Elsevier.
drying of wood was included. The results were validated with
experiment and the details inside the reactor were provided.
It is worth noting that in several simulations of reactors other
than xed beds, PMM without solving gas momentum equation
was also applied. Hofmann and Antal26 and Gorton et al.49 used
this approach along the axial direction in their simulation of
entrained-ow biomass pyrolysis with Scheme B and A2,
respectively. The nite dierence method was used to solve
the conservation equations with Gaussian elimination approach.
Axial distributions of temperature and product yields were
obtained and the eects of operating conditions such as feeding
rate and biomass particle size were claried.
In summary, PMM without gas momentum is relatively fast to
solve and able to be applied to industry-scale xed-bed reactors.
However, because it assumes a uniform distribution of gas
velocity across the ow eld, its application is largely limited to
homogeneous xed beds, whereas for heterogeneous xed beds
its modeling accuracy is relatively low. Thus, its modeling
capacity can be greatly enhanced by introducing the gas
momentum equation, as discussed in the following.
Simulations Solving Gas Momentum Equation. A
cylindrical packed bed for slow pyrolysis of wood wastes was
conducted by Yang et al.50 using the complete set of PMM with
Scheme B and solid shrinkage. The agreement between
simulation and experiment was rather good, and the simulation
discovered that packed beds can produce 30100% more char
than standard TGA and wood has higher tar cracking ability. A
horizontal pyrolysis ow inside porous media with Scheme C31
was modeled similarly. The simulated overall pressure drop was
validated with experiment and the detailed spatial distributions of
velocity, temperature, and species mass fraction inside the porous
media were discussed.
A 1D simulation by Polesek-Karczewska and Kardas51 was
conducted on the pyrolysis of wet wood biomass in a cylindrical
packed bed. The complete PMM equations were solved with
Scheme A2. A mixed explicit-implicit numerical scheme was
applied to solve the conservation equations. Mass and
momentum balances were solved explicitly whereas energy
balance was solved by an implicit CrankNicolson algorithm.
The obtained temperature was found in qualitative agreement
F DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.6b02634
Perspective
with experiment and the eects of thermal conductivity, specic
heat, specic surface area, and moisture content on the
temperature distribution were investigated. Similarly, a 3D
simulation on the temperature distribution of oil palm empty
fruit bunches in a microwave pyrolyzer was done by Hussain et
al.52 The variations of surface temperature of oil palm empty fruit
bunches with respect to nitrogen ow rate and microwave power
were studied. It was found that the surface temperature of
biomass was insensitive to nitrogen ow rate but heavily
dependent on the microwave power.
Simulations Including Intraparticle Transport Phe-
nomena. For thermally thick biomass particles pyrolyzed in
xed beds, because of the relatively high Biot number, the
temperature distribution inside biomass particles is nonuniform
and its impact on the reaction rate needs to be accounted for.
Meanwhile, because of the rapid increase of the computational
power, the intraparticle mass ow and heat transfer can be
directly solved and coupled with PMM. Thus, in recent years,
several attempts have been devoted to the multiscale modeling of
thermally thick biomass particles pyrolysis in xed beds. In
general, the above conservation equations can be applied to
simulate the intraparticle transport phenomena with prescribed
boundary conditions on the particle surface, e.g., as
Ts(r ) Ts(r )
|r = 0 = 0, k |r = R = h(Tg Ts(R ))
r r (3.5)
where k and h are the solid thermal conductivity and convective
gassolid heat transfer coecient.
A pioneering work under this direction was conducted by
Ratte et al.24 in their simulation of biomass pyrolysis in a packed
column using Scheme A1. The complete set of conservation
equations was solved in 3D inside biomass particles whereas only
the mass and energy conservation equations were solved in 1D in
the axial direction of the reactor. The plug-ow assumption was
applied to the gas phase axial velocity. The radial direction was
discretized by the nite dierence method whereas the axial
direction was discretized the by nite volume method using
upwind scheme. The axial distribution of gas temperature was
validated with experiment. The axial distributions of temper-
ature, moisture content, and wood weight were provided. The
ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. XXXX, XXX, XXXXXX
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
impact of moisture content on the consumed power was
investigated, indicating that more power is required at higher
moisture content. In the work by Anca-Couce et al.,53 the gas
momentum equation was included at the reactor scale. Both sets
of conservation equations were solved in 1D and a quantitative
agreement with experiment on temperature and mass loss was
achieved. One remarkable contribution of this work is that the
importance of intraparticle gradients was highlighted.
A step further has been launched by Mahmoudi et al.54,55 in
their simulation of heterogeneous packed-bed biomass pyrolysis
by the so-called XDEM approach. Other than simulating a
representative biomass particle, the intraparticle transport of all
biomass particles is solved simultaneously with Scheme B and
particle drying. Thus, detailed information on each individual
particle can be obtained to study quantitatively the eects of
particle conguration. By solving the intraparticle transport in
1D and external gas ow in 3D, XDEM was found to be able to
reproduce experimental results very well, as shown in Figure 3.
The eects of inlet temperature, particle size, and packing mode
were investigated. It was reported that under the same solid
loading, the overall product yields are greatly inuenced by
particle size and packing mode.
It is worth noting that the coupled strategy of intraparticle
transport and PMM was also employed to simulate a high-
temperature high-heating-rate entrained ow reactor by Dupont
et al.56 with Scheme E. 1D simulation was applied both to the
particle and reactor scale and the gas velocity was assumed to be
constant instead of solving the momentum equation. The
comparison between simulation and experiment on axial
distribution of species mass fraction was encouraging. The
inuence of particle size and reactor temperature was
investigated and it was found that the particle size is most crucial.
Overall, PMM involving the intraparticle heat transfer is the
most comprehensive CFD model for simulating xed-bed
biomass pyrolysis. Because it simulates the whole reactor
below the individual particle scale, very detailed and accurate
information on biomass pyrolysis in xed beds can be obtained.
However, restricted by the current computational power, this
approach has only been utilized in relatively small-scale systems,
which still cannot meet the requirement for industry.
MULTIFLUID MODELING OF FLUIDIZED-BED
BIOMASS PYROLYSIS
In conventional uidized beds for biomass pyrolysis, the solid
phases (usually including biomass and sand) are uidized by the
gas phase (usually containing inlet nitrogen and produced
volatiles) with external heat supplies (usually through wall). With
the dynamic mixing of sand and biomass particles, external heat is
transferred to biomass to be adsorbed for endothermal reactions.
Produced volatiles and biochar are carried by the nitrogen toward
the reactor exit. In addition, the friction between biomass and
sand particles can attrite and break big biomass particles into
smaller sizes.
The multiuid model, an extension of two-uid model,57 is the
most widely used CFD model in simulating reactor-scale biomass
pyrolysis. In MFM, all phases are modeled as interpenetrating
continua and each phase can contain an arbitrary number of
species. The conservation equations employed in MFM for the
gas phase are quite similar to those used for PMM, except that the
gassolid interphase transfers are modeled by gassolid
interphase coecients. For example, the momentum conserva-
tion equation for gas phase is
G DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.6b02634
Perspective
(gg Ug)
+ (gg UgUg)
t
= (gg) gpg + gs(Us Ug) + gs + gg g
(4.1)
where gs is the so-called drag coecient, which is conventionally
modeled by empirical correlations such as the Gidaspow58 or
Symlal-OBrien59 drag models. The conservation equations for
solid phases can be expressed similarly. It is worth noting that
contrast to the PMM, because of the free moving of solid
particles and interparticle collisions, the solid stress needs to be
included which is usually modeled using the so-called kinetic
theory of granular ow (KTGF).60 KTGF was derived from the
analogue to kinetic theory of nonuniform gas,61 where the so-
called granular temperature is dened and used to formulate
pseudo solid transport properties such as pressure and viscosity.
It is worth noting that though KTGF has relatively solid
mathematical foundation, formulating a closed equation for
granular temperature requires considerable empirical closures,
which highly restrict its generality in simulating various
particulate ows. It can be clearly seen that like PMM, in
MFM the computational requirement is independent of the
actual number of solid particles and only relevant to the
prescribed spatiotemporal resolution. So far, MFM is the only
feasible CFD model that can simulate uidized-bed biomass
pyrolysis at industry scale.
The main assumptions for MFM simulation of uidized-bed
biomass pyrolysis are as follows. First, biomass particle diameter
is usually assumed constant and porosity of particle increases in
time. In most cases, this assumption is valid if biomass particles
do not break or erode. The second is that interphase momentum
transfer is dominated by drag force, which is correct for most ow
regimes in uidized-bed biomass pyrolysis. Likewise, local solid
physical properties such as thermal conductivity and heat
capacity are assumed to change only with local conversion
extent. Finally, gas phase is assumed to be opaque, where thermal
radiation is not involved in the gas energy equation. This is a
good approximation as gas temperature in uidized-bed biomass
pyrolysis is relatively low.
MFM Simulation of Fluidized-Bed Biomass Pyrolysis.
Since the mathematical formulation of MFM for simulating
bubbling uidized-bed biomass pyrolysis by Lathouwers and
Bellan,62 plenty of activities using MFM have been devoted to
simulate biomass pyrolysis in uidized beds. Using their own
developed MFM code with Scheme D, Lathouwers and
Bellan62,63 conducted parametric studies on the eects of
operating conditions. Operating temperature was found to be
the most inuential factor to tar yield. Zero-ux boundary
conditions were imposed for solid energy equations whereas
thermal radiation was included. The conservation equations were
solved using the nite volume method with TVD scheme for
convective terms.
Realizing the capability of MFM to simulate biomass pyrolysis
in large-scale uidized beds, a sheer volume of CFD modeling
using MFM has appeared in the past decade. Xue et al.33,64,65
used the same formulations as those of Lathouwers and Bellan62
to simulate a laboratory-scale bubbling uidized-bed biomass
pyrolysis with an open-source code named MFIX.59 The
modeling results were validated by experiment and the eects
of biomass type, operating conditions, and biomass particle
polydispersity were claried. With their own developed open-
source code BIOTC,34,66 a series of MFM modeling were
ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. XXXX, XXX, XXXXXX
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering Perspective

Figure 4. Multiuid modeling of biomass pyrolysis in a bubbling uidized bed conducted by Lee et al.75 (a) Reactor conguration and operating
conditions; (b) steady-state tar reaction rates at dierent reactor temperatures (with permission from Elsevier for use in this paper). Copyright 2015
Elsevier.

Figure 5. Multiuid modeling of biomass pyrolysis in an auger reactor conducted by Aramideh et al.92 (a) Steady-state volume fraction and velocity
distributions of solids phases; (b) steady-state mass fraction distributions of tar and gas (with permission from Elsevier for use in this paper). Copyright
2015 Elsevier.

conducted by Xiong et al. using Scheme D to study systematically
the eects of operating conditions,67,68 choice of submodels,69
and reaction kinetics.70,71 The popular open-source code
OpenFOAM was used as the platform to solve the governing
partial dierential equations with the so-called PISO algorithm.
Boundary conditions are similar to those proposed by
Lathouwers and Bellan.62 The tar yield and its temporal
uctuations were found to be sensitive to the ow pattern,
especially from bubbling to slugging. Similar simulations were
done by Boateng and Mtui72 and Azizi and Mowla,73 and Sharma
et al.74 and Lee et al.75 by Fluent, with Scheme A2 and B,
respectively. In these studies, experimental validation and
detailed description of the ow eld and heat transfer
characteristics were presented, as shown in Figure 4. A model
reduction work was done by Trendewicz et al.9 and Humbird et
al.76 in their 1D steady-state modeling of biomass pyrolysis in a
circulating uidized bed using Scheme E. It was attractive to nd
that the developed 1D model shows close predictability to 2D
H DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.6b02634
MFM. The eects of bed column size on lignocellulosic biomass
pyrolysis were recently studied by Lee et al.77 with Scheme B
using MFIX. Under dierent column size, the bubble behaviors
are signicantly distinct and nally result in very dierent
pyrolysis reactions.
Scheme E was coupled with MFM by Mellin et al.,36,7880
Ranganathan and Gu,81 and Eri et al.82 to simulate uidized-bed
biomass pyrolysis. The nite volume method with SIMPLE
algorithm was used to solve the governing equations. Free
slipping wall was assigned to the solid phase. It was claimed that
compared with other schemes, Scheme E can provide better
reproductions of experimental results. The eects of biomass
particle shrinkage were considered in the MFM modeling by
Zhong et al.83 with Scheme A2. The particle shrinkage was
modeled using the prescribed biomass and char material density.
It was found that stronger shrinkage can lead to weaker char
entrainment, smaller char yield and higher biomass conversion.
The intraparticle heat conduction was indirectly included by
ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. XXXX, XXX, XXXXXX
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
Dong et al.84 through modifying the rate constants of reaction
kinetics. It was shown that the modication of reaction rate
constants can qualitatively describe the eects of intraparticle
heat conduction.
MFM Simulation of Biomass Pyrolysis in Other Types
of Reactors. Besides uidized beds, MFM has been employed to
simulate other types of reactors. Biomass pyrolysis in entrained-
ow reactors were simulated with Scheme A2 by Xiu et al.85 and
Sun et al.86 The primary purpose of these two studies was to
determine the relevant kinetic parameters with experimental
validation. Gravity-driven reactors for biomass pyrolysis were
modeled by Choi et al.,87 Yu et al.,88,89 and Lin et al.90 The
popular nite volume method with SIMPLE scheme was used to
solve the conservation equations. A partially slip wall condition
was assigned to solids phase whereas the gas phase was modeled
as nonslip. Very detailed information on hydrodynamics, heat
and mass transfers, and reaction rates were obtained.
With MFM, some complicated reactors were modeled for
biomass pyrolysis. A vortex reactor was simulated by Ashcraft et
al.91 with Scheme D. Only 2D periodical domain was simulated.
The numerical results were validated by experiment and radial
distributions of solid volume fraction and temperature were
discussed. Using the so-called rotating reference framework,
Aramideh et al.92 simulated biomass pyrolysis in an auger reactor.
The ow pattern inside the reactor and product distributions at
steady state were presented, as shown in Figure 5. A parametric
study was also conducted to study the eects of operating
conditions. It is worth noting that for vortex and auger reactors,
because of the complex geometry, generating a satisfactory mesh
is the most nontrivial work.
DISCRETE PARTICLE MODELING OF
REACTOR-SCALE BIOMASS PYROLYSIS
In the discrete particle model, each solid particle is modeled as a
discrete object and tracked individually.93 Proper particle/
particle and particle/wall collision models are used to represent
the interactions among solid particles and walls. The gas phase is
still modeled in the same way as that in MFM. The movement of
a solid particle in DPM can be expressed as
dUp
mp = Vppg + Fc + Ff + mpg
dt (5.1)
where mp, Up, and Vp are the mass, velocity and volume of a solid
particle. Fc and Ff are the interparticle collision force and gas
solid interaction. The temporal evolutions of energy and species
mass fraction of a solid particle can be derived similarly. It should
be mentioned that in DPM, from the side of gas phase each solid
particle is viewed as a point source with nite size and mass. As
solid particles are individually tracked in DPM, the computa-
tional eort is majorly devoted to the solid phase and the overall
computational requirement is proportional to the number of
solid particles. But on the other hand, as in DPM the motion of
each solid particle is directly solved, temporal evolution of every
solid particle can be recorded and more measurements such as
solid residence time can be easily obtained.
As each solid particle is tracked in Lagrange way, some
assumptions from MFM can be released for DPM simulation of
biomass pyrolysis. For example, biomass particle diameter can
vary with time, which means that shrinkage and breakage can be
incorporated. It is worth noting that in most DPM simulations of
reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis, solid particles are still assumed to
be spherical. In the future, such assumption can be eliminated if
I DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.6b02634
Perspective
elaborated interparticle collision models can be developed for
nonspherical biomass particles.
Modeling All Solid Phases as Discrete Particle. To the
best of our knowledge, the earliest work using DPM was done by
Wagenaar et al.94 in their simulation of biomass pyrolysis in a
rotating cone with Scheme B. The gas phase was not solved using
CFD but by the so-called CISTR model and the interparticle
interaction was not taken in account. The predicted variations of
product yields with temperature were in good agreement with
experiment. The radial distributions of wood conversion were
analyzed. A step further was conducted by Simone et al.95 in their
simulation of drop tube reactor to evaluate devolatilization
kinetics parameters, where the gas phase eld was solved by
CFD. Johansen et al.96 also used this approach to derive kinetic
parameters for Scheme A2 in an entrained reactor with high
heating rate. The obtained kinetic constants were evaluated in
the simulation of a bench-scale reactor. A similar work was done
by Tchapda and Pisupati97 in the EulerLagrange simulation of
biomasscoal pyrolysis in an high-temperature entrained
reactor. The in-bed temperature and velocity were analyzed
and the dependence of product yields on reactor temperature
was studied. It was found higher temperature leads to lower tar
yield. The eects of particle shrinkage were studied by testing
two shrinking models in the DPM simulation of biomass
pyrolysis in a falling reactor98 with Scheme A2. The results
showed that the constant volume model predicts a faster
pyrolysis and longer particle residence time than the constant
density model. An EulerLagrange simulation was conducted by
Li et al.99 for biomass pyrolysis in a gravity-driven reactor with
nonspherical particles. The results were validated with
experimental data on conversion rate and product yields.
In later studies, the intraparticle transport phenomena were
involved and coupled with the Lagrange motion of biomass
particles. In the work by Hastaoglu and Hassam100 and Miller
and Bellan,101 the intraparticle mass and heat transfer were
solved and Scheme B and D were used for wood pyrolysis,
respectively. The temporal evolution of conversion agreed very
well with experiment and the eects of temperature, particle
diameter, and particle size distribution, etc., were studied. The
interesting trends found are that with the increases in gas velocity
and wood feeding rate, both conversion and particle residence
time decrease. A similar study was conducted by Luo et al.102 in
their DPM study of pyrolysis in a uidized reactor. The plug-ow
assumption for gas velocity was adopted. The product yields
along reactor height were presented and the eects of operating
conditions were discussed. The intraparticle heat transfer was
involved by an empirical model to dierentiate the particle
surface and mean temperature in the work by Rabinovich et al.103
The eects of temperature on the product yields of a single
biomass particle were investigated.
The dynamics of gas phase was solved using CFD in the DPM
simulation of an entrained bed by Brown et al.,104 where the
intraparticle heat transfer was still included. Through this
approach, the temporal proles of particle temperature and
conversion were analyzed and validated with experiment.
Similarly, in the discrete simulation of biomass pyrolysis in
suspension between two walls, Russo et al.105 solved the gas
turbulent ow using direct numerical simulation and the
intraparticle heat transfer was obtained by a semianalytical
model. The delay of pyrolysis due to the intraparticle heat
transfer was revealed and the importance of two-way coupling
was demonstrated.
ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. XXXX, XXX, XXXXXX
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
Figure 6. Discrete particle modeling of biomass pyrolysis in a bubbling uidized bed conducted by Bruchmuller et al.106 (a) 3D reactor conguration and
initial conditions; (b) temporal evolution of positions and temperatures of biomass particles (with permission from Elsevier for use in this paper).
Copyright 2013 Elsevier.
It can be seen in the above-mentioned DPM simulations of
reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis, interparticle interactions were
not considered because the overall solid volume fraction is very
low. However, for reactors with solid concentration far from
dilute, excluding interparticle interactions in DPM simulation
can introduce signicant errors. Rabinovich et al.107 modeled the
interparticle collision using the spring-dash discrete element
method (DEM) in their DPM simulation of pyrolysis of an
ensemble of biomass particles in a uidized bed. Through this
approach, correlations of the residence time and conversion to
the reactor height were rst derived and then coupled with the
numerical solution of the intraparticle transport to calculate the
overall tar yield. A parametric study on the impacts of particle
diameter, moisture content and temperature was conducted. A
comprehensive CFD-DEM simulation of biomass pyrolysis in a
laboratory-scale uidized bed was done by Bruchmuller et
al.106,108 with Scheme D. Around 0.8 million sand and biomass
particles were tracked, and the drying process was involved. A
very good agreement with experiment on product yields was
achieved and a detailed description of hydrodynamics was
provided, as shown in Figure 6. The inuences of inlet nitrogen
velocity, moisture content, and reactor temperature were
quantied, and it was reported that the inlet nitrogen velocity
is more important than the moisture content on the nal tar
yield. Such study provides us an unprecedented insight in the
complex behavior of biomass pyrolysis in uidized bed at particle
level.
In summary, as DPM tracks all individual solid particles, less
empirical correlations on solids phases are needed and more
detailed information at particle scale can be provided. Thus,
compared with MFM, the modeling accuracy of DPM is
obviously higher. At the same time, unlike MFM, systems with
polydispersity and particle shrinkage can be modeled using
DPM. However, currently using DPM to simulate an industry-
scale reactor, even a pilot-scale reactor, is still impossible as
billions to trillions of solid particles need to be modeled
discretely.
J DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.6b02634
Perspective
Modeling Sand as Continuum. Though tracking all solid
phases as discrete particles can provide more details on the in-
bed hydrodynamics, the required computational eort is still
unaordable for practical engineering applications. On the other
hand, in a conventional uidized bed for biomass pyrolysis, the
number of sand particles is much higher than that of biomass
particles and the major computational burden is on the tracking
of sand particles. As sand is inert where no density and shape
change will happen, it is postulated that modeling sand as
continuum will not only save a large portion of time but also can
produce engineering accurate description of sand dynamics.
Therefore, Papadikis et al.109,110 proposed a novel approach that
models both gas and sand as continua through the two-uid
model, whereas biomass particles are tracked individually with
consideration of intraparticle heat transfer.
The numerical formulations for gas and sand have been
discussed previously and thus will not be repeated here. The
movement of individual biomass particle is governed as
du b f
mp = c (uc ub) + g 1 c + Fvc
dt c b (5.2)
where ub is the velocity of biomass particle, and uc and c are the
velocity and supercial density of modeled continuum phase
(either gas or sand). fc, c, and Fvc are the so-called drag factor,
velocity response time, and virtual mass force related to the
modeled continuum phase. More details on the formulation
choice of fc, c, and Fvc can be found elsewhere.110 The impact of
intraparticle heat transfer was considered by solving the 1D heat
diusion equation for an isotropic biomass particle. Scheme B
was employed to model the wood pyrolysis.
Through this EulerEulerLagrange approach, the pyrolysis
of one biomass particle inside a laboratory-scale uidized bed was
simulated.110,111 Temporal evolutions of velocity, density, and
drag force, etc. were monitored until it was blown out of the
reactor. Both 2D and 3D simulations were tested and compared,
and a qualitative agreement between each other was achieved.
ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. XXXX, XXX, XXXXXX
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering Perspective

Table 2. Summarized Information on Computational Eort for each CFD Approach To Simulate Reactor-Scale Biomass Pyrolysis
Physical time and
Approach Reactor type Reactor dimension time step CPU time Computing node Grid/particle number
PMM Fixed bed53 0.125 m in radius and 0.21 m 4000 s and 2e3 s 2500 s Dual core 2.4 GHz 16 control volumes for reactor and 8 control
in height AMD Opteron volumes for each particle
MFM Fluidized 0.01905 m in radius and 100 s and 7e4 s 7 days Dell Precision T7400 940
bed33 0.3429 m in height workstation
Fluidized a and 0.95 m in height a and 5e3 s 133.7 h 4-core HP Compaq 69294
bed79 81100 Elite CMT
Downer 0.0345 m in radius and 1.335 2.5 s and 1e3 s 20 days 4-core 3.2 GHz 30785
reactor89 m in height
Vortex 0.27 m in radius and 0.1 m in 400 s and 5e4 s 200 days 8-core AMD 12500
reactor91 length
DPM Fluidized 0.01905 m in radius and 10 s and 2e6 s 87 days 192-core 2.3 GHz 800000 particles
bed108 0.3429 m in height HECToR Phase 2a
a
, not provided.

The variations of product yields in the radial direction with
respect to time were predicted.
Following the above studies,110,111 a series of parametric
studies were conducted on the eects of particle shrinkage,112
convective heat transfer coecient,113 biomass particle
size,114,115 particle sphericity,116 and gassand drag correla-
tion.117 It was reported that for small-size biomass particles (less
than 500 m), shrinkage does not have a signicant eect on
both momentum transport and pyrolysis yields. An innitely fast
external heat transfer rate was found to result in faster biomass
decomposition and shorter particle residence time than the
RanzMarshall correlation.118 It was also found that the particle
residence time of tetrahedral shape is lowest, whereas that of
spherical shape is highest.
In summary, treating the sand phase as continuum can
signicantly reduce the computational requirement as the
amount of sand is usually much larger than biomass. However,
a compromise to the saving of modeling time is the loss of details
for the sand itself and biomasssand interactions. It is worth
noting that so far this approach has only been used to simulate
systems with a few biomass particles, majorly oriented to
fundamental investigations.
disadvantages. Using commercial software, researchers can spend
more time to the physical analysis, but designing a user-specic
case may be inconvenient. Performing CFD modeling of reactor-
scale biomass pyrolysis using open-source codes requires users to
have a relatively deep background on programming and
numerical algorithm, but a freedom to introduce user-specic
functions and modications can be achieved.
Finally, this review also reveals that most CFD studies on
reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis have been carried out in 1D or
2D, whereas very few eorts have been devoted to 3D. In 1D
simulations, either the radial or axial direction is considered and
hence the computational requirement is low. Because it
overlooks the variations in other dimensions, the predictive
accuracy is also relatively low. On the other hand, 1D simulation
still has its value. If we are more concerned on the rough trend
other than the accuracy, a quick 1D simulation may be still a good
choice. 2D simulation improves the modeling accuracy
compared to 1D as it is closer to the actual reactor geometry.
Most recent CFD simulations of reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis
have been performed in 2D as it is more computationally
aordable compared with 3D. It is worth noting that for complex
but real geometries, 3D simulation is still highly desirable.

CONCLUDING REMARKS
In this Perspective, a comprehensive review of CFD modeling of
Moreover, from the physical point of view, the predictive
capability for 2D is still below the level of 3D. Thus, accelerating
the modeling speed to conduct full 3D simulations should be one
of the main directions in the future.

reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis is given. The topic on the reaction
kinetics to model the biomass devolatilization process is
summarized. Activities using PMM, MFM, and DPM to simulate
biomass pyrolyzers are discussed in detail. For each of these three
CFD models, their strengths and weaknesses for CFD modeling
of reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis are reviewed. Table 2
summarizes available information such as reactor dimension,
type, CPU time, computing node number, grid number, etc. in
the literature for PMM, MFM, and DPM, which is more
convenient to evaluate each approach for CFD simulation of
reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis.
During the early stage of CFD modeling of reactor-scale
biomass pyrolysis, most studies used programmed in-house
codes with MATLAB, Fortran, or C. In the last 2 decades, with
the rapid development of commercial software, nearly half of
CFD simulations of reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis have been
performed with the help of popular commercial software, such as
ANSYS Fluent and CFX. At the same time, an increased number
of open-source codes such as MFIX and OpenFOAM have been
released, based on which a lot of CFD simulations of reactor-
scale biomass pyrolysis have been conducted. Commercial
software and open-source codes both have their merits and
K DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.6b02634
PERSPECTIVE
In the future, a very urgent direction for the development of CFD
modeling of reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis is to improve
modeling accuracy. For MFM, more studies are needed to
consider properly the eects of subgrid structures such as particle
clustering, size distribution, and temporal changes of particle size
and shape. For DPM, developing engineering accurate but
computationally economic submodels to include the eects of
intraparticle transport phenomena is the main direction in the
future. In additional, continued eort on accelerating the
modeling speed for DPM is crucial as this model is highly
computationally expensive. Advanced computer architectures
such as graphical processing unit computing and many-in-core
skill can be employed as these methods are very suitable to
discrete modeling.
It is worth noting that with the increased computational power
in recent years, a few attempts have been oriented to simulate
biomass pyrolyzers by the so-called particle-resolved direct
numerical simulation approach.119122 In such studies, the grid
size to simulate gas ow is below the particle scale. Intraparticle
ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. XXXX, XXX, XXXXXX
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering Perspective

transport phenomena are directly coupled with surrounding gas

ow to substitute articial boundary conditions at particle
surface. Thus, it is postulated that this modeling approach can
provide the most accurate information within the border of CFD.
However, because of the tremendous computational require-
ment, this approach seems infeasible in the foreseeable future to
simulate a practical pyrolyzer. Nonetheless, this approach should
be very useful to conduct fundamental studies to deepen our
knowledge of biomass pyrolysis at ne scales as well as to derive
accurate submodels for PMM, MFM, and DPM.

AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Authors
Dr. Yang Yang is an engineer with Corning Incorporated, USA. He
received his B.S., M.S.E., and Ph.D. degrees all in Civil Engineering from
Tongji University, China (2008), Syracuse University, USA (2011), and
*Email: khong@hyit.edu.cn (K. Hong). Johns Hopkins University, USA (2016), respectively. His research
*Email: giulio.lorenzini@unipr.it (G. Lorenzini). focuses on topology optimization for eigenvalue problems.
*Email: srwang@zju.edu.cn (S. Wang).
ORCID
Qingang Xiong: 0000-0002-8484-6163
Jingchao Zhang: 0000-0001-5289-6062
Shurong Wang: 0000-0001-6733-3027
Notes
The authors declare no competing nancial interest.
Biographies

Fei Xu is a Ph.D. candidate at the Department of Mechanical

Engineering, Iowa State University. He received his B.S. (2011) from
the Xian Jiaotong University, China, and M.S. (2014) from Beihang
Univerisity, China. His current research interests include nite-element
based uidstructure interaction simulations, high-performance parallel
computational uid dynamics, isogeometric analysis for complex
geometries, and heart valve modeling and analysis.

Dr. Qingang Xiong is a senior engineer with Corning Incorporated, USA

and an adjunct professor of Huaiyin Institute of Technology, China. Dr.
Xiong received his Ph.D. degree of Chemical Engineering in 2011 from
Institute of Process Engineering, Chinese Academy of Sciences,
majoring in high performance computing aided computational uid
dynamics (CFD) simulation of multiphase ows. After graduation, Dr.
Xiong continued his academic career as postdoctoral research associate
in Iowa State University and Oak Ridge National Laboratory,
conducting multiscale CFD simulation of biomass pyrolysis and
heterogeneous catalysis. Dr. Xiong has published more than 30 scientic Yaoyu Pan is currently a Ph.D. student in Mechanical Engineering at
articles in prestigious peer-reviewed journals. Dr. Xiongs main research Iowa State University. He received B.E. and M.E. degrees in the School
of Energy and Power Engineering from Huazhong University of Science
interests are CFD simulation on multiphase catalytic ows, CFD model
and Technology, China, in 2012 and 2014, respectively. His main
and algorithm development, biomass thermochemical conversion, heat research interest is the numerical study of multiphase and multiscale
and mass transfer. uid ow coupled with heat and mass transfer.

L DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.6b02634
ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. XXXX, XXX, XXXXXX
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
Jingchao Zhang received his B.S. (2010) from the Department of
Thermal and Power Engineering of Shandong University of China. In
2013, he graduated with a Ph.D. degree from the School of Mechanical
Engineering of Iowa State University. At present, he is an HPC
applications specialist at University of NebraskaLincoln Holland
Computing Center. His current research interests include 2D atomic-
layer interface energy transport, energy transport in heterostructures,
and new nanoscale thermal probing to achieve atomic-level resolution.
He is a campus champion for Extreme Science and Engineering
Discovery Environment (XSEDE) and a certied instructor for Software
Carpentry (SWC).
Dr. Kun Hong is an associate professor of Huaiyin Institute of
Technology, China. Dr. Hong received his Ph.D. degree of Chemical
Engineering in 2013 from Institute of Process Engineering, Chinese
Academy of Sciences, majoring in modelling and simulation of
multiphase ows. Dr. Hong has published more than 10 scientic
articles on multiphase ows. Dr. Hongs main research interests are the
formulation for gassolid uidization and its application in chemical
reactor.
M DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.6b02634
Perspective
Prof. Dr. Giulio Lorenzini received a Masters Degree in Nuclear
Engineering at Alma Mater Studiorum-University of Bologna (Italy) in
1994 with a cum laude evaluation. Professional State Examination was
awarded in 1995 with an evaluation equal to 120/120. In 1999, he
obtained a Ph.D. in Nuclear Engineering. From 1996 to 2005, he was a
researcher in Fisica Tecnica Industriale at Alma Mater Studiorum-
University of Bologna. From 2005 to 2010, he was an associate professor
of Fisica Tecnica Industriale at Alma Mater Studiorum-University of
Bologna (Italy). From 2010 to today, he is a full professor of Fisica
Tecnica Ambientale at the Department of Industrial Engineering of the
University of Parma (Italy).
Prof. Shurong Wang received a Ph.D. in Engineering Thermal Physics
from Zhejiang University in 1999. He is the rst awardee of the First
Class Prize of Natural Science Award by the Ministry of Education for
the project High-quality liquid fuels production from the directional
thermo-chemical conversion of biomass followed by the graded
upgrading of bio-oil in 2016. He is also the rst author of a monograph
in English published by De Gruyter in 2016 and a monograph in
Chinese published by Science Press in 2013, the publishing of both was
supported by the Scientic Publishing Funds of Chinese Academy of
Sciences. He has also been included on the list of Most Cited Chinese
Researchers in the energy eld. His research interests include biomass
pyrolysis, biomass liquefaction, bio-oil upgrading, biochar utilization,
and alternative fuel synthesis.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was nancially supported by the Externally
Collaborative Project from State Key Laboratory of Clean
Energy Utilization, Zhejiang University, China under Grant No.
ZJUCEU2017011, the National Natural Science Foundation of
China under Grant No. 21406081, and the Natural Science
Foundation of Jiangsu Province under Grant No. BK20130420.
REFERENCES
(1) Brown, R. C. Biorenewable resources: engineering new products from
agriculture; Iowa State Press, 2003.
(2) Elliott, D. C. Transportation fuels from biomass via fast pyrolysis
and hydroprocessing. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and
Environment 2013, 2, 525533.
(3) Mohan, D.; Pittman, C. U.; Steele, P. H. Pyrolysis of wood/biomass
for bio-oil: a critical review. Energy Fuels 2006, 20, 848889.
(4) Shen, C.; Fletcher, T. H. Fuel element combustion properties for
live wildland utah shrubs. Combust. Sci. Technol. 2015, 187, 428444.
(5) Damartzis, T.; Zabaniotou, A. Thermochemical conversion of
biomass to second generation biofuels through integrated process
designA review. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 2011, 15, 366
378.
ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. XXXX, XXX, XXXXXX
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
(6) White, J. E.; Catallo, W. J.; Legendre, B. L. Biomass pyrolysis
kinetics: A comparative critical review with relevant agricultural residue
case studies. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2011, 91, 133.
(7) Di Blasi, C. The state of the art of transport models for charring
solid degradation. Polym. Int. 2000, 49, 11331146.
(8) Bridgwater, A. V. Review of fast pyrolysis of biomass and product
upgrading. Biomass Bioenergy 2012, 38, 6894.
(9) Trendewicz, A.; Braun, R.; Dutta, A.; Ziegler, J. One dimensional
steady-state circulating fluidized-bed reactor model for biomass fast
pyrolysis. Fuel 2014, 133, 253262.
(10) Di Blasi, C. Modeling chemical and physical processes of wood
and biomass pyrolysis. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 2008, 34, 4790.
(11) Mettler, M. S.; Vlachos, D. G.; Dauenhauer, P. J. Top ten
fundamental challenges of biomass pyrolysis for biofuels. Energy Environ.
Sci. 2012, 5, 77977809.
(12) Babu, B. Biomass pyrolysis: a state-of-the-art review. Biofuels,
Bioprod. Biorefin. 2008, 2, 393414.
(13) Bridgwater, A. Renewable fuels and chemicals by thermal
processing of biomass. Chem. Eng. J. 2003, 91, 87102.
(14) Moghtaderi, B. The state-of-the-art in pyrolysis modelling of
lignocellulosic solid fuels. Fire Mater. 2006, 30, 134.
(15) Sharma, A.; Pareek, V.; Zhang, D. Biomass pyrolysisA review of
modelling, process parameters and catalytic studies. Renewable
Sustainable Energy Rev. 2015, 50, 10811096.
(16) Patankar, S. V. Numerical heat transfer and uid ow; Taylor &
Francis, 1980.
(17) Anca-Couce, A. Reaction mechanisms and multi-scale modelling
of lignocellulosic biomass pyrolysis. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 2016, 53,
4179.
(18) Van de Velden, M.; Baeyens, J.; Brems, A.; Janssens, B.; Dewil, R.
Fundamentals, kinetics and endothermicity of the biomass pyrolysis
reaction. Renewable Energy 2010, 35, 232242.
(19) Demirbas, A. Mechanisms of liquefaction and pyrolysis reactions
of biomass. Energy Convers. Manage. 2000, 41, 633646.
(20) Papari, S.; Hawboldt, K. A review on the pyrolysis of woody
biomass to bio-oil: Focus on kinetic models. Renewable Sustainable
Energy Rev. 2015, 52, 15801595.
(21) Xie, N.; Battaglia, F.; Fox, R. O. Simulations of multiphase reactive
flows in fluidized beds using in situ adaptive tabulation. Combust. Theory
Modell. 2004, 8, 195209.
(22) Shafizadeh, F.; Chin, P. P. Thermal deterioration of wood. ACS
Symp. Ser. 1977, 43, 5781.
(23) Lamarche, P.; Tazerout, M.; Gelix, F.; Kohler, S.; Mati, K.; Paviet,
F. Modelling of an indirectly heated fixed bed pyrolysis reactor of wood:
transition from batch to continuous staged gasification. Fuel 2013, 106,
118128.
(24) Ratte, J.; Fardet, E.; Mateos, D.; Hery, J.-S. Mathematical
modelling of a continuous biomass torrefaction reactor: TORSPYD
column. Biomass Bioenergy 2011, 35, 34813495.
(25) Liang, X.; Kozinski, J. Numerical modeling of combustion and
pyrolysis of cellulosic biomass in thermogravimetric systems. Fuel 2000,
79, 14771486.
(26) Hofmann, L.; Antal, M. J. Numerical simulations of the
performance of solar fired flash pyrolysis reactors. Sol. Energy 1984,
33, 427440.
(27) Han, J.; Kim, H. The reduction and control technology of tar
during biomass gasification/pyrolysis: an overview. Renewable Sustain-
able Energy Rev. 2008, 12, 397416.
(28) Authier, O.; Ferrer, M.; Khalfi, A.-E.; Lede, J. Solid pyrolysis
modelling by a Lagrangian and dimensionless approach-Application to
cellulose fast pyrolysis. Int. J. Chem. React. Eng. 2010, 8, A78.
(29) Ghabi, C.; Benticha, H.; Sassi, M. Two-dimensional computa-
tional modeling and simulation of wood particles pyrolysis in a fixed bed
reactor. Combust. Sci. Technol. 2008, 180, 833853.
(30) Yang, H.; Yan, R.; Chen, H.; Zheng, C.; Lee, D. H.; Liang, D. T.
In-depth investigation of biomass pyrolysis based on three major
components: hemicellulose, cellulose and lignin. Energy Fuels 2006, 20,
388393.
N DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.6b02634
Perspective
(31) Romagnosi, L.; Gascoin, N.; El-Tabach, E.; Fedioun, I.; Bouchez,
M.; Steelant, J. Pyrolysis in porous media: Part 1. numerical model and
parametric study. Energy Convers. Manage. 2013, 68, 6373.
(32) Miller, R.; Bellan, J. A generalized biomass pyrolysis model based
on superimposed cellulose, hemicellulose and lignin kinetics. Combust.
Sci. Technol. 1997, 126, 97137.
(33) Xue, Q.; Heindel, T.; Fox, R. A CFD model for biomass fast
pyrolysis in fluidized-bed reactors. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2011, 66, 24402452.
(34) Xiong, Q.; Kong, S.-C.; Passalacqua, A. Development of a
generalized numerical framework for simulating biomass fast pyrolysis in
fluidized-bed reactors. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2013, 99, 305313.
(35) Ranzi, E.; Cuoci, A.; Faravelli, T.; Frassoldati, A.; Migliavacca, G.;
Pierucci, S.; Sommariva, S. Chemical kinetics of biomass pyrolysis.
Energy Fuels 2008, 22, 42924300.
(36) Mellin, P.; Kantarelis, E.; Yang, W. Computational fluid dynamics
modeling of biomass fast pyrolysis in a fluidized bed reactor, using a
comprehensive chemistry scheme. Fuel 2014, 117, 704715.
(37) Wang, C.; Cheng, P. A multiphase mixture model for multiphase,
multicomponent transport in capillary porous mediaI. Model
development. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 1996, 39, 36073618.
(38) Ergun, S. Fluid flow through packed columns. Chem. Eng. Progress
1952, 48, 8994.
(39) Cozzani, V.; Nicolella, C.; Petarca, L.; Rovatti, M.; Tognotti, L. A
fundamental study on conventional pyrolysis of a refuse-derived fuel.
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1995, 34, 20062020.
(40) Curtis, L. J.; Miller, D. J. Transport model with radiative heat
transfer for rapid cellulose pyrolysis. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1988, 27,
17751783.
(41) Cozzani, V.; Nicolella, C.; Rovatti, M.; Tognotti, L. Modeling and
experimental verification of physical and chemical processes during
pyrolysis of a refuse-derived fuel. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1996, 35, 9098.
(42) Park, C.; Zahid, U.; Lee, S.; Han, C. Effect of process operating
conditions in the biomass torrefaction: A simulation study using one-
dimensional reactor and process model. Energy 2015, 79, 127139.
(43) Olaleye, A. K.; Adedayo, K. J.; Wu, C.; Nahil, M. A.; Wang, M.;
Williams, P. T. Experimental study, dynamic modelling, validation and
analysis of hydrogen production from biomass pyrolysis/gasification of
biomass in a two-stage fixed bed reaction system. Fuel 2014, 137, 364
374.
(44) Borello, D.; Cedola, L.; Frangioni, G.; Meloni, R.; Venturini, P.;
De Filippis, P.; de Caprariis, B. Development of a numerical model for
biomass packed bed pyrolysis based on experimental validation. Appl.
Energy 2016, 164, 956962.
(45) Sharma, A.; Rao, T. R. Analysis of an annular finned pyrolyser.
Energy Convers. Manage. 1998, 39, 985997.
(46) Batra, D.; Rao, T. R. Analysis of an annular finned pyrolyser-II.
Energy Convers. Manage. 2000, 41, 573583.
(47) Ravi, M.; Jhalani, A.; Sinha, S.; Ray, A. Development of a semi-
empirical model for pyrolysis of an annular sawdust bed. J. Anal. Appl.
Pyrolysis 2004, 71, 353374.
(48) Vijeu, R.; Gerun, L.; Tazerout, M.; Castelain, C.; Bellettre, J.
Dimensional modelling of wood pyrolysis using a nodal approach. Fuel
2008, 87, 32923303.
(49) Gorton, C.; Kovac, R.; Knight, J.; Nygaard, T. Modeling pyrolysis
oil production in an entrained-flow reactor. Biomass 1990, 21, 110.
(50) Yang, Y. B.; Phan, A. N.; Ryu, C.; Sharifi, V.; Swithenbank, J.
Mathematical modelling of slow pyrolysis of segregated solid wastes in a
packed-bed pyrolyser. Fuel 2007, 86, 169180.
(51) Polesek-Karczewska, S.; Kardas, D. Prediction of thermal behavior
of pyrolyzed wet biomass by means of model with inner wood structure.
J. Therm. Sci. 2015, 24, 8289.
(52) Hussain, S. A.; Bano, S.; Yeoh, H. S.; Rozita, O. Simulation on
temperature distribution of oil palm empty fruit bunches during the
microwave pyrolysis process. Asia-Pac. J. Chem. Eng. 2014, 9, 3949.
(53) Anca-Couce, A.; Zobel, N.; Jakobsen, H. A. Multi-scale modeling
of fixed-bed thermo-chemical processes of biomass with the
representative particle model: application to pyrolysis. Fuel 2013, 103,
773782.
ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. XXXX, XXX, XXXXXX
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
(54) Mahmoudi, A. H.; Hoffmann, F.; Peters, B. Detailed numerical
modeling of pyrolysis in a heterogeneous packed bed using XDEM. J.
Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2014, 106, 920.
(55) Mahmoudi, A. H.; Hoffmann, F.; Peters, B.; Besseron, X.
Numerical study of the influence of particle size and packing on pyrolysis
products using XDEM. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transfer 2016, 71, 20
34.
(56) Dupont, C.; Chen, L.; Cances, J.; Commandre, J.-M.; Cuoci, A.;
Pierucci, S.; Ranzi, E. Biomass pyrolysis: Kinetic modelling and
experimental validation under high temperature and flash heating rate
conditions. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2009, 85, 260267.
(57) Ishii, M.; Mishima, K. Two-fluid model and hydrodynamic
constitutive relations. Nucl. Eng. Des. 1984, 82, 107126.
(58) Gidaspow, D. Multiphase ow and uidization: continuum and
kinetic theory descriptions; Academic Press, 1994.
(59) Syamlal, M.; Rogers, W.; OBrien, T. J. MFIX documentation:
theory guide; Technical Note DOE/METC-94/1004, NTIS/
DE94000087; National Technical Information Service: Springeld,
VA, 1993.
(60) Lun, C. K. K.; Savage, S. B.; Jeffrey, D. J.; Chepurniy, N. Kinetic
theories for granular flow: inelastic particles in Couette flow and slightly
inelastic particles in a general flowfield. J. Fluid Mech. 1984, 140, 223
256.
(61) Chapman, S.; Cowling, T. G. The mathematical theory of non-
uniform gases: An account of the kinetic theory of viscosity, thermal
conduction and diusion in gases; Cambridge University Press, 1970.
(62) Lathouwers, D.; Bellan, J. Modeling of dense gassolid reactive
mixtures applied to biomass pyrolysis in a fluidized bed. Int. J. Multiphase
Flow 2001, 27, 21552187.
(63) Lathouwers, D.; Bellan, J. Yield optimization and scaling of
fluidized beds for tar production from biomass. Energy Fuels 2001, 15,
12471262.
(64) Xue, Q.; Dalluge, D.; Heindel, T.; Fox, R.; Brown, R. Experimental
validation and CFD modeling study of biomass fast pyrolysis in
fluidized-bed reactors. Fuel 2012, 97, 757769.
(65) Xue, Q.; Fox, R. O. Computational modeling of biomass
thermochemical conversion in fluidized beds: particle density variation
and size distribution. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2015, 54, 40844094.
(66) Xiong, Q.; Aramideh, S.; Passalacqua, A.; Kong, S.-C. BIOTC: an
open-source CFD code for simulating biomass fast pyrolysis. Comput.
Phys. Commun. 2014, 185, 17391746.
(67) Xiong, Q.; Aramideh, S.; Kong, S.-C. Modeling effects of
operating conditions on biomass fast pyrolysis in bubbling fluidized bed
reactors. Energy Fuels 2013, 27, 59485956.
(68) Xiong, Q.; Xu, F.; Ramirez, E.; Pannala, S.; Daw, C. S. Modeling
the impact of bubbling bed hydrodynamics on tar yield and its
fluctuations during biomass fast pyrolysis. Fuel 2016, 164, 1117.
(69) Xiong, Q.; Kong, S.-C. Modeling effects of interphase transport
coefficients on biomass pyrolysis in fluidized beds. Powder Technol.
2014, 262, 96105.
(70) Xiong, Q.; Kong, S.-C.; Aramideh, S. Assessment of
devolatilization schemes in predicting product yields of biomass fast
pyrolysis. Environ. Prog. Sustainable Energy 2014, 33, 756761.
(71) Xiong, Q.; Zhang, J.; Xu, F.; Wiggins, G.; Daw, C. S. Coupling
DAEM and CFD for simulating biomass fast pyrolysis in fluidized beds.
J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2016, 117, 176181.
(72) Boateng, A.; Mtui, P. CFD modeling of space-time evolution of
fast pyrolysis products in a bench-scale fluidized-bed reactor. Appl.
Therm. Eng. 2012, 33, 190198.
(73) Azizi, S.; Mowla, D. CFD modeling of algae flash pyrolysis in the
batch fluidized bed reactor including heat carrier particles. Int. J. Chem.
React. Eng. 2016, 14, 463480.
(74) Sharma, A.; Wang, S.; Pareek, V.; Yang, H.; Zhang, D. Multi-fluid
reactive modeling of fluidized bed pyrolysis process. Chem. Eng. Sci.
2015, 123, 311321.
(75) Lee, Y. R.; Choi, H. S.; Park, H. C.; Lee, J. E. A numerical study on
biomass fast pyrolysis process: a comparison between full lumped
modeling and hybrid modeling combined with CFD. Comput. Chem.
Eng. 2015, 82, 202215.
O DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.6b02634
Perspective
(76) Humbird, D.; Trendewicz, A.; Braun, R.; Dutta, A. One-
Dimensional Biomass Fast Pyrolysis Model with Reaction Kinetics
Integrated in an Aspen Plus Biorefinery Process Model. ACS Sustainable
Chem. Eng. 2017, 5, 2463.
(77) Lee, J. E.; Park, H. C.; Choi, H. S. Numerical Study on Fast
Pyrolysis of Lignocellulosic Biomass with Varying Column Size of
Bubbling Fluidized Bed. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2017, 5, 2196.
(78) Mellin, P.; Kantarelis, E.; Zhou, C.; Yang, W. Simulation of bed
dynamics and primary products from fast pyrolysis of biomass: steam
compared to nitrogen as a fluidizing agent. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2014, 53,
1212912142.
(79) Mellin, P.; Zhang, Q.; Kantarelis, E.; Yang, W. An Euler-Euler
approach to modeling biomass fast pyrolysis in fluidized-bed reactors
Focusing on the gas phase. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2013, 58, 344353.
(80) Mellin, P.; Yu, X.; Yang, W.; Blasiak, W. Influence of reaction
atmosphere (H2O, N2, H2, CO2, CO) on fluidized-bed fast pyrolysis of
biomass using detailed tar vapor chemistry in computational fluid
dynamics. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2015, 54, 83448355.
(81) Ranganathan, P.; Gu, S. Computational fluid dynamics modelling
of biomass fast pyrolysis in fluidised bed reactors, focusing different
kinetic schemes. Bioresour. Technol. 2016, 213, 333341.
(82) Eri, Q.; Zhao, X.; Ranganathan, P.; Gu, S. Numerical simulations
on the effect of potassium on the biomass fast pyrolysis in fluidized bed
reactor. Fuel 2017, 197, 290297.
(83) Zhong, H.; Zhang, J.; Zhu, Y.; Liang, S. Multi-fluid modeling
biomass fast pyrolysis in the fluidized-bed reactor including particle
shrinkage effects. Energy Fuels 2016, 30, 64406447.
(84) Dong, N.; Luo, K.; Wang, Q. Modeling of biomass pyrolysis in a
bubbling uidized bed reactor: Impact of intra-particle heat conduction.
Fuel Process. Technol. 2016, DOI: 10.1016/j.fuproc.2016.09.015.
(85) Xiu, S.; Wang, N.; Yi, W.; Li, B.; Shahbazi, G. Validation of kinetic
parameter values for prediction of pyrolysis behaviour of corn stalks in a
horizontal entrained-flow reactor. Biosystems Engineering 2008, 100, 79
85.
(86) Sun, S.; Tian, H.; Zhao, Y.; Sun, R.; Zhou, H. Experimental and
numerical study of biomass flash pyrolysis in an entrained flow reactor.
Bioresour. Technol. 2010, 101, 36783684.
(87) Choi, H. S.; Choi, Y. S.; Kim, S. J. Numerical study of fast pyrolysis
of woody biomass in a gravity-driven reactor. Environ. Prog. Sustainable
Energy 2009, 28, 418426.
(88) Yu, X.; Makkawi, Y.; Ocone, R.; Huard, M.; Briens, C.; Berruti, F.
A CFD study of biomass pyrolysis in a downer reactor equipped with a
novel gassolid separatorI: Hydrodynamic performance. Fuel Process.
Technol. 2014, 126, 366382.
(89) Yu, X.; Hassan, M.; Ocone, R.; Makkawi, Y. A CFD study of
biomass pyrolysis in a downer reactor equipped with a novel gassolid
separator-II: Thermochemical performance and products. Fuel Process.
Technol. 2015, 133, 5163.
(90) Lin, Y.; Mountziaris, T. J.; Davis, J. M. Steady flow of gas and
decomposing particles in a vertical feed tube for applications in biomass
pyrolysis. AIChE J. 2016, DOI: 10.1002/aic.15558.
(91) Ashcraft, R. W.; Heynderickx, G. J.; Marin, G. B. Modeling fast
biomass pyrolysis in a gassolid vortex reactor. Chem. Eng. J. 2012, 207,
195208.
(92) Aramideh, S.; Xiong, Q.; Kong, S.-C.; Brown, R. C. Numerical
simulation of biomass fast pyrolysis in an auger reactor. Fuel 2015, 156,
234242.
(93) Zhu, H.; Zhou, Z.; Yang, R.; Yu, A. Discrete particle simulation of
particulate systems: theoretical developments. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2007, 62,
33783396.
(94) Wagenaar, B.; Prins, W.; Van Swaaij, W. Pyrolysis of biomass in
the rotating cone reactor: modelling and experimental justification.
Chem. Eng. Sci. 1994, 49, 51095126.
(95) Simone, M.; Biagini, E.; Galletti, C.; Tognotti, L. Evaluation of
global biomass devolatilization kinetics in a drop tube reactor with CFD
aided experiments. Fuel 2009, 88, 18181827.
(96) Johansen, J. M.; Gadsbll, R.; Thomsen, J.; Jensen, P. A.;
Glarborg, P.; Ek, P.; De Martini, N.; Mancini, M.; Weber, R.; Mitchell, R.
E. Devolatilization kinetics of woody biomass at short residence times
ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. XXXX, XXX, XXXXXX
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering Perspective

and high heating rates and peak temperatures. Appl. Energy 2016, 162, (119) Mahmoudi, A. H.; Hoffmann, F.; Peters, B. Semi-resolved
245256. modeling of heat-up, drying and pyrolysis of biomass solid particles as a
(97) Tchapda, A. H.; Pisupati, S. V. Characterization of an entrained new feature in XDEM. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2016, 93, 10911104.
flow reactor for pyrolysis of coal and biomass at higher temperatures. (120) Xiong, Q.; Kong, S.-C. High-resolution particle-scale simulation
Fuel 2015, 156, 254266. of biomass pyrolysis. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2016, 4, 54565461.
(98) Ku, X.; Li, T.; Lvas, T. Effects of particle shrinkage and (121) Pan, Y.; Kong, S.-C. Predicting effects of operating conditions on
devolatilization models on high-temperature biomass pyrolysis and biomass fast pyrolysis using particle-level simulation. Energy Fuels 2017,
gasification. Energy Fuels 2015, 29, 51275135. 31, 635646.
(99) Li, T.; Wang, L.; Ku, X.; Guell, B. M.; Lvas, T.; Shaddix, C. R. (122) Pan, Y.; Kong, S.-C. Simulation of biomass particle evolution
Experimental and modeling study of the effect of torrefaction on the under pyrolysis conditions using lattice Boltzmann method. Combust.
rapid devolatilization of biomass. Energy Fuels 2015, 29, 43284338. Flame 2017, 178, 2134.
(100) Hastaoglu, M.; Hassam, M. Application of a general gas-solid
reaction model to flash pyrolysis of wood in a circulating fluidized bed.
Fuel 1995, 74, 697703.
(101) Miller, R.; Bellan, J. Numerical simulation of vortex pyrolysis
reactors for condensable tar production from biomass. Energy Fuels
1998, 12, 2540.
(102) Luo, Z.; Wang, S.; Cen, K. A model of wood flash pyrolysis in
fluidized bed reactor. Renewable Energy 2005, 30, 377392.
(103) Rabinovich, O.; Korban, V.; Palchenok, G.; Khorolskaya, O.
Modeling of fast pyrolysis of a single biomass particle in an inert boiling
bed. J. Eng. Phys. Thermophys. 2009, 82, 611622.
(104) Brown, A. L.; Dayton, D. C.; Nimlos, M. R.; Daily, J. W. Design
and characterization of an entrained flow reactor for the study of
biomass pyrolysis chemistry at high heating rates. Energy Fuels 2001, 15,
12761285.
(105) Russo, E.; Kuerten, J.; Geurts, B. Delay of biomass pyrolysis by
gasparticle interaction. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2014, 110, 8899.
(106) Bruchmuller, J.; Luo, K.; van Wachem, B. Tar formation
variations during fluidised bed pyrolytic biomass conversion. Proc.
Combust. Inst. 2013, 34, 23732381.
(107) Rabinovich, O.; Borodulya, V.; Vinogradov, L.; Korban, V. Fast
pyrolysis of an ensemble of biomass particles in a fluidized bed. J. Eng.
Phys. Thermophys. 2010, 83, 742752.
(108) Bruchmuller, J.; van Wachem, B.; Gu, S.; Luo, K.; Brown, R.
Modelling the thermochemical degradation of biomass inside a fast
pyrolysis fluidised bed reactor. AIChE J. 2012, 58, 30303042.
(109) Papadikis, K.; Bridgwater, A.; Gu, S. CFD modelling of the fast
pyrolysis of biomass in fluidised bed reactors, Part A: Eulerian
computation of momentum transport in bubbling fluidised beds.
Chem. Eng. Sci. 2008, 63, 42184227.
(110) Papadikis, K.; Gu, S.; Bridgwater, A. CFD modelling of the fast
pyrolysis of biomass in fluidised bed reactors. Part B: Heat, momentum
and mass transport in bubbling fluidised beds. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2009, 64,
10361045.
(111) Papadikis, K.; Gu, S.; Bridgwater, A. V.; Gerhauser, H.
Application of CFD to model fast pyrolysis of biomass. Fuel Process.
Technol. 2009, 90, 504512.
(112) Papadikis, K.; Gu, S.; Bridgwater, A. V. CFD modelling of the fast
pyrolysis of biomass in fluidised bed reactors: modelling the impact of
biomass shrinkage. Chem. Eng. J. 2009, 149, 417427.
(113) Papadikis, K.; Gerhauser, H.; Bridgwater, A. V.; Gu, S. CFD
modelling of the fast pyrolysis of an in-flight cellulosic particle subjected
to convective heat transfer. Biomass Bioenergy 2009, 33, 97107.
(114) Papadikis, K.; Gu, S.; Bridgwater, A. V. A CFD approach on the
effect of particle size on char entrainment in bubbling fluidised bed
reactors. Biomass Bioenergy 2010, 34, 2129.
(115) Papadikis, K.; Gu, S.; Bridgwater, A. V. Computational
modelling of the impact of particle size to the heat transfer coefficient
between biomass particles and a fluidised bed. Fuel Process. Technol.
2010, 91, 6879.
(116) Papadikis, K.; Gu, S.; Bridgwater, A. 3D simulation of the effects
of sphericity on char entrainment in fluidised beds. Fuel Process. Technol.
2010, 91, 749758.
(117) Papadikis, K.; Gu, S.; Fivga, A.; Bridgwater, A. V. Numerical
comparison of the drag models of granular flows applied to the fast
pyrolysis of biomass. Energy Fuels 2010, 24, 21332145.
(118) Ranz, W.; Marshall, W. Evaporation from drops. Chem. Eng.
Progress 1952, 48, 141146.

P DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.6b02634
ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. XXXX, XXX, XXXXXX