Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Applied Thermal Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apthermeng

CFD modeling to study fluidized bed combustion and gasification

Ravi Inder Singh a, b, *,1, Anders Brink b, Mikko Hupa b
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Guru Nanak Dev Engineering College, Gill Road, Ludhiana 141006, India
b
Process Chemistry Center, Department of Chemical Engineering, Åbo Academy University, Åbo, Finland

h i g h l i g h t s

< Summary of CFD modeling to study combustion/gasification in fluidized bed is done.

< Equations for CFD modeling for fluidized bed combustion/gasification explained.
< CFD modeling can predict heat flux, flow, temperature, ash deposits and emissions.
< Trends, challenges and future research areas in this field are explored.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The increase in application of fluidized bed combustion and gasification devices throughout world means
Received 3 August 2012 that more consideration will be given to improve design and reduce emissions of these. Due to excellent
Accepted 18 December 2012 thermal and mixing properties fluidized beds are generally preferred over the fixed bed combustors and
Available online 2 January 2013
gasifiers. Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) is a technique which helps to optimize the design and
operation of fluidized bed combustor and gasifiers. Recent progression in numerical techniques and
Keywords:
computing efficacy has advanced CFD as a widely used practice to provide efficient design solutions in
Fluidization
fluidized bed industry. In this paper an extensive review of CFD modeling to study combustion and
Combustion
Multiphase flow
gasification in fluidized beds has been done. This paper introduces the fundamentals involved in
Hydrodynamics developing a CFD solution for fluidized bed combustion and gasification. Mathematical equations gov-
Lagrangian and EulerianeEulerian erning the fluid flow, heat and mass transfer and chemical reactions in fluidized bed combustion and
gasifiers systems are described and main CFD models are presented. The aim is to illustrate what can be
done and also to identify trends and those areas where further work is needed.
Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Fast depleting fossils fuels, energy security and environmental
concerns are demanding effective use of fossil fuels. Due to this
more and more attention has been focused on clean coal technol-
ogies. Among these technologies fluidized bed combustion and
gasification devices is one of the important technologies helpful in
controlling the greenhouse emissions.
Fluidized bed combustors and gasifiers are widely used in many
chemical and power industries due to their high heat transfer rates,
high efficiency, low combustion temperature and low pollutant
emissions. Applications of fluidized bed combustors and gasifiers
* Corresponding author. Johan Gadolin Fellow, Process Chemistry Center, Abo
Academy University, Abo, Finland. Tel.: þ91 (0)161 2560327; fax: þ91 161 2502240.
E-mail address: dr.rjassar@gmail.com (R.I. Singh).
1
On EOL (without pay leave) from Department of Mechanical Engineering, Guru
Nanak Dev Engineering College, Ludhiana, India.
are developing at fast pace in the power generating industry as they
combine fuel flexibility and high efficiency especially for biomass
co-combustion.
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) is an economical and
effective modeling tool to study combustion and gasification in
fluidized bed. Reliable CFD models are essential for the opti-
mization of fluidized bed unit’s design, as it can predict inert ma-
terial concentration in bed, fuel mixing efficiency, temperature
profiles of solid and gaseous phase present in dense bed, temper-
ature profile of furnace, heat flux etc. Simulation with aid of CFD is
regarded as one of the most appropriate approaches for the pre-
diction of critical parameters required for the control of efficient
operation of such installations. These CFD techniques are expected
to substitute empirical or semi-empirical models in large-scale FB
design process in near term.
Fluidized bed combustion and gasification is a multiphase
reactive flow phenomenon. It is a multiphase problem between
gases and fuel particles and also a reactive flow problem, which
involves homogeneous reactions among gases and heterogeneous

1359-4311/$ e see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2012.12.017
586 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614

Nomenclature m viscosity (kg m1 s1)

r density of solid (kg m3)
A constant sk turbulence Prandtl numbers

A constant sε turbulence Prandtl numbers
C1ε, C2ε model constants ss scattering coefficient
Cd Drag coefficients s stress tensor (N m2)
Cp specific heat at constant pressure (J kg1 K1) stq torque (N m)
D differential F scattering phase function
Dgs diffusion of gas (m2 s1) fi instantaneous species concentration density or
dp particle diameter (m) temperature
ds diameter of solid particle (m) u source term for a species i
e coefficient of restitution
fv,0 initial volatile fraction Subscripts
F force (N) g gas
g gravity (m2 s1) gs gas solid
g0 radial distribution function i,j x and y directions, respectively
Gk turbulence production term mf minimum fluidization
H0 standard enthalpy (J) p particle
H enthalpy (J) pp particleeparticle
I radiant intensity r radiation
k turbulent kinetic energy (m2 s2) R heterogeneous reaction rate
ks granular conductivity (kg m1 s1) s solid phase
ma ash content in the particle (kg) sg solid gas
mi mass of species concentration (kg)
mp solid fuel particle mass (kg) Abbreviations
mp,0 initial particle mass (kg) B bubbling
mv(t) volatile yield up to time t (kg) BFB bubbling fluidized bed
P gas pressure (Pa) BFBG bubbling fluidized bed gasifier
Q heat Exchange between different phases (J) C circulating
r1,r2 reaction rates for eddy dissipation combustion model CFB circulating fluidized bed
Re Reynolds number CFD computational fluid dynamics
Nus Nusselt number CLC chemical loop combustion
R universal gas constant (J kmol1 K1) DEM discrete element method
Rf reaction rate term DOM discrete ordinate model
! !
r, s directions DPM discrete particle model
Sh Sherwood number EBM eddy break up model
S source term EDCM eddy dissipation combustion model
Sgs source term EDM eddy dissipation model
Sm transfer of mass from reacting particles EeE EulerianeEulerian
t instantaneous time (s) EeL EulerianeLagrangian
T mean temperature (K) ER equivalence ratio
Tref reference temperature (K) FB fluidized bed
u, v velocity (m s1) FBC fluidized bed combustion
n! Instantaneous velocity (m s1) GKTM granular kinetic theory model
n0 s solids fluctuating velocity (m s1) HC hydrocarbons
V volume (m3) LFR laminar finite rate
wi molecular weight (kg/kmol) LES large eddy simulation
Yi mass fraction of species i entering the fine structures P pressurized
PDF probability density function
Greek symbols RANS Reynolds average Navier Stokes
a volume fraction RDF refused derived fuel
b inter-phase drag coefficients Ref reference
g energy dissipation per unit volume (kg m3 s1) RNG re-normalization group
g1, g2 yield factor RTE radiative transfer equation
ε dissipation rate of turbulent kinetic energy (m2 s3) S/B steam to biomass ratio
Qs granular temperature (m s2) SCM shrinking core model
ls bulk viscosity (Pa s) Sec secondary
lmix thermal conductivity of mixture (W m1 K1) TFM two fluid model
ms solid shear viscosity (kg m1 s1) VM volatile matter
ms,dil dilute viscosity (kg m1 s1) VOF volume of fluid
 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614
reactions between fuel particles and gases. Fluidized bed for com-
bustion and gasification reaction consists of solid (fuel), liquid
(fuel), gaseous (fuel), gas (medium) and inert particles. The fuel
exists in the solid, liquid or gaseous form in the inert sand particles
and the gasifying agent is air in combustion and steam-air in the
case of gasification. The involvement of multiphase flow, combus-
tion and gasification in fluidized bed devices makes modeling of
these extremely complicated and continues to be a challenge to the
scientific community and practicing engineers.
Majority of the CFD studies in literature on fluidized bed devices
in past has been focused on isothermal modeling of dense bed (Gao
et al. [1], Behjat et al. [2], Gnanapragasam and Reddy [3], Wang et al.
[4], Chen et al. [5]). CFD modeling to study the combustion and
gasification in fluidized bed is possible due to advancement in
computational technology. Researchers in literature used CFD in
studying emissions, operational parameters, conversion of fuels in
bed and freeboard/riser, ash deposition behavior prediction, ni-
trogen chemistry, calcination, co-firing coal with biomass and non-
commercial technologies like chemical looping combustion sys-
tems. Researcher also tried to use CFD to study fuel, char, ash,
physical and chemical behavior in fluidized bed.
Currently there are three numerical techniques used for the
studying combustion and gasification in fluidized beds in literature
and these are EulerianeLagrangian with single particle or a particle
parcel and a group of particles, EulerianeEulerian TFM and Discrete
Element Method (DEMeCFD) within EulerianeLagrangian concept.
Literature concerning the numerical modeling of fluidized bed
combustor and gasifier devices could be divided mainly into three
parts based on the geometric regions of fluidized bed furnace. It is
dense bed, splash zone and freeboard/riser of fluidized bed units.
Regarding dense bed most of studies is concentrated on gas-
ification and done with EulerianeEulerian (EeE) Two Fluid Model
(TFM) approach and geometries considered in literature are very
simple. Few of them [6e8] considered CFD for combustion of coal in
circulating fluidized bed combustor overlooking three-dimensional
effects. Only two authors [9,10] considered the three-dimensional
or full-scale device geometry to investigate the unit with EeE
approach considering combustion/gasification occurring in bed.
The other CFD technique, i.e. EulerianeLagrangian DPM with
single particle or a particle parcel and a group of particles is mostly
used in region above the dense bed, i.e. freeboard where the diluted
particle conditions are present. To study freeboard in fluidized beds
different authors have touched different aspects. They tried to
apply CFD to study combustion and gasification issues of solid fuels,
their emissions, operational parameters and other aspects like fate
of nitrogen in freeboard [11e14]. Few of them used CFD to look the
flow, temperature and main species in the fluidized bed combustor
using their own code and Fluent. Few others tried to look ash
deposition prediction with the use of CFD in commercial fluidized
bed combustors [15e20]. They found deposition maps in boiler
with high probability of ash positions on boiler surfaces. Many
authors tried to model the freeboard using probability density
approach [21e23]. They considered the fuel to be in gas phase,
burning above the bed. The tracking of fuel particles in a discrete
phase with DPM is done by integrating the force balance on the
particle, which is written in a Lagrangian reference frame.
Anders et al. [24] formed simplified model for the behavior of
large biomass particles in the splashing zone of a bubbling bed. Wu
et al. [25] found that new challenges arise in the field of the nu-
merical prediction of hydrodynamic behavior, combustion and
emissions performance in fluidized bed. Most of the literature in
fluidized bed gasification is overlooking three-dimensional be-
haviors (Myöhänen [10]).
The CFD models considering combustion/gasification issues in
fluidized bed are capable of predicting qualitative information like
587
solid volume fraction and quantitative information like tempera-
ture profiles, heat transfer and emissions. Most of studies are not
able to predict temperature profiles or the gas concentration inside
the bed quantitatively. Most of quantitative results mentioned in
literature are used to study the temperature profile, heat transfer or
emissions of freeboard/riser with EeL DPM model. The EeE TFM
method is adopted in most of studies because tracking each particle
with the Lagrangian method is not practical with the current
computational capacity. Furthermore, the available correlations
describing the interactions between particles and gases in the
Lagrangian method are all limited to a single particle or diluted
particle concentration conditions and they can’t be used for dense
condition in a fluidized bed. There is no literature found which have
considered the application of EeE TFM with thermo-chemical re-
actions in dense bed in commercial boilers. There is no paper
reported on heat exchange coefficients between solids (i.e. inert
material and fuel) in dense beds of commercial fluidized bed
boilers.
In this paper an overview of CFD modeling to study combustion
and gasification of fuels in fluidized bed systems of last two decades
has been done keeping in mind to find new challenges in this field.
There are no previous review studies related to review of CFD
modeling of fluidized bed combustion and gasification. The appli-
cation of CFD modeling to study combustion and gasification is in
development stage and it is immature field to study. The common
mathematical equations used for studying combustion and gas-
ification are explained and qualitative/quantitative information is
presented.
1.1. Description of fluidized bed systems
When an evenly distributed air or gas is passed upward through
a finely divided bed of solid particles such as sand supported on
a fine mesh, the particles remain undisturbed at low velocities. As
the air velocity is gradually increased, a stage is reached when the
individual particles are suspended in the air stream and the bed is
called “fluidized”. With further increase in air velocity, there is
bubble formation, vigorous turbulence, rapid mixing and formation
of dense defined bed surface. The bed of solid particles exhibits the
properties of a boiling liquid and assumes the appearance of a fluid
“bubbling fluidized bed”. At higher velocities, bubbles disappear,
and particles are blown out of the bed. Some amounts of particles
have to be re-circulated to maintain a stable system and is called as
“circulating fluidized bed”. This principle of fluidization is illus-
trated in Fig. 1.
Fluidization depends largely on the particle size and the air
velocity. The mean solid velocity increases at a slower rate than
Fig. 1. Principal of fluidization [26].
588 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614
does the gas velocity. The difference between the mean solid ve-
locity and mean gas velocity is called as slip velocity. Maximum slip
velocity between the solids and the gas is desirable for good heat
transfer and intimate contact. The proportion of combustible ma-
terial within the bed is normally only around 5%. If sand particles in
fluidized state are heated to the ignition temperatures of fuel and
fuel is injected continuously into the bed, the fuel will burn rapidly
and the bed attains a uniform temperature. The gas velocity is
maintained between minimum fluidization velocity and particle
entrainment velocity. This ensures a stable operation of the bed and
avoids particle entrainment in the gas stream. The global FBC ca-
pacity is going to grow steeply in future. Fig. 2 presents information
available on cumulative number of fluidized devices worldwide.
Fluidized bed (FB) has emerged as viable alternative as it has sig-
nificant advantages over conventional firing system. FB offers
multiple benefits, such as: compact boiler design, flexibility with
fuel used higher combustion efficiency and reduced emissions of
noxious pollutants such as SOx and NOx. The various types of fuels
that can be burnt or gasified in fluidized beds are coal, coal washery
rejects, biomass, refused derived fuels etc.
The basic principle of fluidized bed gasification is same as
combustion. The only difference is that gasification is an endo-
thermal conversion technology where a solid fuel is converted into
a combustible gas. The product gas consists of carbon monoxide,
carbon dioxide, hydrogen, methane, trace amounts of hydrocar-
bons, water nitrogen and various contaminants such as char par-
ticles, ash and tars. The chemistry involved in converting fuel into
combustible gaseous products is complex, involving a number of
different reactions with numerous intermediate stages. Pyrolysis is
thermal decomposition in the absence of air. It is always first step
before combustion and gasification. Depending upon the type of
flow the fluidized bed devices have been divided into three types,
bubbling (B), circulating(C) and pressurized bed (P). From these
three, the pressurized fluidized bed devices are in development
stage, not many industrial applications are there presently. Due to
much diversified applications the use of circulating fluidized bed
combustors is increasing.
1.2. CFD modeling and multiphase approach
Combustion and gasification of fuels in fluidized bed have been
considered for a number of decades. An early comprehensive math-
ematical model produced was starting with simplified chemical re-
actions to determine emission predictions. The first model [109] to be
regarded as a fully complete model, which considers fluidization
modeling (FM) and it models the emulsion phase, the bubbles
through the mass balance of the drying and devolatilization
Fig. 2. Cumulative number of fluidized bed devices worldwide [27].
processes. Unfortunately, FMs so far do not consider the fully complex
gas-particle dynamics that CFD considers; however, they still main-
tain the multiphase flow dynamics with the inclusion of semi-
empirical fluid dynamic correlations for the flow behavior [28] in
the bed.
Mathematical modeling and simulations are helpful to under-
stand combustion and gasification processes deeply and these are
significant for fluidization industry [110] since 1960. Several models
are developed and improved in the last two decades. Focus was less
on three-dimensional models due to more costly computational
power. Due to advancement in computers the computational fluid
dynamics is being applied on fluidization during the last decade.
Earlier CFD models neglected combustion and gasification as these
brings more complexity to the system. The first attempt to model
fluidized bed device numerically which includes gasification is by
Kimura and Kojima [29]. Jicheng et al. [30] also did the numerically
simulation of fluidized bed coal gasifier. Earlier numerical modeling
approach is quite different from present day CFD models.
The desire to analyze, design and optimize the performance of
fluidized bed devices implies the development of multidimensional
combustors and gasifiers models. These multidimensional models
will bridge the gap between sub-scale testing and the operation of
fluidized bed furnaces by providing information about combustion
and gasification processes that experimental data alone cannot
provide. Fig. 3 shows the framework for CFD modeling of fluidized
bed combustors and gasifiers. CFD is a kind of numerical simulation
that involves the fluid mechanics with numerical methods and
algorithms to solve and analyze problems that involve fluid flows.
The process of modeling of physical and chemical processes in-
teractions in thermo-chemical conversion of fuels is shown in
Fig. 4. Fig. 4 shows the interrelation between models involved in
combustion and gasification with other physical models in fluidized
beds. Myohanen and Hyppanen [31] made the framework to dis-
tinguish the CFD from other modeling techniques used in fluidized
bed technology. The fundamentals oriented micro and meso-scale
models are not yet capable for practical comprehensive calcula-
tions of industrial scale fluidized bed units, including modeling of
reactions, attrition of particles, and heat transfer. Fig. 5 presents
a scale-based classification [31] for the most popular model ap-
proaches used for fluidized bed systems. The purpose is to show
roughly the different scales for which the different models are
applied and to relate the presented semi-empirical steady state 3D
model to other model approaches. The ranges of space and time
scales cannot be exact, but the given values provide some idea of
the vast range of different scales, which are encountered when
modeling the fluidized bed systems. The top region of Fig. 5 in-
cludes area for steady state modeling. Due to different long-term
phenomena (e.g. segregation, fouling, rusting), the real physical
Modeling
1 D Model 3 D Model 2 D Model
Time averaged 3D fluid dynamics
Gas Solid or Gas-Gas or Gas liquid Reactions Solid Solid Interactions Heat Transfer
Fuel mixing Fuel conversion
Combustion, gasification and pyrolysis
Fig. 3. Framework for CFD modeling.
 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614
Gas Phase
Turbulent Mixing
Direct numerical simulation (DNS)
Large-eddy simulation (LES)
Reynolds averaged Navier stokes (RANS)
Drag forces
Porosity effect
Turbulence attenuation
Preferential concentration
Multiphase flows
Collision and friction forces
Polydisperse flows
Lagrangian particle tracking
Eulerian multi fluid approach
Fig. 4. Modeling of physical and chemical processes interactions in thermo-chemical conversion of fuels [32].
processes are never actually steady state, if the observation time is
long enough (e.g. years or decades). Thus, the steady state is a vir-
tual state, which can be reached [31] only in models, in which the
number of affecting variables is limited. The measurements are
always quasi-steady values. The averaged values of transient cal-
culations are often quasi-steady values because the calculation
capacity limits the averaging times.
There are three approaches used for the numerical simulation of
the multiphase flow in literature. They are known as Eulere
Lagrange, EulereEuler approach and Discrete Element Methode
CFD. In the EulereLagrangian the primary phase is treated as
continuum by solving the time-averaged NaviereStokes equations.
The behaviors of the dispersed phases are obtained by following
a large number of the particles, through the calculated primary
phase flow field. Particle trajectories are calculated in the given
intervals during the primary phase flow calculations. Dispersed and
primary phases can exchange mass, momentum, and energy. The
basic assumption in this model is that the volume fraction of the
Fig. 5. Scale-based classification of multiphase approaches for fluidized bed [31].
589
High Performance,
Large Scale Computing
Scalability
Robustness
Strong turbulent mixing/reaction rates
interactions. Coupling between a wide
range of time and length scale
Chemistry
Heat, mass
and momentum Heterogeneous chemistry
exchanges Biomass devolatization
Char Combustion
Gas phase chemistry
Primary tar decomposition
Secondary tar formation
Evolving particle Reduced order chemical schemes
size distributions Tabulation techniques
dispersed, secondary phase is below 10e12%, although its mass can
be greater than the mass of the primary phase.
The different phases in the EulereEuler approach are considered
as inter-penetrating continua, thus introducing phasic volume
fractions as continuous functions of time and space. The sum for all
phase volume fractions in each computational cell is equal to one.
Conservation laws are applied to each phase in order to obtain a set
of equations that is similar for all phases. Constitutive relations
obtained from empirical information must be added to close the set
of equations. In the EulereEuler approach, there are three models
of multiphase flow: the volume of fluid (VOF), the mixture model
and the Eulerian model. The Eulerian model is only suitable for
modeling the fluidized bed systems and discussing other models
are not within scope of this paper.
The Eulerian model is the most complex of all models of mul-
tiphase flow. In this model the additional equations of mass and
momentum conservation are solved for each phase separately. Any
combination of liquid, gas and solid phases can be modeled. The
Eulerian method of determining the flow field is used for both
primary and secondary phases. The Lagrangian discrete phase
model is based on the EulereLagrange approach where the fluid
phase is treated as a continuum by solving the time-averaged
NaviereStokes equations, whereas the dispersed phase is solved
by numerically integrating the equations of motion for the dis-
persed phase, i.e. computing the trajectories of a large number of
particles or droplets through the calculated flow field.
The EeE TFM model can easily be incorporated in preexisting
CFD codes and relatively computational inexpensive. This method
requires all processes at the particle scale such as drag, collision,
friction forces and heterogeneous chemistry to be included as
phase interaction terms into governing equations. It is less com-
putationally exhaustive in comparison to the DPM Euleriane
Lagrangian method which simulates the individual particle dy-
namics [34e36] and the complete Lagrangian model which models
both particles and fluid with a Lagrangian approach. A combination
of the EulerianeEulerian model and the EeL DPM model is recently
considered by Papadikis et al. [37,38] where one or two Lagrangian
biomass particles are introduced to a EulerianeEulerian bubbling
bed of inert sand. Although their approach is highly beneficial for
590 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614

the investigation at an individual particle dynamic scale, the sim-
ulation is limited to up to 5.0 s in physical time. Hence, their
method does not prove to be computationally viable for realistic
industrial reactors which contain far more fuel particles and require
simulations over a longer period to allow for the achievement of
possible steady state conditions and the statistical convergence of
averaged results [39]. Table 1 shows the summarized description of
models used for simulating dense gasesolid flow in context of gas-
fluidization [33]. More details about this could be referred from
[33].
2. Mathematical description of various CFD models in FB
units
2.1. Basic governing equations
Following are basic fundamental equations for mass, mo-
mentum, energy and species respectively for gas phase. These are
the basic equations of flow for gas phase when combustion and
gasification is taking place in fluidized bed. For multiphase flow
these equations could be modified and these are discussed in
Section 2.5. The details of these could be referred from Bakul et al.
[40].
Continuity equation
an FB unit, known as bed material, are fuel ash, sorbents or some
other non-combustible hot solids; and they constitute 95e99.5%
of the bed material. As soon as the solid fuel enters inside fluid-
ized bed the process drying, devolatilization, combustion or
gasification occurs. The following sub-models will be incorpo-
rated in basic equations of computational fluid dynamics to
simulate the actual combustion and gasification processes in
fluidized bed.
2.2.1. Devolatilization submodel
The devolatilization process begins when the solid fuel reaches
a particular level. Many devolatilization [113] models have been
developed in past. One-step global mechanisms and semi-global
multi-step mechanisms can be basically distinguished. The sim-
plified approaches define devolatization rates with single or two-
step Arrhenius reaction schemes.
The details of one-step devolatilization mechanism is shown
below
Coal or Biomass or RDF/ Volatiles þ Char/ Tar þ Gases þ Char
(2.5)
The reaction kinetic rate (k) can be expressed as single-step
Arrhenius fashion as k ¼ Aexp(Ea/RT) and the devolatilization
rate [41] is

v

 h
 i
r þ V$ rg !
n g ¼ Sg (2.1) dmp
¼ k mp  1  fv;0 mp;0 (2.6)
vt g dt
Momentum equation
Here A and E are numerical constants of reacting substances.
v
!

 For two-step Arrhenius reaction schemes, the kinetic devolati-
r ng þ V$ rg !
ng !
ng ¼ VPg þ V$ mV!
n g þ Sg (2.2) lization rate expressions of the form proposed by Kobayashi et al.
vt g
[115] are as follows:
Energy equation
k1 ¼ A1 expð  E1 =RTÞ (2.7)
v

  
rg Hg þ V$ rg !
ng Hg ¼ V lg VTg þ SH (2.3)
vt
k2 ¼ A2 expð  E2 =RTÞ (2.8)
Species transport equation

v

 where k1 and k2 are competing rates that may control the devola-
rg Yi þ V$ rg !
ng Yi ¼ VðDVðrYi ÞÞ þ SY þ Rf (2.4) tilization over different temperature ranges. The two kinetic rates
vt
weighted to yield an expression for the devolatilization [41] as
0 1
Zt Zt
mv ðtÞ

 ¼ ðY1 k1 þ Y2 k2 Þexp@  ðk1 þ k2 Þdt Adt
2.2. Combustion and gasification sub-models 1  fv;0 mp;0  ma
0 0
The solid fuel is generally constitutes 0.5e5% by weight of the (2.9)
total solids present in Fluidized Bed (FB). The remaining solids in

Table 1 2.2.2. Homogenous gas phase reactions

Classification of various models used for simulating dense gasesolid flow in context The solid fuel devolatilization and cracking gas species will react
of gas-fluidization [33]. with supplied oxidizer and with each other such as water-gas shift
Discrete bubble Lagrangian Eulerian Drag closures Industrial reaction. The heat generated by exothermic reactions is important
model for bubbles (<10 m) for the release of volatiles and ignition of char. The general ho-
Two fluid model Eulerian Eulerian Gas soild Engineering mogenous reactions taking place are as follows.
drag (1 m)
closures
Unresolved discrete Eulerian Lagrangian Gas-particle Laboratory
H2 þ 1=2 O2 /H2 O þ 242 kJ=mol (2.10)
particle model (Unresolved) drag (0.1 m)
closures CO þ 1=2 O2 /CO2 þ 283 kJ=mol (2.11)
Resolved discrete Eulerian Lagrangian Boundary Laboratory
particle model (resolved) condition (0.01 m)
at particle CH4 þ 2 O2 /CO2 þ 2H2 O þ 35:7 kJ=mol (2.12)
surface
Molecular dynamics Lagrangian Lagrangian Elastic Mesoscopic
collisions at (<0.001 m) CH4 þ H2 O/CO þ 3H2  206 kJ=mol (2.13)
particle
surface
CO þ H2 O/CO2 þ H2 þ 41:1 kJ=mol (2.14)
 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614
Keeping the space considerations, here only basic and general
equations are discussed. The details of these reaction mechanisms,
others which are not mentioned here and kinetic parameters can be
found in literature [42]. Other models like Laminar finite rate
model, Eddy dissipation model, Eddy dissipation concept model
which could be used with homogenous reactions only (for gaseous
fuel) and these could be referred from Ref. [41]. These are also not
discussed here as the aim of fluidized bed is to burn/gasify solid
fuels not gaseous fuels.
2.2.3. Heterogeneous reaction sub-models
Char is the solid devolatilization residue. Heterogeneous re-
actions of char with the gas species is complex process which
involve the balancing rate of mass diffusion of the oxidizing
chemical species to the surface of fuel particle with the surface
reaction of these species with the char. The overall rate of a char
particle is determined by the oxygen diffusion to the particle sur-
face and the rate of surface reaction, which depend on the tem-
perature and composition of the gaseous environment and the size,
porosity and temperature of the particle. The commonly simplified
reactions models which consider the following overall reactions:
C þ CO2 /2CO  172kJ=mol (2.15)
C þ 1=2O/CO þ 122:9kJ=mol (2.16)
C þ H2 O/CO þ H2  131kJ=mol
(2.17)
The literature that reviewed the char surface reactions and the
kinetic relationship can be found from Refs. [43e45].
2.3. Physical models
In the present state NaviereStokes equations which describe
laws of mass, momentum and energy for each phase find limited
scope in combustion and gasification of fuels in fluidized beds.
These basic equations need to modify with additional physical
models or assumptions to fully represent the physical process.
There are various physical models those will include turbulence
models, heat transfer with radiation models and mass transfer and
diffusion etc. In this section only common models are explained
more detailed or advanced physical models could be referred from
Bakul et al. [40].
2.3.1. Turbulent flow
Turbulence plays important role during combustion and gas-
ification of fuels in fluidized bed. The turbulent flow in fluidization
is characterized by fluctuating velocity of air and particles. The
turbulence affects the heat and mass transfer in fluidized beds
which plays important role in combustion and gasification of fuels
in fluidized beds. The solution of equation with turbulence to
multiphase flow with full solution of the transport equations at all
length and time scales is computationally very expensive due to
small size fluctuations. The turbulence models are required to ac-
count for the effects of turbulence on combustion and gasification
rather than simulate it directly in engineering applications. Since
the small eddies are not directly simulated so the techniques of
Reynolds averaging and filtering are generally applied to transform
the NaviereStokes equations. These are discussed in following
subsections.
(a) RANS based models
The Reynolds-averaged NaviereStokes (RANS) equations rep-
resent transport equations for the mean flow quantities only, with
591
all the scales of turbulence being modeled. The instantaneous
properties in the conservation equations into mean and fluctuating
components formed the basis of RANS equations as
4 ¼ 4 þ 40 (2.18)
The averaging of the flow field variables is used to account for the
effects of density fluctuations due to turbulence. More details on
above equation can be referred from Versteeg and Malalasekera [52].
The Reynolds-averaged approach is generally adopted for practical
engineering calculations. The present RANS models use the Bous-
sinesq hypothesis to model the Reynolds stresses terms. It is based
on theory that an increase in turbulence can be represented by an
increase in effective fluid viscosity and the Reynolds stresses are
proportional to the mean velocity gradients via this viscosity.
In the present fluid dynamics the various models based on this
theory are SpalarteAllmaras, Standard keε, RNG keε, Realizable ke
ε, keu and its types [41]. The Reynolds stress model (RSM) closes
the Reynolds-averaged NaviereStokes equations by solving trans-
port equations for the Reynolds stresses directly, together with an
equation for the dissipation rate. The details of above models and
RSM could be referred from Bakul et al. [40]. In majority of works
standard keε [46] is used in combustion and gasification of fuels in
fluidized beds.
 
v m þ mt
ðrkÞ þ V$ðrVkÞ ¼ V$ Vk þ Gk  rε (2.19)
vt sk
 
v ðm þ mt Þ ε ε2
ðrkÞ þ V$ðrVεÞ ¼ V$ Vε þ C1ε Gk  C2ε r
vt sε k k
(2.20)
(b) LES models
When unsteady or transient effects in turbulent reacting flows are
important, then large eddy simulation (LES) is typically required. LES
is an approach that accounts for large-scale turbulent chemistry
interaction in a direct manner. Large eddy simulations are computa-
tional very expensive and are now becoming a more practical method
to resolve temporal and spatial scales. In the LES method, the transient
forms of the conservation equations governing fluid flow, reaction
and heat transfer are solved. Improved numerical accuracy, with a fine
enough grid and appropriate time step are required for LES because it
is used to fully resolve large-scale motions. Only the effects of smaller
scales are modeled. Subgrid models are required to compute the ef-
fects of the small-scale turbulence on momentum, species and
enthalpy transport. The development and testing of turbulence
chemistry interaction models for the sub grid scale LES methods is far
less mature that the steady state methods presented earlier. The
application of LES to combustion and gasification fluidized beds is not
found in literature due to computational expensiveness. More details
about these models could be referred from Bakul et al. [40].
2.3.2. Radiation modeling
The radiation process influences the heat transfer rate in fluid-
ized bed units, which in turn influences combustion and gas-
ification process. The radiative transfer equation (RTE) for an
!
absorbing, emitting, and scattering medium at position r in the
!
direction s can be written as follows:
! !
dIð r ; s Þ ! ! sT 4
þ ða þ ss ÞIð r ; s Þ ¼ an2
ds p
Z4p
ss ! !0  ! !0  0
þ I r ; s F r ; s dU
4p
0
(2.21)
592 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614

A semi-transparent medium is considered and the refractive
index is equal to unity.
The following models are applicable.
(a) Discrete ordinates model;
(b) P-1 model;
(c) Rosseland model; and
(d) Discrete transfer radiation model
The details of all these models should be referred from Bakul
et al. [40]. The above models could be used in combustion and
gasification process based on optical thickness aL where a is con-
stant and L is an appropriate length scale. The P-1 and Rosseland
models are useful when aL [ l. The P-1 model should typically be
used for optical thicknesses large than 1. The Rosseland model is
computationally cheaper and more efficient but should only be
used for optical thicknesses larger than 3. The Discrete Ordinates
model (DOM) model works across the range of optical thicknesses,
but is substantially more computationally expensive than the
Rosseland model [41]. The Discrete transfer radiation model is also
used rarely as being computationally expensive.
2.3.3. Mixture fraction model
The mixture fraction/PDF modeling approach involves the so-
lution of transport equations for one or two conserved scalars (the
mixture fractions). In this approach, instead of solving the transport
equations for individual species, the individual component con-
centrations for a certain species of interest are derived from the
predicted mixture fraction. The basis of the mixture fraction
approach is that under a certain set of simplifying assumptions, the
instantaneous thermo-chemical state of the fluid is related to
a conserved scalar quantity known as the mixture fraction, f. Being
a conserved scalar quantity, the value of f at each point in the flow
domain is computed [41] through the solution of the conservation
equation for mean (time-averaged) value of f in the turbulent flow
field, f:
!
v v mt vf
ðrui f Þ ¼ þ SM
vxi vxi st vxi
In addition to solving the conservation equation for the mean
mixture fraction, a conservation equation for the mixture fraction
variance, f0 2 is also solved:
2.4. Discrete particle model in Lagrangian frame of reference
The flow in freeboard of fluidized bed combustors or gasifiers is
a kind of gasesolid flow with chemical reactions. The fuel particles
present in freeboard are in solid form. The hydrodynamics of the gase
solid flow can be performed based on the discrete particle model
EulerianeLagrangian concept. Most of the simulated particle pres-
ents one particle or a particle parcel, a group of particles in this
concept. In this approach, the fluid phase is treated as a continuum by
solving the time-averaged NaviereStokes equations, while the dis-
persed phase is solved by tracking a large number of particles, bub-
bles, or droplets through the calculated flow field. The dispersed
phase exchange momentum, mass, and energy with the fluid phase.
In this model, the fundamental assumption is that even though high
mass loading is acceptable, the dispersed phase occupies a low vol-
ume fraction. During the fluid phase calculation, the particle or
droplet trajectories are computed individually at particular intervals.
This makes the model appropriate for the modeling of spray
dryers, coal and liquid fuel combustion, and some gas-particle
flows. This model is inappropriate for the modeling of lower por-
tion of fluidized bed reactors, liquid-liquid mixtures or any appli-
cation where the volume fraction of the second phase is not
negligible. The discrete phase method can be applied to the particle
flow when the particle phase can be considered to be sufficiently
dilute that the particleeparticle interactions and the effects of the
particle volume fraction on the gas phase can be assumed neglec-
ted. Due to present computer efficacy the DPM Lagrange approach
is more suitable for industrial size fluidized bed reactors. The
governing equations used during the modeling study in freeboard
consisted of mathematical models of the gas phase, particle
movement and reactive chemistry.
2.4.1. Equation of motion for a particle
The coupling of the continuous phase and the discrete phase is
important and it is solved by tracking the exchange of mass, mo-
mentum and energy. The model computes the particle trajectory
using a Lagrangian formulation which includes the inertia, hydro-
dynamic drag, and the force of gravity. The particle trajectory can be
(2.22) predicted for the xi(i ¼ 1, 2, 3 for three dimensions) direction in
Cartesian coordinates by [41]:


rp  r
d2 xi  
¼ FD vi vp;i þ gxi þ Fxi (2.26)
dt 2 rp

0 1 !2 where Fxi is the additional force, FD(vivp,i)is the drag force per unit
 
v v @mt vf 02 A vf ε particle mass and
rui f 02 ¼ þ Cg mt Cd r f 02 (2.23)
vxi vxi st vxi vxi k
18m CD Re
FD ¼ (2.27)
The values of constants st, Cg and Cd in Eq. (2.23) will be taken rp d2p 24
depending on simulations and situation, respectively. If a secondary
stream is included in a non-adiabatic system, the instantaneous
2.5. EulerianeEulerian two fluid computational fluid dynamics
values will depend on the instantaneous fuel mixture fraction, fuel,
model
the secondary partial fraction, psec and the enthalpy, H

 The EulerianeEulerian method is one of the affordable CFD

fi ¼ f*i ffuel ; psec ; H* (2.24) modeling approaches for performing simulations of an industrial
scale gasesolid flow system. Combustion and gasification brings
Here H* is given by: more complexity into the system. In the EulereEuler approach, the
different phases are treated mathematically as inter-penetrating
2 3 continua. The concept of phase volume fraction is introduced in
X X ZT
7 this approach. These volume fractions are assumed to be con-
6
H* ¼ mi0 Hi0 ¼ mi0 6
4 Cp þ hoi0 Tref i0 7
5 (2.25) tinuous functions of space and time and their sum is equal to one.
i0 i0 For each phase, conservation equations are derived to obtain a set
Tref 0
i
of equations which have similar structure for all phases. These
More details about solution could be referred from Ref. [41]. equations are closed by providing constitutive relations that are
 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614 593

  
obtained from empirical information, or, in the case of granular as 1=3 1
(solid) flows, by application of kinetic theory. Below mentioned are go ¼ 1  (2.39)
as;max
the general equations for EulerianeEulerian phase inside fluidized
bed with combustion and gasification. Details of these could be Equivalent to the thermodynamic temperature for gases, the
referred from [28,39,47]. granular temperature can be introduced as a measure for the
fluctuating kinetic energy of the particles. The granular tempera-
2.5.1. Continuity equations ture Qs is defined as

1 !
Qs ¼ n02 (2.40)
v

 3 s
ag rg þ V$ ag rg !
ng ¼ Sgs (2.28) !
vt
where n0s is the solids fluctuating velocity.

 The equation of conservation of the solids fluctuating energy is
v
ðas rs Þ þ V$ as rs !
ns ¼ Ssg (2.29) given as
vt


3 v
Ssg ¼ wc
X
gc Rc ¼ Sgs (2.30) ðas rs QÞ þ V$ as rs !
ns $Q ¼ ðPs I þ as ss Þ
2 vt
For the gas phase density, a mixture of ideal gas : V!
n þ V$k VQ  g s s (2.41)

P where ðPs I þ as ss Þ : V!
ns is the generation of the fluctuating energy
rg ¼ Pn
(2.31) due to work done by shear stress in the particle phase; V$ks VQ is
Yi
RT i¼1 the conduction of the fluctuating energy; g is the rate of dissipation
wi
of the fluctuating energy due to inelastic collision.
The granular conductivity ks and the collisional rate of energy
dissipation per unit volume g are adopted as:
2.5.2. Momentum equations
 2  1=2
2kdil 6 Q
ks ¼ 1 þ ð1 þ eÞgo as þ2a2s rs ds (2.42)
v

 ð1 þ eÞgo 5 p
ag rg !
ng þ V$ ag rg !
ng !
ng ¼ ag VPg þ Vag $sg þ ag rg g
vt pffiffiffi

 75 p
þb ! ns  !
ng þ Sgs !
ns kdil ¼ r ds Q1=2 (2.43)
384 s
(2.32)
   1=2
4 Q
g ¼ 3 1  e2 as rs go Q V$!
ns (2.44)
ds p
v


as rs !
ns þ V$ as rs !
ns !
ns ¼  as VPs þ Vas $ss þ as rs g The drag between gas phase and solid phase is to play important
vt

b ! ns  !
ng þ Ssg !
role in the momentum exchange.
ns ð2:33Þ
For a  0.8, the drag coefficient is was given based on the work
by Gidaspow [50]
In the above equations the stress tensor sg and ss is given by
 
! !
h
T i 2
 3 as rs ng  ns  2:65
s g ¼ m g V!
n g þ V!
ng  ag mg V!
ng (2.34) b ¼ Cd ag (2.45)
3 4 ds

h
T i 2
! where the drag coefficient Cd is given by

ss ¼ ms V$!
ns þ V$!
ns  m V$ ns þ ls $V$!
ns (2.35)
3 s 24

Cd ¼ 1 þ 0:15Re0:687 for Res  1000 (2.46)
Here ls is bulk viscosity, it is based on expression given by Lun Res s

et al. [48] and it can be obtained as

 1=2 Cd ¼ 0:44; for Res  1000 (2.47)
4 Q
ls ¼ as rs ds go ð1  eÞ s (2.36)  
p
ag rg ds ! ns 
ng  !
5
For the collisional and kinetic effects the coefficient of restitu- Res ¼ (2.48)
mg
tion was introduced by Jenkins and Savage [49] and the equation of
solid shear viscosity ms For a < 0.8, the well known Ergun equation[51] is suitable for
describing the dense regime
 2  1=2  
ms ; dil Q  
rg as ! ns 
4 4
ms ¼ 1 þ ð1 þ eÞgo as þ a2s rs ds ð1 þ eÞgo 1  ag mg ng  !
ð1 þ eÞgo 5 5 p b ¼ 150 þ 1:75 (2.49)
(2.37) ag d2s ds

pffiffiffi 2.5.3. Energy equation

5 p
ms ; dil ¼ r ds Q1=2 (2.38)
96 s
v

  
where ms,dil is the dilute viscosity and go is the radial distribution ag rg Hg þ V$ ag rg !
ng Hg ¼ V lg VTg þ Qgs þ Sgs Hs
vt
function expressing the statistics of the spatial arrangement of
(2.50)
particles. The following expressions are used:
594 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614

v

ðas rs Hs Þ þ V$ as rs !
ns Hs ¼ Vðls VTs Þ þ Qsg þ Ssg Hs (2.51) v

  
vt ag rg !
ng þ V$ ag rg !
ng !
ng ¼ ag Vpg þ V$ ag sg þ ag rg g
vt
The third term on the right-hand side of the expression is the  Sm
heat transfer in that the solid phase changed into the gas phase.
(2.59)
Qsg ¼ Qgs (2.52) where rg is the gas density, sg the gas viscous stress tensor, Sg the
gas mass source due to heterogeneous reactions, Sm the gas mo-
  mentum source due to inter-phase interaction. For dense gasesolid
Qsg ¼ hsg Ts  Tg (2.53) flows in fluidized beds, two-way coupling is required. According to
Newtonian third law, Sm in a fluid cell is determined by adding up
6kg as ag Nus the drag force of the particles located in the fluid cell.
hsg ¼ (2.54)
d2p
1 X
Np
Sm ¼ Fd (2.60)
Here Nus is proposed by Gunn [51] Vcell
k¼1

where Vcell is the volume of the fluid cell. In the hydrodynamic

2.6. Discrete element methodeCFD within EulerianeLagrangian DEMeCFD model, Sg in Eq. (2.60) is set to zero. When it is extended
model to model of thermo-chemical conversion of fuel in gasesolid sys-
tems involved with heterogeneous and homogenous reactions, Sg
A discrete element method (DEM) is a family of numerical methods should not be zero.
for computing the motion of a large number of particles of
micrometer-scale size and above. In the DEMeCFD model, each indi- 2.6.2. Heat transfer [53]
vidual particle is tracked and gas phase dynamic is solved by Naviere The heat balance for an individual particle is given below:
Stokes equations. DEM is very closely related to molecular dynamics,
the method is generally distinguished by its inclusion of rotational dTi
mi Cp;i ¼ Qgp þ Qpp þ Qrad þ QR (2.61)
degrees-of-freedom as well as stateful contact and often complicated dt
geometries. These days with a rapid development of computer tech-
nology and the numerical tool DEM (discrete element method), a new where Qgp, Qpp, Qrad and QR represent gas-particle convective,
era of research on gasesolid heterogeneous reaction systems, com- particleeparticle conduction, radiation heat transfer, and hetero-
bustion and gasification is about to come. The following section deals geneous chemical reactions, respectively. The conservation equa-
briefly with basic mathematical equations involved in DEMeCFD. tion for the gas energy is

v


2.6.1. Hydrodynamics of DEMeCFD model [53] ag rg Cpg Tg þ V$ ag rg Cpg !
n g Tg
vt
In the DEMeCFD model, each individual particle is tracked by  
Newtonian equation. For each particle, the linear and angular ¼ V$ ag kg VTg þ SQ ;cv þ SQ ;R þ Sh (2.62)
momentum equations are
where Tg is the gas temperature, Cpg the gas capacity, kg the gas
X
N  thermal conductivity, SQ,cv the heat source due to gas-particle
dvi 
mi ¼ Vi Vpg þ Fd þ Fg þ Fij;n þ Fij;t (2.55) convective heat transfer, SQ,R the heat source due to chemical re-
dt j¼1 actions, Sh the heat transported by mass source of Sg in Eq. (2.58).
SQ;cv is calculated in a similar way of Sm in Eq. (2.62),
XN
 XN  
dwi X
Np
Ii ¼ stqij ¼ Rj nij  Fij;t (2.56) 1
dt j¼1 j¼1
Sm ¼ Qcv (2.63)
Vcell
k¼1

where i represents a single particle, j the particles contacted with
particle i, m, V, I, R, v and w the particle mass, volume, inertia
moment, radius, linear velocity, and angular velocity respectively,
Vpg the local pressure drop, Fd the drag force, Fg the gravitational
force, Fij,n and Fij,t the normal and tangential components of the
contact force from particle j to i, and torque stqij . The contact force is
calculated according to a linear spring-dashpot model where the
force is a function of particle overlap and relative velocity. The drag
force, Fd in Eq. (2.55), is calculated by
SQ;R is determined by heat release of chemical reactions. Sh is
determined by the formation enthalpies carried along with the
inter-phase transferred mass of Sg in Eq. (2.58). Although DEMeCFD
has disadvantages like the maximum number of particles and
duration of a virtual simulation is limited by computational power.
Typical flows contain billions of particles, but contemporary DEM
simulations on large cluster computing resources have only
recently been able to approach this scale for sufficiently long time.
More details could be referred from [53,114].

Vb
Fd ¼  i  ðu  vi Þ (2.57)
1  ag 3. Combustion and gasification

where u is the local gas velocity, ag the local gas volume fraction, There are two kinds of solid fuels generally incinerated or gasified
and b inter-phase momentum transfer. The gas phase is treated as in fluidized bed. This could be divided into non renewable (coal) or
continuum and described by the volume-averaged NaviereStokes renewable (biomass/RDF fuels). The fuel could be characterized due to
equations. Mass and momentum conservations are its physical properties like bulk density, particle size or pellet dura-
bility, together with moisture content. As soon it enters reactor at first
v


ag rg þ V$ ag rg !
n g ¼ Sg (2.58)
it dries and then there is release of volatile matter called devolatili-
vt zation stage. The released volatile matter undergoes homogenous
 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614
oxidation, whereas the remaining char will undergoes heterogeneous
reactions in bed or above the bed. The remaining part is ash and it will
be removed through drain or through flue gas. The stages in com-
bustion and gasification process are shown in Fig. 6. There are two
main regions of fluidized bed unit dense bed or freeboard/riser.
EulerianeEulerian TFM CFD model along with chemistry models are
used in literature to model solid fuel particles in dense bed. The
NaviereStokes coupled with energy as explained in Section 2 will be
used to model the process. CFD modeling of combustion and gas-
ification of solid particles in freeboard using discrete particle mod-
eling and tracking of particle is done using Lagrangian approach as
explained in Section 2. Present approach used by CFD modelers in
modeling combustion/gasification of fuel in freeboard in fluidized
furnaces is same in pulverized furnaces. The main difference in CFD
modeling of combustion gasification of fuel lies in dense bed. The
review of combustion and gasification process with CFD modeling is
done in following sections.
3.1. Combustion
Combustion is an exothermic oxidation process occurring at
a relatively high temperature. The time of reaction, temperature
required for sustaining the reaction and better mixing of fuel with
oxidant are three major requirement of a good combustion process.
These three requirements are adequately met in an FB combustor,
whose excellent internal and external recirculation of hot solids at
the combustion temperature provides a long residence time and
adequate temperature to the fuel particles. The high degree of gas
solid mixing in the FB furnace also provides the turbulence
necessary for good combustion. The stages of combustion have
been discussed with the aid of CFD by many authors. In studying
combustion of fuel in the dense bed the initial time is taken, where
as in freeboard the real time is taken by many studies. In all of
studies reported the keε turbulence model is used.
3.1.1. Physical and chemical processes
Present CFD models can be used to study the physical and
chemical processes occurred during combustion of fuel in fluidized
bed. The stages during combustion process can be studied with
different CFD models. The first step to initiate the combustion
process is heat the fuel particles up to the temperature required for
combustion process, which is determined and validated by various
authors. Due to the limitation of the present CFD codes (which did
not allow for simultaneous modeling of burning particle (EeL
approach) and bubbling bed (EeE TFM approach)), it is generally
assumed in all studies that the heat required to initiate the com-
bustion of biomass/RDF particles is provided by the fluidizing air
entering at the combustion temperatures. The Lagrangian phase
and DPM method is applied by [15,21,23,24,54] few authors to
study various properties of fuels in BFB units. As the temperature is
important parameter that affects combustion process, the correct
prediction of it is very important for correct CFD model. Present
CFD simulations predict the temperature successfully in fluidized
bed combustors, but at the same times it fails to answer the hot and
Fig. 6. Stages in combustion and gasification process.
595
cold spots in bed. The basic approach in prediction of temperature
in for coal and biomass/RDF is same. The study presented by
Agraniotis [23] has not considered all stages of combustion, i.e.
drying, devolatilization, char combustion process as they have
considered dried fuel entering in combustor. At present Mueller et
al. [15] and Wang and Yan [54] have considered all stages of com-
bustion to predict the temperature profiles in fluidized bed com-
bustors. Ravelli et al. [21] used two-mixture fraction approach to
predict correct temperature. The following section deals with dif-
ferent stages of combustion of fuels inside fluidized bed.
3.1.1.1. Devolatilization. Devolatilization is the process where
a wide range of gaseous products is released through the decom-
position of fuel. The volatile matter (VM) comprises a number of
hydrocarbons which are released in steps. Devolatilization is in-
termediate step before combustion of particle in fluidized bed. CFD
model is able to predict this stage correctly. Presently devolatili-
zation is not validated in real fluidized bed combustors. Only few
authors have studied devolatilization of solid fuel particles in
freeboard, although their aim is to study different fuels or to vali-
date their numerical model. Mueller et al. [15] and Raveli et al. [21]
have used CFD to formulate numerical model of peat-forest residue,
Refused derived fuel (RDF) respectively in bubbling fluidized bed
combustors. Raveli et al. [21] showed that the comparison between
the devolatilization and the char burnout profiles at the entry ports
level, which showed that devolatilization was starting after short
time when the fuel is injected. The fragile structure of the RDF and
its high intrinsic reactivity favor the fast activation of the homo-
geneous combustion of volatiles (Fig. 7(a)). Fuel particles are
expected to be broken into small fragments immediately after
feeding: since a small particle is burnt faster than a big one, this
would accelerate the emission of volatile from RDF. Fixed carbon
combustion begins after devolatilization and takes place in differ-
ent freeboard zones by varying the furnace operating conditions.
Fig. 7(b) shows that devolatilization takes place in the region close
to the furnace exit while it is confined to the area just above the
bed. Consequently, in the first case, a low percentage of the fuel can
be entrained to the furnace exit before the oxidation process is
completed. The two cases on low load and high load in commercial
combustor have been shown in picture. The literature reveals that
devolatilization depends on fragile structure, intrinsic reactivity,
size, temperature and density of properties of particles. If the par-
ticles are less fragile, intrinsic reactivity is low, size is large and
denser then the chances of char devolatilization occurs in bed or
during flight from fuel chutes as shown in Fig. 7(b) and (c). To study
devolatilization behavior Mueller et al. [15] and Ravelli et al. [21]
have used Kobayashi model.
3.1.1.2. Char oxidation/burn out. The devolatilized fuel known as
char burns slowly and it takes time depending upon intrinsic
reactivity and size to burn completely. There is chance that some
particle will not burn in bed before leaving. The light particles like
rice husk will burn during trajectory. The char oxidation and char
burn out profiles are difficult to study in dense bed due to com-
putational limitations and due surrounding of char particle by sand
particle. With present computational approach it is easier to study
char oxidation in freeboard of commercial as well lab scale units
with discrete particle model Lagrangian approach. The char burn
out is difficult to validate in real combustors and it is not validated
in any of studies. In most of studies the aim is not to study the char
burn out rather to validate the CFD model. The char oxidation of
RDF fuel [21] in commercial combustor is shown in Fig. 8(a).
Fig. 8(a) shows that char combustion takes place in the region close
to the furnace exit in case of minimum load, while in case max-
imum load it is confined to the area just above the bed.
596 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614
Fig. 7. (a) Fractions of DPM volatilizations [21]. (b) Devolatilization of peat. (c) Devolatilization of forest residue [15].
Consequently, in the first case, a low percentage of the fuel can be
entrained to the furnace exit before the oxidation process [21] is
completed. In the minimum load condition, the temperature of the
flue gas coming from the bed (971.2 K) is not high enough to rapidly
ignite combustion thus fuel particles may be elutriated from the
furnace, reducing its efficiency. On the contrary, in maximum load,
the temperature of the flue gas coming from the bed (1078.5 K)
causes all the fuel to be burnt. For the light weight particles like rice
husk [22] the char oxidation and combustion will take place during
trajectory for the case of rice husk [22] as shown in Fig. 8(c) and (d).
In the case of dense bed in present context EeE TFM and DEMe
CFD is used to formulate char combustion model. DEMeCFD to
formulate char combustion model in dense bed is done by Geng
and Che [55], Rong and Horio [56] and Daoyin et al. [53]. Rong and
Horio [56] are among few who used DEM to simulate the char in
bubbling fluidized combustor. They took the fluctuations of char
particle temperature into account to effect the particleeparticle
heat conduction, particle gas heat convection, radiation and com-
bustion. They found that NO emissions are greatly affected by the
temperature of burning char particles. Later they concluded that
char temperature fluctuated at a frequency of 5e7 Hz and the
maximum char temperature was 50  5  C higher than the average
temperature, which is determined by nearby oxygen concentration
and the heat transfer and the heat transfer properties of their
surrounding gas and particles. Daoyin et al. [53] simulated char and
propane combustion in a fluidized bed by extending DEMeCFD
approach. The model predicts that the gaseous fuel reduces the
char combustion rate and this effect is more predominant with
higher bed temperatures or highly reactive chars. The char com-
bustion rate in bed decreases as the temperature rises. The simu-
lation results shows the local heat source generated from the
homogeneous reactions fluctuates with gas volume fraction, indi-
cating the gas reaction is highly related with bubbles, which agrees
with the optical measurements by Zukowski et al. [57].
Geng and Che [55] proposed a DEMeCFD for combustion of char
in bubbling fluidized bed of inert sand. They presented a new char
combustion sub model as shown in Fig. 8(b) considering sand
inhibitory effects to develop and describe char particle combustion
behavior in the fluidized bed. The effects of bed temperature, ox-
ygen concentration and superficial velocity on char combustion
behavior are also examined through model simulation. The pres-
ence of the inert particles has shown significant effects on the
 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614
Fig. 8. (a) Fractions of DPM burnout (%) [21]. (b) Char combustion model in fluidized beds with inert sand particles [55]. (c) Char fraction of a burning rice husk particle in Model III
(One of cases) [22]. (d) Char fraction of burning rice husk particle in Model IV [22].
process of heat and mass transfer and char combustion in fluidized
beds.
In studies reported above the freeboard is modeled by DPM
Lagrangian approach and char combustion in bed is modeled by
DEMeCFD approach. The char combustion or oxidation is influ-
enced by bed hydrodynamics, individual particle temperature, char
residence time and concentrations of the products.
3.1.1.3. Ash behavior. CFD modeling is used in locating the ash
deposition region in the fluidized bed combustors. Biomass mix-
tures currently used in heat and power production are, despite
their environmental and economical advantages, also combined
with ash-related operational problems, such as slagging, fouling,
and corrosion. To improve boiler efficiency, reliable ash deposition
prediction is essential. Ash-related problems are strongly depend-
ent on fuel specific aspects, such as the mineral matter distribution
in the fuel, agents specific to the used combustion technique as well
as design aspects unique for the combustion chamber of any
operating power plant. The overall goal in combustion related
research is therefore the prediction of potential operational prob-
lems originating from fuel streams entering the combustion
chamber as well as those originating from fuel streams as well as
those originating from the design of individual furnaces. The slag-
ging and fouling tendencies of boilers using CFD are discussed by
authors [16e20,58,59].
The experimental investigations of the original fuels provide the
composition of the ash forming elements in the biomass. These ash
specific data can be used as input for advanced thermodynamics
equilibrium analysis leading to a detailed description of the tem-
perature dependent melting behavior of the ash. Based on this
597
melting behavior, a fuel field studies and the operational setup of
the boiler serve as boundary conditions for the CFD calculations. In
these calculations, the physical and chemical processes occurring in
the freeboard region of a bubbling fluidized bed combustor-starting
from the bed up to the first heat exchanger unit-are predicted in the
form of continuous phase and ash particle trajectory simulations.
The exact positions of ash particle impact on the boiler surfaces are
recorded and the particle temperatures at these locations are the
linking parameter to the fuel specific stickiness criterion. The pre-
dicted locations of high ash deposition probability on evaporator
and heat exchanger surfaces are compared qualitatively with ob-
servations made in the boiler and very good qualitative agreement
is found. The chemical fractionation and the thermodynamic
equilibrium calculations deliver highly reliable data for the ash
melting behavior of different biomasses. The strong dependence on
the biomass composition would cause the relevant sticky temper-
ature of an ash and it could be varied from 850 to 1000 K. The
higher temperature regions in furnace are found with help from
CFD. As shown in Fig. 9 the hot regions with red in color are
responsible for ash prediction in fluidized bed furnace. In all of
studies reported, the basic methodology of ash prediction using
CFD remains same. But to illustrate the concept of CFD, different
fuels and different furnaces are used.
3.1.1.4. Particle trajectories. The CFD model computes the particle
trajectory using a Lagrangian formulation which includes the
inertia, hydrodynamic drag, and the force of gravity. The trajec-
tories of particles determined will only be possible in freeboard as
the particle concentration is quite less compare to gas. Whereas in
the dense bed, with DPM Lagrangian approach and with present
598 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614

800-1000 (K)

1000-1200 (K)

1200-1400 (K)

1400-1600 (K)

1600- (K)

Fig. 9. Visual validation of ash deposit prediction in the freeboard of a bubbling flu-
idized bed furnace.

computational power it is not possible to track the particle as

concentration of particles in dense bed is quite high as compare to
gas. The particle trajectory will be depending on size, density and
moisture content in the particle. The history of each single particle
can be tracked both qualitatively and quantitatively. The trajec-
tories of particles can be plotted by selecting the desired number of
streams. Besides, the DPM report gives information about the
average residence time of the fuel particles in the freeboard and the
combustion efficiency: both greatly differ from case to case. As
these particles are denser and contain more moisture these will
vanish in bed instead in freeboard. The ash particles however will
be ejected out of furnace.

3.1.2. Fuels in gaseous phase

The combustion of gaseous phase fuels in fluidized bed elimi-
nates the heterogeneous reactions. It makes the system easier to
study due less computational space. There are only a few number of
research papers found on combustion of gaseous fuels in fluidized
bed. Fluidized bed technology is used mainly for incinerating or
gasifying solid fuels. The combustion of gaseous fuels in fluidized
bed has been discussed in chemical loop combustion systems using
CFD as tool. There are few [53,60] who have also discussed com-
bustion of gaseous fuels in fluidized bed using CFD. Most of studies
performed in this section are on two-dimensional geometries.
Despite advances in computational studies, some technical chal-
lenges still need to be solved to enable it to be applicable to large- Fig. 10. (a) Outline of interconnected fluidized bed chemical looping combustion
scale industrial processes. systems [68]. (b) Contour plots of mass fraction of CH4 in the fuel reactor [68].
Chemical looping combustion (CLC) typically employs a dual
fluidized bed system (circulating fluidized bed process) where
a metal oxide is employed as a bed material providing the oxygen fluidized bed operated as the fuel reactor in combination with
for combustion in the fuel reactor. The reduced metal is then a high velocity riser operated as air reactor as originally proposed
transferred to the second bed (air reactor) and re-oxidized before by [65]. Intensive research has been performed over the past dec-
being reintroduced back to the fuel reactor completing the loop. ade involving chemical looping combustion [67], but it is still away
The process of chemical looping combustion may be utilized with from being a commercially available technology. Many authors
either solid or gaseous fuels involving static [61,62], moving [63,64] [68e73] studied chemical looping combustion in fluidized beds
or fluidized beds [65,66] in which the oxygen necessary for the using EeE TFM CFD. The studies reported used CFD for fuel reactor
combustion is provided by a solid carrier. A basic outline of the mainly.
process is shown in Fig. 10(a). Two steps are required: an initial The development and testing of an interconnected multiphase
oxidation and a subsequent reduction step of the oxygen carrier. CFD model for chemical looping combustion is done by Emden et al.
Currently implemented systems are mostly based on the fluidized [68]. The air reactor is modeled as a high velocity riser, the fuel
bed technology due to the fact that solid fuels are addressable, reactor as a bubbling fluidized bed. The models of both reactors are
a good mixing of gas and solid carrier is provided and the circula- implemented as separate CFD simulations allowing for an exchange
tion and replacement of the carrier material become easy. The of solid mass through time-dependent inlet and outlet boundary
process is usually realized through the combination of a bubbling conditions as well as mass, momentum, heat and heat sinks placed
 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614 599

in the bubbling bed equipped with a weir. The developed frame-

work is tested for chemical looping operated with methane as fuel
gas and Mn3O4 as oxygen carrier. Fig. 10(b) shows the contour plots
of CH4 in the fuel reactor. The simulation could not capture the
unexpected increase in methane conversion with an increase in
fuel injection rate. This counter-intuitive trend was explained by
noting that the reaction rate exhibited by the particles is so rapid
that the global reaction behavior was completely limited by the
species transfer in the particle lean regions towards the gas-
emulsion interface.
Wang et al. [70] did the CFD simulation of fuel reactor in
chemical looping combustion process using TFM and GKTM. It is
found during simulation of fuel reactor that a high weight fraction
of unburned methane fuel in the flue gas along with CO2 and H2O.
This behavior implies high fuel loss at the exit of the reactor and
indicates the necessity to increase the residence time and improve
mixing in the fuel reactor using circulating fluidized bed technol-
ogy. Deng et al. [71,74,75] used multiphase CFD modeling for
a chemical looping combustion process. In this work, the reaction
kinetics models of the (CaSO4 þ H2) fuel reactor are developed.
Deng et al. [71] applied multiphase CFD modeling for a chemical
looping combustion process (Fuel Reactor). They also studied effect
of various parameters on performance along with validation of
model. They checked the effect of various parameters like bed
temperature, particle diameter, flow rate etc. Fig. 11(a) shows the
effect of particle diameter on molar fraction of H2 and Fig. 11(b)
displays the effect of bed temperature on the conversion of H2. It is
observed that the conversion of H2 increases at higher tempera-
tures and decreases with particle size. Mahalatkar et al. [72] has
made simulations of a circulating fluidized bed chemical looping
combustion system utilizing gaseous fuel. The CLC experiments are
simulated using methane as fuel. A 2-D continuum model was used
to describe both the gas and solid phases. Detailed sub-models to
account for fluid-particle and particle interaction forces are inclu-
ded. Global models of fuel and carrier chemistry are utilized. The
results obtained from CFD are compared with experimental outlet
species concentrations, solid circulation rates, solid mass distribu-
tion in the reactors, and leakage and dilution rates. The transient
CFD simulations provided a reasonable match with the reported
Fig. 11. (a) Effect of particle diameter on conversion of H2 [71]. (b) Effect of bed
experimental data. Jung and Gamwo [76] applied multiphase CFD- temperature on the conversion of H2 [71].
based models for chemical looping combustion process using MFIX
code. Wang et al. [73] applied multiphase TFM CFD modeling to
chemical looping combustion using a CUO/Al2O3 oxygen carrier. superficial velocity, etc. which affects combustion process in flu-
The shrinking core model (SCM) with the reaction controlled by the idized bed. Although numerous literature will be found on these
chemical reaction in the grain is applied. The results show that the parameters, but with CFD few studies are reported.
fuel conversion with the same inlet gas velocity would go up by
modestly increasing the initial bed height and the temperature but 3.2. Gasification
would slightly decrease with an increase in the operating pressure.
The high conversion of coal gas with a low solid inventory could be Gasification is generally carried out by reacting fuel such as coal,
reached in proper operating conditions. biomass, petroleum coke or heavy oil with restricted amount of
Intensive research has been performed over the past decade oxygen and often in combination with steam. Although much of
involving chemical looping combustion, but still it far away from studies related to gasification of fuels in fluidized bed is already
being a commercial available technology. CFD modeling of chemical established and many textbooks [111,112] are found related to this,
loop combustion systems has been done to know how the fuel and but the aim of this study is to find the use of CFD in studying the
oxygen carrier is circulated in both the vessels along with other gasification process.
parameters. Present CFD studies in all the cases are on two-
dimensional or third dimension is negligible. The solid volume 3.2.1. Physical and chemical processes
fractions in all the cases indicate the reaction of fuel with oxidizer. CFD models are used to study the physical and chemical
The major difference in all the studies is in terms of carriers and fuel behavior of fuels in fluidized bed gasification process. The numer-
gas. In all these studies the heterogeneous reaction rate is impor- ical model can present the detailed information about the gas-
tant for the determination of the mass transfer between solid and ification processes and bridge the gap effectively between large-
fluid phase and for the species transport equation which will be scale commercialized beds and small-scale testing models. To
used to determine the solid volume reaction rates. Apart from time, improve the thermal efficiency and to predict product gas com-
temperature and turbulence there are other parameters like par- position and emission rates numerous mathematical models for
ticle diameter, design parameters, flow rate, oxygen concentration, coal and biomass gasification in dense bed [28,29,31,39,77e85] has
600 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614
been developed. Most of them considered EulereEuler’s model to
study fundamental investigations of the chemical and fluid me-
chanical aspects of fluidized beds. It is part of their EeE TFM CFD
model which are formed to look different characteristics. Most of
simulations are done in two-dimensional geometries. Most studies
have performed on coal as fuel. Only some authors have reported
[77,80,85] it for biomass in dense bed. Armstrong et al. [80] formed
a CFD model for biomass and coal. They also discussed various ef-
fects regarding gaseous emissions. The result in these early stages
shows that the inclusion of coal to the model has strong effect on
the gaseous products produced. There appears to be a significant
increase in the mole fractions of CO2 and H2O. This could be due to
an increase in the mass fraction of H2 and a slight increase in CO
released during the pyrolysis stage of the coal compared to the
biomass. Gerber et al. [77,85] formulated CFD model bed material
consisting of wood and char. With increasing temperatures within
the reactor they found higher reaction rates for pyrolysis, gas-
ification, and homogeneous gas phase reactions. The concentration
of gasification products like CO, H2, and CH4 is causing increased
temperature levels. Zeng et al. [79] discussed CFD model of coal
gasification in fluidized bed and the effect of various parameters on
gasification parameters, i.e. emissions. Pressure causing the carbon
monoxide to increase in reactor and bed temperature is having no
effect on molar concentration. However with increase in reactor
temperature, the rate of Boudouard reaction which consumes CO2
and produces CO will become faster. Li et al. [84] also discussed the
above effects in pressurized spouted fluid bed for coal.
The numerical simulations of the bubbling fluidized bed coal
gasification for two-dimensional bubbling fluidized bed gasifier
(BFBG) is done by Yu et al. [47]. The coal gasification rates are
determined by combining Arrhenius rate and diffusion rate for
heterogeneous reactions or turbulent mixing rate for homogeneous
reactions. The simulation results would give much more exact
predictions of the distributions of pressure, temperature, velocity,
volume fraction of the phases and gas composition along the
reactor which cannot be described by two-phase or three-phase
one dimensional fluidization models. The mathematical modeling
of coal gasification in a fluidized bed reactor is done by Cornejo and
Farıas [86]. This work is similar to work done by Yu et al. [47] with
more simplifications. Their chemical model involved five hetero-
geneous and five homogeneous chemical reactions, tracking seven
species in the gas phase (CO2, CO, H2O, CH4, H2, O2 and N2) and one
species in the solid phase (C(s)). Drying and volatilization rates
were estimated by mass conservation. The major difference from
Yu et al. [47] is that in this process coal entering in the gasifier in
dried state and there is no ash considered in this system. The CFD
simulation of a fluidized bed gasifier operating with lignite coal is
done by Karimipour et al. [87]. They discussed that the method of
implementing the water-gas shift reaction into the simulation code
is highly influential on the computational expense.
The TFM EeE CFD technique is also used to plot the solid volume
fraction of char, to know the movement of char. After the drying
and devolatilization these char particles become less dense and
their tendency to flow at the top of bed. This technique could help
to see flow of char in the bed. The solid volume fraction of two chars
[80] and Lime and Char is shown in Fig. 12(a). The char particles in
the fluidized bed after some time will be segregated depending
upon the time of simulation. After 5.0 s for the biomass gasification
model the volumetric fraction of char 1 [biomass] and char 2 [coal]
phases in the bed. The diameter of the char 2 phase is smaller than
the char 1 phase therefore the particle move to the top of the bed as
the larger particles segregate to the bottom. Fig. 12(b) shows the
volume fraction of the biomass at 5.0 s. The particles are only seen
in the vicinity of the fuel inlet. The highest volume fraction of
particles occurs at the fuel inlet and reduces due to the mass
reduction as a result of pyrolysis and the migration of particles. A
low volume fraction is seen to descend near the air inlet. This is due
to the biomass phase having a higher density and diameter than the
char phases causing the particles to fall to the base of the bed. The
Fig. 12(c) and (d) shows the volumetric fraction of Lime and Char,
respectively. The particle diameters remain the same however the
densities of the limestone and char differ greatly. Although no clear
distinction is observed with regards to segregation in Fig. 12(d)
close inspection indicates that the lower density particles namely
char, are segregating to the top of the bed. The highest volume
fraction of particles occurs at the fuel inlet and reduces due to the
mass reduction as a result of pyrolysis and the migration of parti-
cles. A low volume fraction is seen to descend near the air inlet. This
is due to the biomass phase having a higher density and diameter
than the char phases causing the particles to fall to the base of the
bed.
3.2.2. Effect of operational parameters
The parameters which control gasification in fluidized bed
include fuel properties, particle size, species concentration, flow
velocity, bed material, fluidization velocity, geometry etc. CFD is
being used to study all these parameters. CFD is tool to study the
variation of these parameters on the gasification process in fluid-
ized bed. Because of complexity of process, i.e. gasification with
multiphase, not much detail is found about variation of parameters.
Moreover, the geometries like two dimensions discussed in liter-
ature will not be helpful to make any solid conclusions regarding
study of gasification process in fluidized bed with CFD. The size,
design and conditions of each fluidized bed gasifier are different
and comparison is very difficult. Few studies related to these are
reported.
Gerber et al. [77] have formed the EeE TFM CFD model for char
as bed material in two-dimensional fluid bed gasifier and studied
the various parameters like effect of initial bed height, variations in
fuel air ratio and reactor throughput. They tried to do the variations
in initial bed height by 25% in both directions and product gas
concentrations and tar yield are depicted for the base case and the
variations. They do not find any influence of the initial bed height
on the gaseous components in the product gas and found strong
influence on the reactive tar component. They also tried to vary the
fuel to air ratio by changing the fuel mass flow by varying the re-
sults in the gas yields. The higher the fuel input is, the more
products gases and tars evolve. This trend is expected for the
product gases but not necessarily for tar as tar production rates
show higher temperature dependence than wood. Zeng et al. [79]
have formed CFD model for pressurized spouted bed and dis-
cussed the effect of bed temperature and pressure on formation of
gaseous species. In their results the increase of bed temperature
enhances the formation of all other gases except H2 and CH4. There
results indicate that the gas quality (combustible fractions and
caloric value) improves at a higher operating pressure. They
explained two possible reasons behind this. They explained the one
about the gasification rate enhanced directly by pressure due to the
increase in the partial pressure of reactants and other as the flu-
idization in the reactor becomes better at elevated pressure.
Armstrong et al. [28] studied the parametric gasification of
process in BFB gasifier using CFD. They studied the effect of bed
height on gas species. This lower bed height increases the area of
the freeboard providing more space for the relevant species,
namely CO, CO2, H2, and H2O, to compete in the water-gas shift
reaction thus indicating that equilibrium can be obtained in
a small-scale reactor provided the freeboard should be sufficiently
tall. Results show that bed temperature is having more influence on
the gasification processes. The bed temperature results in an
increase in CO and H2 species and a decrease in CO2 and H2O. They
 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614 601

Fig. 12. (a) Volume fraction of char1 and char 2 [80]. (b) Volumetric fraction of biomass [80]. (c) and (d) Volume fraction of lime and char [39].

explained it due to highly temperature dependent heterogeneous respectively. Zhou et al. [88] formed CFD model and discussed
reactions. As the temperature increases the reactions take place various parameters for biomass gasification in fluidized bed. The
faster leading to a faster consumption of the reactants H2O and CO2 size of particle is increasing the hydrogen yield, steam to biomass
through the steam gasification reaction and Boudouard reaction, ratio (S/B) and equivalence ratio (E/R) initially increasing gas yield
602 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614
and then decreasing gas yield. As per Wang et al. [89] when the
airflow rate is fixed, the amount of hydrogen and carbon mono-
oxide is sensitive to the changes of ER and temperature, and lower
ER value or higher temperature or both are beneficial for higher
yield of syngas.
He et al. [81] used CFD to simulate the wood gasification in a lab
scale bubbling fluidized bed. They discussed effect of various pa-
rameters like ER and S/B on gas composition. The effect of ER and S/
B on gas composition is shown in Fig. 13(a) and (b), in which the
simulation results obtained from the kinetic model. Due to the
dilution effect from nitrogen and the combustion reactions, pro-
duction of gases with heating value (H2, CO and CH4) from air
gasification is low while having a high CO percentage. An increasing
ER decreases H2, CO and CH4 yields but increases CO2 amount and
dry gas yield. With increasing S/B ratio, concentration of H2 and CO
increases while that of CO decreases indicating an enhanced water-
gas shift reaction. The simulation results show a good agreement in
H2 and CH4 production but discrepancy of predicting the CO and CO
trends compared with the experimental results.
Since CFD in fluidized bed gasification is immature field and it is
still growing with advancement in computational technology. Most
of parameters discussed above like bed height, feeding rate, ER, S/B
ratio etc. are known facts, but here attempt is study the above
parameters with aid of CFD. Many of parameters are not reported
for most of studies. The target/aim of most of studies is to validate
CFD model in their cases.
3.2.2.1. Bed material. The inert bed material is having no affect on
the gasification process in fluidized bed as predicted with CFD. CFD
can be used as tool to study the effect of bed material on gas-
ification process in fluidized bed. The bed material limestone to
capture sulfur, i.e. calcination process on gasification parameters in
Fig. 13. (a) Effect of ER on H2/CO and gas yield [81]. (b) Effect of S/B on H2/CO and gas
yield [81].
fluidized bed with CFD as discussed by Armstrong et al. [28,39]. For
most the devices the bed material is inert and having no effect on
gasification of fuel in fluidized bed. There are few authors [47,86,87]
who studied gasification of fuels in fluidized bed without inert
material. The considered solid fuel chars as bed material. They used
EeE TFM approach to study gasification in fluidized bed. Few
simplifications include the negation of interaction forces like lift
force, thermophoretic force, Brownian force and virtual mass forces
in all these cases. The intensity of particles collision does not vary
with temperature, i.e., exothermic or endothermic reaction has no
impact on the fluctuation of solid velocity and does not have a rise
in the temperature of granular are among few more simplifications.
There is no known effect of char on gasification in fluidized bed
when it is used as bed material. In all the studies reported above
there is no ash phase considered, i.e. fuel will break down into char
and combustible gases.
The few studies reported when they considered bed material as
mixture of sand, fuel, char or ashes. Few authors have considered
[28,29,78,80,90] studied gasification using the above mixture.
However for any of studies reported the effect of variation in dif-
ferent percentage of bed material is not reported. In all cases
reported these includes drying, devolatilization and gasification.
But no such parameters is discussed which will decrease or
enhance the gasification process. An Eulerian CFD modeling
approach of wood gasification in a bubbling fluidized bed reactor
using char as bed material is done by Gerber et al. [77]. They
reported char to act as a catalyst capable of reducing tar, but no
effects of performance or comparison with inert material is
reported.
3.2.2.2. Design. The effect of changes in geometry or design is not
much reported in literature to affect the combustion and gas-
ification in fluidized bed with aid of CFD. Benjapon et al. [91] have
made the hydrodynamic descriptions and chemical reaction re-
sponses using CFD modeling of tapered circulating fluidized bed
reactor risers. They tested CFD modeling for taper in and taper out
of riser. They found that the tapered-in riser increases the solid
particle residence time and gives a more uniform temperature
distribution, because it does not have sufficient force to support the
weight of the particles. They found that the tapered-in riser is best
for reactions with a slow rate whilst the tapered out riser best fitted
the reactions with a fast rate. Mazumder et al. [92] used CFD in
designing conceptual hybrid gasifier and in second part [93] they
have made simulation of a hybrid entrained-flow and fluidized bed
mild gasifier. It is simply newly conceptual design in two di-
mensions and nothing is explained about any chemical process that
is affected by design. They calculated various species and consid-
ered all the reactions in gasifier using CFD.
Although it is proved that CFD is helpful in design of fluidized
bed devices, but considering multiphase reactions, i.e. gasification
it lacks in literature. The bed temperature, bed height, particle size,
oxygen concentration in air, pressure in combustor, hydrogen to
carbon monoxide ratio, geometry, bed material and ash behavior
have unique effect on performance of fluidized bed performance
with gasification and it is proved by above literature that CFD is an
effective tool used to study operational parameters that are deriv-
ing above process. Table 2 summarizes the CFD study of combus-
tion and gasification based on EeE TFM model and Table 3
summarizes the CFD study of combustion and gasification based
on DPM Lagrangian approach.
3.3. Emissions
The main source of air pollution is the combustion of fuels in
stationary and transportation systems. The boilers, furnaces and
Table 2
Various TFM EulerianeEulerian CFD chemical reactive models in fluidized bed combustors and gasifiers.

Authors Year Title Type Code/software Dimension Turbulence Features of model Extra model/UDF Agreement with Remarks
model experimental
Farias et al. [60] 2006 CFD study on natural gas-fluidized bed B Ansys Fluent NS keε Two stage kinetic No Yes Cluster of Linux
combustors model X86 machines is
used.
Yu et al. [47] 2007 Numerical simulation of the bubbling B Own code 3D keε Kinetic model NA Yes No inert material is
fluidized bed coal gasification by the kinetic [116]/Eddy Break used in dense bed
theory of granular flow (KTGF) up
Jung and Gamwo [76] 2008 Multiphase CFD-based models for chemical B MFIX 2D NS LFRM Yes Yes Methane and NiO
looping combustion process: fuel reactor as catalyst is used in
modeling fuel reactor
Deng et al. [71] 2008 Multiphase CFD modeling for a chemical B Fluent 2D keε Shrinking core Yes Yes Reaction kinetics
looping combustion process (fuel reactor) model[108]/L F R M models of the
and E D M (CaSO4 þ H2) fuel
reactor
Zhongyi Deng [79] 2008 Computational fluid dynamics modeling of P Fluent 3D keε Shrinking core Yes Yes Experimental
coal gasification in a pressurized spout-fluid model[108]/E D M verification is done

R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614

bed on 0.1 MW reactor
Zhou et al. [8] 2009 Numerical simulation on hydrodynamics C Not Specified 2D keε LFRM Yes Not all Validation with 3D
and combustion in a circulating fluidized test rig and not
bed under O2/CO2 and air atmospheres promising results
Nikolopoulos et al. [9] 2009 Numerical investigation of 3-d transient C Ansys ICEM and 3D keε Shrinking core Yes Yes Combustion
combusting flow in a 1.2 MWth pilot power Star CD model/L F R E chamber has 9.5 m
plant model height and 0.4 m2
diameter
Qianjum et al. [84] 2009 Simulation of coal gasification in P Fluent 3-D keε Kinetic model Chen Yes Yes The maximum
a pressurized spout-fluid bed gasifier et al. [116]/E D M error in one of
parameters of
model, i.e. methane
is 25%.
Wang et al. [78] 2009 Three-dimensional simulation of fluidized B Ansys Fluent 3D keε NS Yes Yes Gasifier of 2 m and
bed coal gasification 0.2 m diameter is
used for validation
Emden et al. [68] 2010 Development and testing of an B Ansys Fluent 2D keε Linear and Yes NS Chemical looping is
interconnected multiphase CFD model for spherical shrinking operated with
chemical looping combustion core/F R M and E D methane as fuel gas
M and Mn3O4 as
oxygen carrier
Karimipour et. al [87] 2010 CFD simulation of a fluidized bed gasifier B Opensource /MFIX 3-D NS Shrinking core No NS Simulation are
operating with lignite coal Model done DMP
(distributed
memory parallel)
mode
Gerber et al. [77] 2010 An Eulerian modeling approach of wood B Opensource /MFIX 2D keε Arhenius type Law/ Yes Not all Char as bed
gasification in a bubbling fluidized bed L F R and E D material is used
reactor using char as bed material
Benjapon et al. [91] 2010 CFD modeling of tapered circulating C Ansys Fluent 3-D keε EDM No Yes Taper in of riser
fluidized bed reactor risers: Hydrodynamic give best
descriptions and chemical reaction performance for
responses reactions
Armstrong et al. [28] 2011 Parametric study of gasification processes B Ansys Fluent 3D keε EDM Yes Yes Limestone
in a BFB coal gasifier calcination is
incorporated in
main model
(continued on next page)

603
Table 2 (continued )

604
Authors Year Title Type Code/software Dimension Turbulence Features of model Extra model/UDF Agreement with Remarks
model experimental
Wang et al. [73] 2011 Multiphase computational fluid dynamics B K Fix 2D keε EDM Yes NS Chemical looping is
(CFD) modeling of chemical looping operated with
combustion using a CuO/Al2O3 oxygen methane as fuel gas
carrier: effect of operating conditions on and NiO as oxygen
coal gas combustion carrier
Mazumder et al. [92] 2011 Design and simulation of a hybrid B Ansys Fluent-12 2-D keε L F R M and E D M Yes NS CFD applied to
entrained-flow and fluidized bed mild conceptual and
gasifier part 1 e design considerations and theoretical hybrid
development of a multiphase model gasifier
Zhou et al. [6] 2011 Two-dimensional computational fluid C MFIX 2D keε L F R and E D M Yes No Two-dimensional
dynamics simulation of coal combustion in with the furnace
a circulating fluidized bed combustor depth of 0.1 m and
no inert material is
considered
Cornejo and Farias [86] 2011 Mathematical modeling of coal gasification C Ansys Fluent 3D keε EDM Yes Yes Model assumes
in a fluidized bed reactor using a Eulerian drying of fuel at

R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614

granular description mouth of gasifier
and variation of one
of gas methane
from experimental
is above 60%
Myohanen and Hyppanen 2011 A three-dimensional model frame for C Ansys Fluent 3D NS Not specified Yes No Simulations are
[31] modeling combustion and gasification in done in 3D test
circulating fluidized bed furnaces furnace and model
includes sulphation
and calcination
model
Li et al. [94] 2011 Numerical simulation of biomass B Ansys Fluent 3D NS Homogeneous No Yes Effect of mass ratio
gasification in a fluidized bed reactions/Arhenius steam and biomass
expression is studied
Mahalatkar et al. [72] 2011 Simulations of a circulating fluidized bed C Ansys Fluent 2D NS Uniform reaction Yes Yes Manganese oxide
chemical looping combustion system model (Son and carrier with the fuel
utilizing gaseous fuel Kim [66]) gases
Wang et al. [73] 2011 Multiphase computational fluid dynamics B Not specified 3D NS Shrinking core Yes Yes CuO/Al2O3 oxygen
(CFD) modeling of chemical looping model/L F R and E D carrier
combustion using a CuO/Al2O3 oxygen M
carrier: effect of operating conditions on
coal gas combustion
Zhou et al.[7] 2011 CFD modeling of oxy-coal combustion in B MFIX 2D keε L F R and E D M Yes No Oxy combustion of
circulating fluidized bed coal in 2D geometry
is considered
Table 3
Discrete particle EulerianeLagrangian approach used in fluidized bed combustion and gasification devices.

Authors Year Title Code/software Dimension Turbulence Extra Agreement with Remarks
model model/UDF experimental
Zabetta et al. [95] 1999 NOx reduction by staging in biomass Fluent 5.4 3D k-ε Yes Yes Staged combustion is done
combustion e A kinetic and CFD modeling
study
Sofialidis and Faltsi [96] 2001 Simulation of biomass gasification in Fluent 3D keε No Yes The biomass particle trajectories are by
fluidized beds using computational fluid no means representative of the real
dynamics approach situation, as the effect of solid-to-solid
interaction (sand-to-biomass) is
ignored.
Brink et. al. [11] 2001 CFD modeling of the fate of biomass fuel- Fluent 3D keε Yes Yes Effect of turbulence is modeled with
nitrogen in the freeboard of a 70 MW FBC- eddy dissipation model.
new aspects on controlling mechanisms
Zevenhovan and 2001 Particle/turbulence interactions, mass Fluent 3D keε Yes Yes The effect of particle size, temperature,
Jarvinen[14] transfer and gas/solid chemistry in a CFBC reactor size and fluidization velocity on
Riser NO is checked.
Mueller et al. [18] 2002 CFD-based ash deposition prediction in Fluent 3D keε Yes Yes New concept of combining CFD with

R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614

a bubbling fluidized bed combustor firing chemical fractionation analysis and
mixtures of biomasses multiphase equilibrium calculations
Grabner et al. [98] 2007 Numerical simulation of coal gasification at Fluent 3D keε Yes Yes CO is not incorporated in simulation
circulating fluidized bed conditions
Lundmarket al. [19] 2007 Computational fluid dynamic modeling of Fluent 3D keε Yes Yes New concept of combining CFD with
combustion and ash deposition in a biomass chemical fractionation analysis and
co-fired bubbling fluidized bed boiler multiphase equilibrium calculations
Agraniotis et al. [23] 2009 Numerical investigation on the combustion Ansys Fluent 3D NS No Yes Measured temperature increase at the
behavior of pre-dried Greek lignite furnace exit which is not expected
Mueller et al. [15] 2005 Numerical simulation of the combustion Ansys Fluent 3D keε Yes Yes All four stages drying, devolatization,
behavior of different biomasses in char carbon conversion and ash particle
a bubbling fluidized bed boiler formation are considered
Zhou et al. [88] 2006 Non premixed combustion model of Fluent 6.0 3-D keε No Yes Effect of particle size, steam to biomass
fluidized bed biomass gasifier for hydrogen ratio and effect of equivalence ratio is
rich gas checked.
Brink et. al. [12] 2006 A modified approach for predicting NOx Fluent 3D NS Yes Yes Splash zone model is formed
emission trends from biomass fired
bubbling fluidized bed boilers
Ravelli et al. [21] 2008 Description, applications and numerical Fluent 6.1 3D keε No Yes Two-mixture fraction using pdf is used
modeling of bubbling fluidized bed
combustion in waste-to-energy plants
Wang and Yan [89] 2009 CFD-based combustion model for sewage Fluent 3D keε No Yes Reaction models using non premixed
sludge gasification in a fluidized bed combustion model and CHEMKIN
database
Xiao et al. [99] 2009 Numerical simulation of sludge dryness Fluent 3D keε No Yes Reactor temperature is below 432 K
under flue gas atmosphere in the riser of which seems extremely low
a fluidized bed
Brink et. al. [24] 2009 A simplified model for the behavior of large Fluent 6.2 3D keε Yes Yes Modified eddy dissipation concept
biomass particles in the splashing zone of model is used
a bubbling bed
Yu et al. [100] 2009 CFD modeling applied to the co-combustion Fluent 6.2.1 3D keε No Yes 130 t/h boiler is under consideration
of paper sludge and coal in a 130 t/h CFB
boiler
Wischnewski et al. [101] 2009 3D-simulation of concentration Not specified 3D NS Yes Yes Four zones bottom zone, splash zone,
distributions inside large-scale circulating upper dilute zone and exit zone are
fluidized bed combustors under consideration
Ratschow et al. [102] 2009 Three-dimensional simulation of Ansys ICEM and Star CD 3D NS Yes Yes Horizontal dispersion coefficients are
temperature distributions in large-scale also discussed
circulating fluidized bed combustors
(continued on next page)

605
 606 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614

engines burning fossil fuels emit gaseous pollutants, such as SO2,

The simulation has been done with new

Energy and chemistry equations for the
MP-PIC method in CPFD are presented.
NOx, CO, N2O and volatile organic compounds (HC). Fluidized bed
Bed temperature of combustor drops

Influence of different velocities has

Koybashi at al. [42] devoltalization
combustors or gasifiers have been used for long times to control
and discussing the impact of these pollutants. CFD modeling of fluid

concept of barracuda method

dynamics has already reached a high level while numerical mod-
Stage gasification is done

eling of reactive multiphase flows is still in an early stage. Many

researchers have done a lot of work on the pollutant emission
modeling in the FB combustors and gasifiers, but CFD modeling of

been presented
emissions in fluidized bed devices is in still developing stage. Only
model is used
frequently

few papers [21,89,93,96,98,100] have been found discussing the

Remarks

above. Most of the research in the literature dealing fuels particles

with DPM Lagrange approach and it is difficult to describe the
chemical processes properly with EeE TFM method. Only few of
them [28,31,39,107] discussed these emissions using EeE TFM
Agreement with

approach. The most authors discussed these pollutants as a part of

experimental

CFD model and compared their results regarding pollutants with

experimental values.
Yes

Yes
Yes

Yes

Yes
Yes

3.3.1. Carbon monoxide

Carbon monoxide particularly in many areas comes primarily
model/UDF

from automobiles. The emission of carbon monoxide from fluidized

Extra

bed boiler plants is not generally perceived to be a major problem

Yes

Yes

No
No

No
No

and is normally below the statutory limit. The emission depends on

the fuel composition and combustion temperature. It is one of most
Turbulence

important green house gas; it received the greatest attention in

RNG keε
model

terms of emission control. CFD is being is used to study its behavior

keε

while combustion/gasification of fuel in fluidized bed. Many au-

NS
NS

NS

NS

thors [21,89,96,98,100] have reported the emissions using DPM

Dimension

Lagrangian and other have used EeE TFM models [93] to study CFD
modeling of combustion/gasification in bed. Lagrangian approach
3-D

using DPM is used to study carbon monoxide emissions in free-

3D

3D
3D

2D
3D

board, whereas for dense bed EeE TFM approach is used. The
emissions are part of CFD modeling for the case of combustors and
gasifiers, which are validated by measurements. For the fluidized
bed combustors the formation of carbon monoxide is considered as
emissions, where as in gasifiers it is intermediate stage before
Code/software

Star ccm 4.02

Ansys Fluent

combustion.
Own Code

Barracuda

Few authors [21,89,93,96,98,100] discussed carbon monoxide

Fluent

CPFD

emissions with Lagrangian DPM approach. Sofialidis et al. [96] has

simulated biomass gasification in fluidized beds using computa-
tional fluid dynamics approach. Their simulation results include
Computational fluid dynamics modeling of

numerical simulation of particle flow and

various species and carbon monoxide is one of them. Fig. 14(a)

Comparison between measurements and
dimensional thermal reacting flow with
rice husk combustion in a fluidized bed

EulerianeLagrangian method for three-

combustion at the Duisburg CFBC plant

Numerical simulation of woody waste
gasification in two stage fluidized bed

shows the contours of the CO mass fractions in the gas mixture. The
gasification in general and improved

gasification in dense fluidized beds

EulereLagrange modeling of wood

higher values for CO are located immediately above the air in lets,
3D computational fluid dynamics
simulation of natural coke steam

while for CO2, at a greater height. Both gases acquire their exit
values very quickly, below the free board area.
application to coal gasifiers

Yu et al. [100] applied CFD modeling applied to the co-

combustion of paper sludge and coal in a 130 t/h CFB boiler. The
carbon monoxide emissions are one of parameters in this. The
fluidized beds

carbon monoxide profiles are shown in Fig. 14(b). They concluded

combustor

that high concentration CO comes from the dense-phase zone and

that is consumed in both the fluidized particle combustion and the
gasifier
Title

collision of bed material. The high CO region coincides with the

main pass of the gas flow and is close to the secondary air inlet. In
the volume space near the bed bottom, there is only low concen-
2010

2011

2011

2011
2010
2010
Year

tration CO. In the dilute-phase zone, temperature reduces to

a lower level and any further CO reaction is very slow. Grabner et al.
[98] also discussed the formation of carbon monoxide using nu-
merical simulation of coal gasification at circulating fluidized bed
Oevermann [105]

Plackmeyer [106]
Rozainee et al. [22]

Snider et al. [104]

Table 3 (continued )

conditions. Wang et al. [89] formed CFD-based combustion model

Park et al. [103]

Tang et al. [82]

for sewage sludge gasification in a fluidized bed. The model sen-

Gerber and

sitivity is analyzed by performing the model in a laboratory-scale

Weng and
Authors

fluidized bed in the literature, and the model validation is carried

out by comparing with experimental data from the literature. Their
results show that reasonably good agreement is achieved. They also
 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614 607

Fig. 14. (a) Mass fractions of CO [96]. (b) CO concentrations profiles of coal combustion (i) and co-combustion of paper sludge/coal (ii) (x ¼ 0 mm, range from 2256.5 mm to
2265.5 mm [boiler dimensions]) [100]. (c) Effect of ER on ratio of H2/CO for T ¼ 1023 K, 1073 K, and 1123 K (M) model results; (E) experiment data [89].

discussed the effects of temperature and equivalence ratio (ER) on
the quality of product syngas (H2 þ CO). A suitable ratio of H2/CO is
useful for the chemical industry. The ratio of H2/CO slightly de-
creases with increasing ER value when ER is less than 0.35 but in-
creases with increasing ER when ER is over 0.35 as shown in
Fig. 14(c).
Hydrogen to carbon monoxide ratio is one of critical output
parameters for liquid fuel synthesis and still variations of nearly an
order of magnitude are observed, which cannot be explained by the
current state of understanding of these systems. Only few authors
[89] discussed hydrogen to carbon monoxide ratio in fluidized bed.
Present research based on CFD models related to fluidized bed
combustion and gasification related has been silent on this issue.
3.3.2. SO2 emissions
Due to burning of fuel the sulfur is oxidized primarily to sulfur
dioxide. The mineral matter in coal may contain some calcium
oxide, CaO, which may absorb a part of the sulfur dioxide as calcium
sulfate. Some amount of it will escape to atmosphere and some
amount will be converted to sulfur trioxide. Primarily during
combustion or gasification of fuel in fluidized bed the chances of
formation of these gases are very thin. The sub-models of sulfur
emissions are added to main CFD model to know the emissions. The
CFD modeling of SOx will make the process computational very
expensive with multiphase approach. The CFD modeling of SOx is
possible both with Lagrangian and EulerianeEulerian Approach.
But for industrial fluidized bed units more journeys have to travel
before any prominent results with SOx CFD models and multiphase
approach. Few authors [28,31,39,107] discussed formation SOx with
EeE CFD model in fluidized bed.
Zhou et al. [107] discussed computational fluid dynamics sim-
ulation of nitrogen and sulfur oxides emissions in a two-
dimensional circulating fluidized bed combustor. Based on the
previously established two-dimensional computational fluid
608 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614

dynamics (CFD) model which described processes of coal devola-
tilization, volatile combustion and char combustion in circulating
fluidized bed (CFB) combustors, nitrogen and sulfur oxides emis-
sions are numerically simulated and investigated in their research.
Fig. 15(a) shows the contours of molar fraction of SO2 concentra-
tion. The char of sulfur will be converted to SO2 during char com-
bustion. SO2 was retained by CaO calcined from CaCO3. By
converting reaction rate expressions to suitable forms for Euleriane
Eulerian modeling, sulfation reaction rates from two different lit-
eratures were compared. They evaluated the performance of SO2
emission for conditions with/without considering sulfur self-
retention. Fig. 15(b) shows the comparison between simulated
and experimental pollutant concentrations at outlet on dry basis.
All the results are matching with the experimental values. Myo-
hanen et al. [31] formed a three-dimensional model frame for
modeling combustion and gasification in circulating fluidized bed
furnaces. They included sub model for sulfur, i.e. limestone re-
actions along with other sub-models in CFD calculation. Limestone
will act as sorbent for the absorption of sulfur dioxide in fluidized
bed combustors. They have applied CFD on three-dimensional test
furnace to look various effects. The limestone is calcined quickly as
it enters the furnace. Regarding sulfur dioxide their on the results of
model is shown in Fig. 15(c). Fig. 15(c) presents the calcination and
sulphation rates. The resulting CaO is then reacting with sulfur
dioxide and the sulphation rate is naturally highest in the locations
where the concentration of SO2 is highest. The highest sulphation

Fig. 15. (a) Contours of SO2 concentration and related reaction rates without adding limestone [107]. (b) Comparison between simulated and experimental pollutant concentrations
at outlet on dry basis [107]. (c) Modeled calcinations and sulphation rates [31].
 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614
rate is located just above the bottom of the furnace and in the core
of the furnace, where the SO2 is released from combustion of char.
The limestone calcination plays important role in capture of
sulfur. Limestone calcination is introduced to a computational fluid
dynamic model of fluidized bed gasification process by Armstrong
et al. [28,39]. The limestone calcination in this study [39] is showing
only slight effects on gasification process. The slight changes are
observed in the gaseous compositions due to the introduction of
CO2 as a result of limestone decomposition. They explained the
reasons for this are because of relatively short simulation time.
Armstrong et al. [28] studied the parametric gasification using EeE
CFD modeling and one of parameters is the effects of limestone
calcination on coal bubbling fluidized bed gasifier in a bed of char
and limestone. They checked the effects of limestone calcination
a bed consisting of 100% limestone which includes inert limestone
and calcinating limestone. A close up of the products, CO, CO2, H2
and CH4, in Fig. 16(a) shows a significant increase in the concen-
tration of CO2 due to limestone calcination; however, as expected
this increase is only slight in comparison to the influence hetero-
geneous reactions have on the gaseous compositions. Fig. 16(b)
shows the average mole fraction of O2 at different heights near the
air inlet for the three-bed compositions. Clearly this is higher when
the percentage of limestone is higher.
3.3.3. NOx emissions (nitrogen chemistry)
CFD modeling is used in predicting nitrogen chemistry param-
eters (NOx, NH3 and N2) in commercial bubbling fluidized bed
combustors. The combustion temperature when firing biomass is
typically fairly low and most of the NOx emissions stem from the
fuel bound nitrogen. The NOx emissions can still be reduced by
primarily bound nitrogen and air staging. CFD is helpful in mini-
mizing NOx emissions using optimization. But NOx emission mod-
eling is one of the most challenging tasks in CFD-based combustion
Fig. 16. (a) Close up of the gaseous composition of the products for a bed of inert and
calcinating limestone [28]. (b) Average mole fraction of O2 at different heights near the
air inlet for the three-bed compositions char ratio is lower [28].
609
modeling. The main reasons are the large number of species and
radicals in low concentrations involved in the nitrogen chemistry
and their sensitivity to temperature and turbulent motion of the
flow. Few of authors studied [11e14,95,97] mechanism of nitrogen
chemistry in bubbling bed combustor. Brink et al. [11,97] used CFD
modeling to study the fate of biomass fuel-nitrogen in the free-
board of a 70 MW FBC-new aspects on controlling mechanism for
forest residue fuel. They have developed two-step mechanisms for
modeling the fate of fuel-N from biomass fired combustion devices.
The effect of the turbulence is modeled with eddy dissipation
combustion model. They found that no influence on the NO emis-
sions could be obtained using a different air staging strategy. It is
because of fact that most of the volatile-N reacted in the lower part
of the freeboard between the second and third level of air ports.
Brink et al. [12] continued their previous work [11] and pre-
sented a modified approach for predicting NOx emissions trends
from biomass fired bubbling fluidized bed boilers. The modified
model is built on the argument that all nitrogen reactions share the
same radical pool and thus proceed at the same physical location in
the turbulent flow. Mathematically the modified EDCM for the two-
step mechanism can be written as:
 
 min ε YNH3 YO2 r1
u1 ¼ min A ; ;u (4.5)
k rNH3 ;R1 rO2 ;R1 r1 þ r2 1;chem
 
 ε min YNH3 ; YO2
u2 ¼ min A
r1
;u (4.6)
k rNH3 ;R1 rO2 ;R1 r1 þ r2 2;chem
Here À is constant and r1 is the chemical rate for NH3 oxidation
by O2 and reaction rate r2 is the chemical rate for the reaction
forming N2 from NH3 and NO. To investigate the difference between
eddy dissipation model and the modified version, a 295 MWth
bubbling fluidized bed boiler is modeled applying the both models
together with a two-step reaction mechanism for fuel-NO. With the
standard EDCM this increase resulted in a marginal increase of the
predicted NOx emission level only, indicating the insensitivity of
this model to the NO chemistry. The modified EDCM showed
a significantly higher sensitivity to the nitrogen chemistry and
allowed prediction of reasonable NOx emission trends. The modi-
fied EDCM shows expected sensitivity of the NOX emissions to the
chemical description of the reaction rates. Zabetta et al. [95] applied
CFD to study reduction of NOx by staging in biomass combustion by
homogenous detailed chemical kinetic modeling. The effect of
temperature, devolatilized hydrodynamics, volatile nitrogen com-
ponents (NH3, HCN) and number of air addition stages on NOx
formation is investigated at one dimensional, isothermal, ideal plug
flow conditions. Zhou et al. [107] has discussed computational fluid
dynamic simulation of nitrogen and sulfur oxides emissions in
a two-dimensional circulating fluidized bed combustor. Their CFD
model in two-dimensional fluidized bed combustor predicted NOx
emissions using EeE approach. In their studies the char N con-
verted to NO during char combustion and NOx is reduced to N2 by
char carbon or CO.
In all the studies except one [107] presented above, the com-
putational domain focuses on the freeboard region. There is diffi-
culty in the accurate modeling of the fuel supply as most of fuels are
80e90% pyrolyzed in flight before arriving at the bed. The
remaining 10% fuel is assumed to be fully oxidized when entering
the freeboard from the bed surface. At present, there are no detailed
models available to determine the composition of the pyrolysis gas
with respect to nitrogen containing species. The values have to be
assigned based on experience and naturally also on the nitrogen
content of the fuel. The same uncertainty exists for the determi-
nation of the composition of the main pyrolysis gas. The firing
mode of fuel to fluidized bed furnace is option to control NOx as
610 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614
explained by Brink et al. [13] in their studies. According to the CFD
optimization it would be possible to reduce the NOx emission by
substantial amount only by adjusting the air supply.
4. Present trends and challenges
CFD modeling of dense bed and freeboard/riser with combus-
tion and gasification issues has been studied separately in liter-
ature. No study is reported when both bed and freeboard have
simultaneously considered for CFD simulation. In generally EeE
TFM is used for dense bed and Lagrangian model with DPM
approach is used for freeboard/riser. As per trends turbulence
model keε is used in most of cases to study combustion and gas-
ification of fuels in fluidized bed units. Majority of studies related to
combustion and gasification in fluidized bed is done using Ansys
Fluent software. However contribution of own codes and other
software’s like MFIX cannot be ruled out. The trends could be
divided into three different approaches discussed previously, i.e. Ee
E TFM, DEMeCFD and Lagrangian DPM approach.
4.1. Trends
4.1.1. TFM EulerianeEulerian and DEMeCFD
CFD modeling of the dense bed area is complicated and accuracy
in results is not sufficient. During last decade, mass conservation and
momentum balance for gas and solid have been applied to simulate
the hydrodynamics of bubbling fluidized bed. DEM (Discrete ele-
ment method) is based on molecular dynamics and two fluid model
(TFM) is based on the assumption that the gas and particulate phases
form two inter-penetrating continuum. To model complex dense bed
with combustion and gasification issues and with the millions of
particles, huge computational times put DEM method at a dis-
advantage. In comparison to DEMeCFD, EeE TFM saves computa-
tional time. To study combustion and gasification, the EeE TFM
approach is more suitable for coal with some approximations. For
biomass like bark, cotton stalks or any other type, there is variation of
particle stream, density, porosity and the size of particle (rectangular
or cylindrical), which causes problems during modeling. The major
hurdle in prediction of accurate simulation results in these cases is
complexity of biomass. For multi scale results very fine mesh reso-
lution is required, which requires huge computational power. Pre-
sent Eulerian technique and present computational power fails to
predict dense bed characteristic in the case of biomass particles.
In the EeE TFM present trends are used to predict the charac-
teristic of fuel in dense bed and it is done mainly for lab scale units.
The focus of most of research done is for Lab scale units and it is
focused on predicting solid volume fraction, i.e. qualitative infor-
mation. Researchers used CFD to study devolatization behavior,
char oxidation, char particle physical movement in bed. EeE TFM
CFD modeling is used in literature to look the emissions for simple
two-dimensional or lab scale units. The quantitative information
for products of combustion like carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide,
SO2 and nitrogen emissions is studied in literature. Sensitivity
analysis is another issue which is being touched in literature. It is
found in literature that bed material is having little or no effect on
combustion/gasification process.
The modeling of combustion, gasification and pyrolysis in flu-
idized bed is possible with extra code inside present Ansys Fluent
Software. The computational cost of such simulations is very high,
even for two dimensions or lab scale units. The extensive code
development and the extremely high amount of memory allocation
have been slowed down the simulations significantly. The mass,
momentum and energy sources of an inert material, air and fuels in
Eulerian phase in combustion and gasification in three dimensions
would make things very complicated.
The present Eulerian technique considered few seconds of flow
time of dense fluidized bed simulations. For real fluidized bed units
the initial flow time is not important as start of units is usually done
with conventional fuels and in conventional fashion.
Authors (We) also tried to apply the EeE TFM approach for bark
in reactive dense bed of commercial scale boiler. The user defined
function (UDF) for bark combustion in the fluidized bed is created
using Arrhenius equation. The results are not satisfactory. The one
reason is shape of bark particles. The other reason is that when
combustion or gasification of fuels in dense bed is considered for
Eulerian phase, it comes with the three phases; barkesandeair and
the reaction of bark with air makes the thing more complex. Only
one author [9] reported combustion in fluidized bed of 1 MWth.
Based on this it can not be concluded that TFM EulerianeEulerian
model at present is suitable for dense beds in commercial units
when phase reactions has to be considered. Present models are
not advanced enough to be considered as useful tool for biomass
gasification-pyrolysis or combustion in dense beds.
4.1.2. Discrete particle model with Lagrangian frame
DPM using Lagrangian frame of reference is the suitable tech-
nique to simulate combustion and gasification of fuels in freeboard
area. In mainstream simulation models of gas-fluidized beds,
Lagrangian models are only used for the solid phase, in which the
particles are represented by perfect spheres for computation.
Lagrangian methods assume a small particle diameter as compared
to the gas phase computational grid. This assumption breaks down
when large particles are gasified in moderate size fluidized beds.
For Lagrangian model of different fuels a particle size distribution is
prescribed and the corresponding initial particle diameters are
assumed to remain constant during simulation. The chemistry
involved considers devolatilization, heterogeneous char conversion
and gas phases reactions.
Present trends in CFD modeling of fluidized beds using above
model is used to find various gas compositions, devolatilization,
heat flux, temperature, trajectories of particles, ash aspects. Con-
ventional fuel (coal) is used in most of cases. Most the cases are
solved for commercial boilers or three-dimensional geometries.
Although some authors used biomass but assumption underlying
them (spherical shape) is same for all the particles. Species gas
composition, heat release by particles is generally matching for all
the cases.
In one of case [105] it is being used in dense bed to look the
characteristics of biomass in simple two-dimensional config-
uration. Due to the very large number of particles involved in dense
beds, DPM approach become prohibitively expensive and making it
unsuitable for industrial dense beds.
The computational time reported for simulation with discrete
particle Lagrangian approach is comparatively very less as compare
to Eulerian approach. At present discrete particle Lagrangian model
is worked successfully for freeboard/riser of fluidized bed to study
combustion and gasification issues.
4.2. Challenges
Present industrial units are mostly FB combustors. Simulating
dense bed considering all physical and chemical reactions is
a challenge. The actual dense bed is a complex thing. It is mixture of
sand, air, fuel, char and ash. The fuel fed to dense bed is a mixture of
different size of particles. Uniform size of fuel particles in real plant
is not possible. The physical characteristics and chemical compo-
sition of biomass material influence how it can best be utilized.
Upon rapid heating, some bio fuels have high gas yields in dense
bed, rendering them suitable for gasification and reburn applica-
tions, but simulating them is major challenge for CFD. Very few
 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614
quantitative results are found in literature for industrial scale flu-
idized bed boilers.
(a) Hydrogen to carbon monoxide ratio
Quantification of hydrogen to carbon monoxide ratio in fluid-
ized bed gasifier during gasification is a critical issue than needs to
be explored.
(b) Fuel characteristics
Present research in CFD fails to predict about fuel characteristics
in fluidized bed. The evolution of biomass particle size, density,
porosity and composition during combustion and gasification in
dense bed are still unknown. These variables are affected those
variables are expected to greatly impact both the hydrodynamics of
bed and product release a function of time.
(c) Fragmentation
All the reactive fluidized bed studies have considered only global
conversion steps or multi-step kinetic schemes involving only a few
major species. Fragmentation of fuel into dense bed is major challenge
that modern CFD models faced. Simulating the complete process of
pyrolysis, one can have a realistic view of what is happening inside the
reactor. Reactor designs can be optimized for efficient char entrain-
ment, something that would increase bio-oil yields. Few of authors
tried to look tar and nitrogen in fluidized bed. The models mentioned
predict the amounts of tar, gas, and char released during pyrolysis, but
the quantitative yields of the main gas species are not predicted.
Quantitative yield of various gases is major challenge. Few bio fuels
have high char yields as compare to other and are better suited for co-
firing in direct combustion configurations.
(d) Char inventory
Char inventory is the major problem in circulating fluidized bed.
Although few authors tried to study the solid volume fraction of
sand in circulating fluidized bed. The char comes in the bed along
with sand. This is important issue where application of CFD needs
to be explored.
(e) Fuel trajectory in dense beds
The fuel particles injected on top of a bed could remain on top,
sink to the bottom of the bed or be caught in a recirculation region.
Different particle size distribution is causing different trajectories of
fuel, which involve different types of physical process and different
heat transfer models. This is an important area where application of
CFD needs to be explored.
(f) Ash sintering
Ash sintering in dense bed is the other area which needs to be
explored.
(g) Exit gas composition
Quantification of exit gas composition in reacting dense bed is
another area where application of needs to be explored. Although few
studies are reported for lab scale units, but results of these are far away
for making solid conclusion towards industrial scale furnace design.
With the proper choices of biomass, coal, dense bed and free-
board and riser reductions in pollutant and net greenhouse gas
emissions can be realized with aid of CFD.
611
4.3. Future of CFD in fluidization industry
Although the CFD modeling is used to study combustion and
gasification in fluidized bed and it will benefit the understanding of
the dynamics and physics of a fluidization operation, but aid in the
optimization and design of existing and new equipments, lab and
commercial units, constraints are the requirements for faster, easier
and less expensive CFD techniques. The future growth in applica-
tion of CFD in combustion and gasification in fluidized bed boilers
should not only be qualitative but it should be quantitative and
effective in work.
In the coming years the continued high rate of advancement in
computer power and in CFD software development will turn
automatic design and optimization in realities and the develop-
ment of fluidization with thermo-chemical reactions. All these
developments will contribute CFD to becoming a mature discipline
and a powerful engineering tool in this field. As a result, more
widespread and rapid adoption of the use of CFD in the complex
fluidized bed industry will take place in future.
5. Conclusions
This paper summarized the CFD modeling tool to study com-
bustion and gasification of fuels in fluidized bed devices. There is
evidence that CFD can be used as a powerful tool to predict char-
acteristics of fuels during combustion and gasification processes in
fluidized bed units.
CFD has played an active part in analysis of the distribution of
products, heat flux, flow, temperature, ash deposits, CO, SOx and
NOx emissions during combustion and gasification of fuels in flu-
idized bed. These parameters could affect the performance and
design. No evidence of EeE TFM CFD model influencing the design
of industrial fluidized bed units when combustion and gasification
issues involved.
The CFD model results are satisfactory and have made good
agreements with the experimental data in many cases. However,
the simulations still have many approximate models as well as
some assumptions. To ensure CFD simulations are more than just
theoretical exercises like two-dimensional units, experimental
validation is necessary to facilitate the model accuracy.
CFD modeling of commercial fluidized bed considering com-
bustion and gasification aspects using EulerianeEulerian TFM
approach still required to explore. Due to variation in size of bio-
mass particles the EulerianeEulerian approach with biomass con-
sidering combustion/gasification issues in dense fluidized beds is
not possible until wide approximations are chosen. No studies have
been reported on CFD simulation investigating both the bed and
freeboard simultaneously and applied either technique to both
dense bed and riser/freeboard of commercial units.
The understanding of Eulerian technique to fluidized beds with
thermo-chemical reactions is still in a development stage. Several
mechanism models are available but none of them is suitable for
industrial scale boilers when then thermo-chemical conversion of
fuels is considered. At present stage application of DPM Lagrangian
technique with gas phase to freeboard with thermo-chemical re-
actions is seems to satisfy fully which can affect and enhance the
performance to industrial scale fluidized bed boilers.
There are many aspects of fluidized beds where the application
of CFD modeling still needs to be explored. The aspects like fuel
combustion/gasification behavior during feeding, mixing of fuel in
the dense bed, ash sintering, fuel characteristics, char reactivity and
inventory, fragmentation of fuel in dense bed with CFD still needs
to be explored.
Although there are still some obstacles such as inability in ac-
curate simulation of large 3D problems on an affordable computer,
612 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614
in particular, in large-scale sophisticated plants, the trend of
widespread application of CFD in the fluidization industry will
continue in the 21st century. With the progressing of the com-
puting power and the development of chemical and physical
models, the CFD application in the combustion and gasification of
fuels in fluidized bed units will more widely spread in the future.
Acknowledgements
Financially support from Johan Gadolin scholarship program,
Abo Academy University, Finland is gratefully acknowledged for
this work.
References
[1] W.M. Gao, L.X. Kong, P.D. Hodgson, Computational simulation of gas flow and
heat transfer near an immersed object in fluidized beds, Advances in Engi-
neering Software 38 (2007) 826e834.
[2] Y. Behjat, S. Shahhosseini, S.H. Hashemabadi, CFD modeling of hydrodynamic
and heat transfer in fluidized bed reactors, International Communications in
Heat and Mass Transfer 35 (2008) 357e368.
[3] N.V. Gnanapragasam, B.V. Reddy, Numerical modeling of axial bed-to-wall
heat transfer in a circulating fluidized bed combustor, International Journal
of Heat and Mass Transfer 52 (2009) 1657e1666.
[4] W. Wang, B. Lu, N. Zhang, Z. Shi, J. Li, A review of multiscale CFD for gasesolid
CFB modeling, International Journal of Multiphase Flow 36 (2010) 109e118.
[5] X.Z. Chen, D.P. Shi, X. Gao, Z.H. Luo, A fundamental CFD study of the gase
solid flow field in fluidized bed polymerization reactors, Powder Technology
205 (2011) 276e278.
[6] W. Zhou, C.S. Zhao, L. Duan, C.R. Qu, X.P. Chen, Two-dimensional computa-
tional fluid dynamics simulation of coal combustion in a circulating fluidized
bed combustor, Chemical Engineering Journal 166 (1) (2011) 306e314.
[7] W. Zhou, C.S. Zhao, L. Duan, D. Liu, X.P. Chen, CFD modeling of oxy-coal
combustion in circulating fluidized bed, International Journal of Green-
house Gas Control 5 (6) (2011) 1489e1497.
[8] W Zhou, C S Zhao, L Duan, C R Qu, J Y Lu, X P Chen, Numerical simulation on
hydrodynamics and combustion in a circulating fluidized bed under O2/CO2
and air atmospheres, in: Proceeding of 20th International Conference on
Fluidized bed combustion, 2009, pp. 883e888.
[9] Nikolopoulos I., Rampidis, N. Nikolopoulos, P. Grammelis, E. Kakaras, Nu-
merical investigation of 3-d transient combusting flow in a 1.2 MWth pilot
power plant, in: Proceeding of 20th International Conference on Fluidized
bed combustion, 2009, pp. 839e844.
[10] K. Myöhänen , T. Hyppänen, A. Vepsäläinen, Modelling of circulating fluid-
ized bed combustion with a semi-empirical three-dimensional model, SIMS
2006, in: Proceedings of the 47th Conference on Simulation and Modelling,
2006, pp. 194e199.
[11] A Brink, S Bostrom, P Kilpinen and M Hupa, CFD modeling of the fate of
biomass fuel-nitrogen in the freeboard of a 70 MW FBC-new aspects on
controlling mechanisms, in: First biennial meeting, The Scandinavian-Nordic
Section of the Combustion Institute 18th to 20th April 2001, Chalmers
University of Technology, Goteborg, Sweden.
[12] A. Brink, C. Mueller, M. Hupa, A modified approach for predicting NOx
emission trends from biomass fired bubbling fluidized bed boilers, in: Pro-
ceeding of 19th FBC conference, May 21e24, 2006.
[13] A. Brink, M. Hupa, E. Kurkela, M. Suomalainen, Minimizing NOx emission
from a waste derived fuel gasifier gas combustor using CFD combined with
detailed chemistry, IFRF Combustion Journal. ISSN: 1562-479X 05 (2005).
ISSN: 1562-479X 1e14.
[14] R. Zevenhoven, M. Järvinen, Particle/turbulence interactions, mass transfer
and gas/solid chemistry in a CFBC riser, Flow Turbulence and Combustion 67
(2) (2001) 107e124.
[15] C. Mueller, A. Brink, M. Hupa, Numerical simulation of the combustion
behavior of different biomasses in a bubbling fluidized bed boiler, in: Pro-
ceedings of 18th International conference on Fluidized bed combustion,
Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 2005.
[16] C. Mueller, B.J. Skrifvars, R. Backman, S. Nickull, M. Hupa, Simulation of ash
particle behaviour on surfaces of biomass fired fluidized bed boilers-
combination of computational fluid dynamics and advanced ash analysis,
in: Proceedings of 16th International conference on Fluidized bed combus-
tion, Reno, Nevada USA, Sustainable fuels-Biomass, Paper No. 139, 2001.
[17] C. Mueller, B.J. Skrifvars, R. Backman, M. Hupa, Ash deposition prediction in
biomass fired fluidized bed boilers-combination of CFD and advanced fuel
analysis, Progress in Computational Fluid dynamics 3 (2e4) (2003) 112e120.
[18] C. Mueller, D. Lundmark, B.J. Skrifvars, M. Hupa, CFD based ash deposition
prediction in a bubbling fluidised bed combustor firing mixtures of bio-
masses, in: Proceeding Finnish-Swedish Flame Days, Vassa, Finland, 2002.
[19] D. Lundmark, C. Mueller, B.J. Skrifvars, M. Hupa, Computational fluid dy-
namic modeling of combustion and ash deposition in a biomass co-fired
bubbling fluidized bed boiler, International Journal Energy Cleaner Envi-
ronment 8 (2007) 2.
[20] D. Lundmark, C. Mueller, R. Backman, M. Zevenhoven, B.J. Skrifvars, M. Hupa,
CFD based ash deposition prediction in a BFBC firing mixtures of peat and
forest residue, Journal of Energy Resources Technology, Transactions of the
ASME 132 (2010) 3.
[21] S. Ravelli, A. Perdichizzi, G. Barigozzi, Description, applications and numer-
ical modeling of bubbling fluidized bed combustion in waste-to-energy
plants, Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 34 (2008) 224e253.
[22] M. Rozainee, S.P. Ngo, A.A. Salema, K.G. Tan, Computational fluid dynamics
modeling of rice husk combustion in a fluidized bed combustor, Powder
Technology 203 (2010) 331e347.
[23] M. Agraniotis, D. Stamatis, P. Grammelisand Kakaras, Numerical inves-
tigation on the combustion behavior of pre-dried Greek lignite, Fuel 88 (12)
(2009) 2385e2391.
[24] A.Brink, O. Karlström, M. Hupa, A simplified model for the behavior of large
biomass particles in the splashing zone of a bubbling bed, in: Proceeding of 20th
International Conference on Fluidized bed combustion, 2009, pp. 764e767.
[25] W. Yuxin, L.V. Junfu, J. Zhang, L. Qing, Yue Guangxi, Y. Zhang, Y. Long, Z. Yang,
Conceptual design of an 800 MW supercritical pressure circulating fluidized
bed boiler, Boiler Technology 3 (48) (2004) 1e5.
[26] Energy Efficiency in Thermal Utilities. A Guide Book for Energy Managers and
Auditors, Bureau of Energy Efficiency, Ministry of Power, Government of
India, 2005.
[27] M. Hupa, Current status and challenges within fluidized bed combustion, in:
N. Syred, A. Khalatov (Eds.), Advanced Combustion and Aerothermal Tech-
nologies, Springer, Netherland, 2005, pp. 87e101.
[28] L.M. Armstrong, S. Gu, K.H. Luo, Parametric study of gasification processes in
a BFB coal gasifier, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research 50 (2011)
5959e5974.
[29] T. Kimura, T. Kojima, Numerical model for reactions in a jetting fluidized bed
coal gasifier, Chemical Engineering Science 47 (1992) 2529e2534.
[30] B. Jicheng, L. Chunhao, K.C. Aoki, S. Umea, T. Kojima, A numerical simulation
of jetting fluidized bed coal gasifier, Fuel 76 (4) (1997) 285e301.
[31] K. Myohanen, T. Hyppanen, A three-dimensional model frame for modeling
combustion and gasification in circulating fluidized bed furnaces, Interna-
tional Journal of Chemical Reactor Engineering 9 (A25) (2011) 1e55.
[32] P. Pepiot, C.J. Dibble, T.D. Foust, Computational fluid dynamics modeling of
biomass gasification and pyrolysis. Computational modeling in lignocellu-
losic biofuel production, in: ACS Symposium Series, vol. 1052, 2010. pp. 273e
298, (Chapter 12).
[33] N.G. Deen, M.V. Annaland, M.A. Van der Hoef, J.A.M. Kuipers, Numerical
simulation of dense gas-solid fluidized beds: A multiscale modeling strategy,
Chemical Engineering Science 62 (2007) 28e44.
[34] D. Gera, M. Gautam, Y. Tsuji, T. Kawaguchi, T. Tanaka, Computer simulation
of bubbles in large-particle fluidized beds, Powder Technology 98 (1998)
3847.
[35] D. Gera, M. Syamlal, T.O. Brien, Hydrodynamics of particle segregation in
fluidized beds, International Journal of Multiphase Flow 30 (2004) 419e428.
[36] C. Ibsen, E. Helland, B. Hjertager, T. Solberg, L. Tadrist, R. Occelli, Comparison of
multi fluid and discrete particle modeling in numerical predictions of gas par-
ticle flow in circulating fluidized beds, Powder Technology 149 (2004) 29e41.
[37] K. Papadikis, A.V. Bridgwater, S. Gu, CFD modeling of the fast pyrolysis of
biomass in fluidised bed reactors, part A: Eulerian computation of mo-
mentum transport in bubbling fluidized beds, Chemical Engineering Science
63 (16) (2008) 4218e4227.
[38] K. Papadikis, S. Gu, A.V. Bridgwater, A CFD approach on the effect of particle
size on char entrainment in bubbling fluidised bed reactors, Biomass and
Bioenergy 34 (2010) 21e29.
[39] L.M. Armstrong, S. Gu, K.H. Luo, Effects of limestone calcination on the
gasification processes in a BFB coal gasifier, Chemical Engineering Journal
168 (2011) 848e860.
[40] C.E.J. Bakul, V.Y. Gershtein, L. Xianming, Computational Fluid Dynamics in
Industrial Combustion, CRC Press, New York, 2001.
[41] FLUENT 6 User’s Guide, Fluent Incorporated, Centerra Resource Park, 10
Cavendish Court, Lebanon NH 03766, 2002.
[42] D. Lathouwers, J. Bellan, Yield optimization and scaling of fluidized beds for
tar production from biomass, Energy Fuels 15 (2001) 1247e1262.
[43] A.M. Eaton, L.D. Smoot, S.C. Hill, C.N. Eatough, Components, formulations,
solutions, evaluation, and application of comprehensive combustion models,
Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 25 (1999) 387e436.
[44] J.C. Wurzenberger, S. Wallner, H. Raupenstrauch, J.G. Khinast, Thermal con-
version of biomass: comprehensive reactor and particle modeling, AICHE
Journal 48 (10) (2002) 2398e2411.
[45] J. Pallares, I. Arauzo, A. Williams, Integration of CFD codes and advanced
combustion models for quantitative burnout determination, Fuel 86 (2007)
2283e2290.
[46] B.E. Launder, D.B. Spalding, Lectures in Mathematical Models of Turbulence,
Academic Press, London, 1972.
[47] L. Yu, J. Lu, X. Zhang, S. Zhang, Numerical simulation of the bubbling fluidized
bed coal gasification by the kinetic theory of granular flow (KTGF), Fuel 86
(2007) 722e734.
[48] C. Lun, S. Savage, D. Jeffrey, N. Chepurniy, Kinetic theories for granular flow:
Inelastic particles in Couette flow and slightly inelastic particles in a general
flow field, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 140 (1984) 223e256.
 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614
[49] J. Jenkins, S. Savage, A theory for the rapid flow of identical smooth nearly
elastic spherical particles, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 130 (1983) 187e202.
[50] D. Gidaspow, Multiphase Flow and Fluidization: Continuum and Kinetic
Theory Descriptions, Academic Press, London, 1994.
[51] D.J. Gunn, Transfer of heat or mass to particles in fixed and fluidized beds,
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 21 (1978) 467e476.
[52] H.K. Versteeg, W. Malalasekera, An Introduction to Computational Fluid
Dynamics: The Finite Volume Method, Pearson Publishers, 2007.
[53] D. Liu, X. Chen, W. Zhou, C. S Zhao, Simulation of char and propane com-
bustion in a fluidized bed by extending DEMeCFD approach, Proceedings of
the Combustion Institute 33 (2) (2011) 2701e2708.
[54] Y. Wang, L. Yan, CFD modeling of a fluidized bed sewage sludge gasifier for
syngas, Asia-Pacific Journal of Chemical Engineering 3 (2008) 161e170.
[55] Y. Geng, D. Che, An extended DEMeCFD model for char combustion in
a bubbling fluidized bed combustor of inert sand, Chemical Engineering
Science 66 (2011) 207e219.
[56] D. Rong, M. Horio, DEM simulation of char combustion in a fluidized bed”, in:
Second International Conference on CFD in the Minerals and Process In-
dustries CSIRO, Melbourne, Australia, 1999, pp. 65e70.
[57] W. Zukowski, J. Baron, E.M. Bulewicz, B. Kowarska, Propagation of reaction
between bubbles with a gas burning in a fluidized bed, Combustion and
Flame 156 (2009) 1445e1452.
[58] S.H. Enestam, M.K. Fabritius, S.K. Hulkkonen, J.T.R. öppänen, Control of ash
related operational problems in BFB combustion of biofuels and waste, in:
Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Fluidized Bed Com-
bustion, 2003, pp. 541e546.
[59] C. Mueller, D. Lundmark, B.J. Skrifvars, R. Backman, M. Zehevhovan, M. Hupa,
CFD based ash deposition prediction in a BFB firing mixtures of peat and
forest residue, in: Proceeding of 17th International (ASME) Conference on
Fluidized Bed Combustion, Jacksonville, Florida. Paper No. 102, 2003.
[60] D.J. Farias, F. Severino, F. Maciel, R. Lucena, S. DaSilva, D. Jornandes, CFD
study on natural gas fluidized bed combustors, in: IChE Annual Meeting,
Conference Proceedings, AIChE Spring National Meeting, 2006.
[61] S. Noorman, M.V. Annaland, H. Kuipers, Packed bed reactor technology for
chemical-looping combustion, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry
Research 46 (12) (2007) 4212e4220.
[62] S. Noorman, M.V. Annaland, H. Kuipers, Experimental validation of packed
bed chemical-looping combustion, Chemical Engineering Science 65 (1)
(2010) 92e97.
[63] N.V. Gnanapragasam, B.V. Reddy, M.A. Rosen, Hydrogen production from
coal using coal direct chemical looping and syngas chemical looping com-
bustion systems: assessment of system operation and resource re-
quirements, International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 34 (2009) 2606e2615.
[64] L. Fan, F. Li, S. Ramkumar, Utilization of chemical looping strategy in coal
gasification processes, Particuology 6 (2008) 131e142.
[65] A. Lyngfelt, B. Leckner, T. Mattisson, A fluidized-bed combustion process
with inherent CO2 separation; application of chemical-looping combustion,
Chemical Engineering Science 56 (10) (2001) 3101e3113.
[66] S.R. Son, S.D. Kim, Chemical-looping combustion with NiO and Fe2O3 in
a thermobalance and circulating fluidized bed reactor with double loops,
Industrial Engineering and Chemical Research 45 (8) (2006) 2689e2696.
[67] M.M. Hossaina, H.I. DeLasa, Chemical-looping combustion (CLC) for inherent
co2 separations e a review, Chemical Engineering Science 63 (18) (2008)
4433e4451.
[68] H. Kruggel-Emden, S. Rickelt, F. Stepanek, A. Munjiza, Development and
testing of an interconnected multiphase CFD-model for chemical looping
combustion, Chemical Engineering Science 65 (2010) 4732e4745.
[69] J.E. Readman, A. Olafsen, J.B. Smith, R. Blom, Chemical looping combustion
using NiO/NiAl2O4: mechanism and kinetics of reduction-oxidation(Red-ox)
reactions from in situ powder X ray diffraction and thermo gravimetric ex-
periments, Energy Fuels 20 (2006) 1382e1387.
[70] W. Shuai, Y. Yang, H. Lu, J. Wang, P. Xu, Liu Guodong, Hydrodynamic simu-
lation of fuel-reactor in chemical looping combustion process, Chemical
Engineering Research and Design 8 (9) (2011) 1501e1510.
[71] Z. Deng, R. Xiao, B. Jin, Q. Song, H. Huang, Multiphase CFD modeling for
a chemical looping combustion process (fuel reactor), Chemical Engineering
Technology 31 (12) (2008) 1754e1766.
[72] K. Mahalatkar, J. Kuhlman, E.D. Huckaby, T.O. Brien, Simulations of a circu-
lating fluidized bed chemical looping combustion system utilizing gaseous
fuel, Oil and Gas Science and Technology Review, IFP Energies Nouvelles 66
(2) (2011) 301e331.
[73] X. Wang, B. Jin, Y. Zhang, W. Zhong, S. Yin, Multiphase computational fluid
dynamics (CFD) modeling of chemical looping combustion using a CuO/Al2O3
oxygen carrier: effect of operating conditions on coal gas combustion, Energy
Fuels 25 (2011) 3815e3824.
[74] B. Jin, R. Xiaoy, Z. Deng, Q. Song, Computational fluid dynamics modeling of
chemical looping combustion process with calcium sulphate oxygen carrier,
International Journal of chemical Reactor Engineering 7 (2009) A19.
[75] Z. Deng, R. Xiao, B. Jin, Q. Song, Numerical simulation of chemical looping
combustion process with CaSO4 oxygen carrier, International Journal of
Greenhouse Gas Control 3 (4) (2009) 368e375.
[76] J. Jung, I.K. Gamwo, Multiphase CFD-based models for chemical looping
combustion process: fuel reactor modeling, Powder Technology 183 (3)
(2008) 401e409.
613
[77] S. Gerber, F. Behrendt, M. Overmann, An Eulerian modeling approach of
wood gasification in a bubbling fluidized bed reactor using char as bed
material, Fuel 89 (2010) 2903e2917.
[78] X.F. Wang, B. Jin, W. Zhong, Three-dimensional simulation of fluidized bed
coal gasification, Chemical Engineering and Processing 48 (2009) 695e705.
[79] Z. Deng, R. Xiao, B. Jin, H. Huang, L. Shen, Q. Song, L. Qianjun, Computational
fluid dynamics modeling of coal gasification in a pressurized spout-fluid bed,
Energy and Fuels 22 (2008) 1560e1569.
[80] L.M. Armstrong, S. Gu, K.H. Luo, CFD modelling of the co-gasification of
biomass and coal particles in fluidized beds, in: Proceedings of the Bioten
Conference on Biomass Bioenergy and Biofuels 2010, CRC Press, Birmingham,
GB, 2010.
[81] L. He, E. Schotte, S. Thomas, A. Schlinkert, A. Herrmann, V. Mosch, V.
Rajendran, S. Heinrich, 2009, Wood gasification in a lab-scale bubbling flu-
idized bed: experiment and simulation, in: Proceeding of 20th International
Conference on fluidized bed combustion, Xian, China, 2009, pp. 686e692.
[82] Y.L. Tang, D. Jun Liu, Y. Hong Liu, Q. Luo, 3D computational fluid dynamics
simulation of natural coke steam gasification in general and improved flu-
idized beds, Energy Fuels 24 (2010) 5602e5610.
[83] R.S. Miller, J. Bellan, A generalized biomass pyrolysis model based on
superimposed cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin kinetics, Combustion Sci-
ence and Technology 126 (1997) 97e138.
[84] L. Qianjun, M. Zhang, W. Zhong, X. Wang, R. Xiao, B. Jin, Simulation of coal
gasification in a pressurized spout-fluid bed gasifier, Canadian Journal of
Chemical Engineering 87 (2) (2009) 169e176.
[85] S. Gerber, F. Behrendt, M. Oevermann, Comparative study of EulereEuler and
EulereLagrange modelling of wood gasification in a dense fluidized bed, in:
Proceeding of the 20th International Conference on FBC, 2009, pp. 693e699.
[86] P. Cornejo, O. Farıas, Mathematical modeling of coal gasification in a fluidized
bed reactor using a Eulerian granular description, International Journal of
Chemical Reactor Engineering 9 (A2) (2011) 1e3.
[87] S. Karimipour, T. Pugsley, R.J. Spiteri, CFD simulation of a fluidized bed gasifier
operating with lignite coal, AICHE, Annual Meeting, Paper no. 465a, 2010.
[88] M. Zhou, L.F. Yan, Q.X. Guo, Q.S. Zhu, Non premixed combustion model of
fluidized bed biomass gasifier for hydrogen rich gas, Chinese Journal of
Chemical Physics 19 (2) (2006) 131e136.
[89] Y. Wang, L. Yan, CFD based combustion model for sewage sludge gasification
in a fluidized bed, Frontiers of Chemical Engineering in China 3 (2) (2009)
138e145.
[90] T.J. Obrien, M. Syamlal, C.Guenther, Computational fluid dynamic simula-
tions of chemical reactive fluidized bed process, in: Third International
Conference on CFD in the Minerals and Process Industries CSIRO, Melbourne,
Australia, 2003, pp. 469e474.
[91] B. Chalermsinsuwan, P. Kuchonthar, P. Piumsomboon, CFD modeling of
tapered circulating fluidized bed reactor risers: hydrodynamic descriptions
and chemical reaction responses, Chemical Engineering and Processing 49
(2010) 1144e1160.
[92] A.K.M.M. Mazumder, T.Wang, J.R. Khan, Design and simulation of a hybrid
entrained flow and fluidized bed mild gasifier Part 1 e Design considerations
and development of a multiphase model, in: Proceedings of the ASME 2011
International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition IMECE, 2011,
pp. 1e12.
[93] A.K.M.M. Mazumder, T. Wang, J.R. Khan, Design and simulation of a hybrid
entrained-flow and fluidized bed mild gasifier part 2 e case study and
analysis, in: Proceedings of the International Mechanical Engineering Con-
gress and Exposition IMECE 2011, Denver, Colorado, USA, 2011, pp. 1e12.
[94] Q.J. Li, X.J. Pan, D.P. Zhang, B. Jiang, Numerical simulation of biomass gas-
ification in a fluidized bed, Chinese Journal of Power Engineering 8 (2011)
624e629.
[95] E.C. Zabetta, T. Norstrom, P. Kilpinen, M. Hupa, NOx Reduction by Staging in
Biomass Combustion e A Kinetic and CFD Modelling Study, The Joint
Swedish Finnish Flame Day, IFRF, Vexjo, Sweden, 1999, pp. 1e17.
[96] D. Sofialidis, O. Faltsi, Simulation of biomass gasification in fluidized beds using
computational fluid dynamics approach, Thermal Science 5 (2) (2001) 95e105.
[97] A. Brink, S. Bostrom, P. Kilpinen, M. Hupa, Modeling nitrogen chemistry in
the freeboard of biomass FBC, IFRF Combustion Journal A-07 (2001) 1e14.
[98] M. Gräbner, S. Ogriseck, B. Meyer, Numerical simulation of coal gasification
at circulating fluidized bed conditions, Fuel Processing Technology 88 (10)
(2007) 948e958.
[99] H.M. Xiao, X.Q. Ma, K. Liu, Z.S. Yu, Numerical simulation of sludge dryness
under flue gas atmosphere in the riser of a fluidized bed, in: Proceeding of
20th International Conference on FBC, 2009, pp. 812e816.
[100] Z.S. Yu, X.Q. Ma, Z.Y. Lai, H.M. Xiao, CFD modelling applied to the co-
combustion of paper sludge and coal in a 130 t/h CFB boiler, in: Proceed-
ing of 20th International conference on fluidized bed combustion, 2009, pp.
1165e1170.
[101] R. Wischnewski, L. Ratschow, E.U. Hartge, J. Werther, 3D-simulation of
concentration distributions inside large-scale circulating fluidized bed
combustors, in: Proceeding of 20th International Conference on Fluidized
bed combustion, 2009, pp. 774e779.
[102] L. Ratschow, R. Wischnewski, E.U. Hartge, J. Werther, Three-dimensional
simulation of temperature distributions in large-scale circulating fluidized
bed combustors, in: Proceeding of 20th International Conference on Fluid-
ized bed combustion, 2009, pp. 780e785.
614 R.I. Singh et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 585e614
[103] P. Jinsoo, T.Y. Mun, J.S. Kim, G.H. Rhee, Numerical simulation of woody waste
gasification in two stage fluidized bed gasifier, Journal of Korea Solid Wastes
Recycling 27 (8) (2010) 700e708.
[104] S. Dale, M.C. Samuel, J. O’Rourke Peter, EulerianeLagrangian method for
three-dimensional thermal reacting flow with application to coal gasifiers,
Chemical Engineering Science 66 (2011) 1285e1295.
[105] S. Gerber, M. Overman, EulereLagrange modeling of wood gasification in
dense fluidized beds, in: First ERCOFTAC conference on simulation of mul-
tiphase flows in gasification and combustion, 2011, pp. 40e46.
[106] M.Weng, J. Plackmeyer, Comparison between measurements and numerical
simulation of particle flow and combustion at the Duisburg CFBC plant, in:
Proceeding of International conference on circulating fluidized beds and
fluidization technology-CFB-10, May 1e5, 2011.
[107] W. Zhou, C.S. Zhao, L.B. Duan, X.P. Chen, C. Liang, Two-dimensional com-
putational fluid dynamics simulation of nitrogen and sulfur oxides emissions
in a circulating fluidized bed combustor, Chemical Engineering Journal 173
(2011) 564e573.
[108] H.M. Yan, C. Heidenreich, D.K. Zhang, Mathematical modeling of a bubbling
fluidized-bed coal gasifier and the significance of net flow, Fuel 77 (1998)
1067e1079.
[109] R.M. Taha, Modelling and Simulation for Coal Gasification, IEA Pubs, 2000.
[110] D. Kunii, O. Levenspiel, Fluidization Engineering, Butterworth-Heinemann, 1991.
[111] P. Basu, Combustion and Gasification in Fluidized Beds, Taylor and Francis,
2006.
[112] S. Oka, Fluidized Bed Combustion, Marcel Dekker Inc, 2003.
[113] M.L.D. Santos, Solid Fuels Combustion and Gasification, Marcel Dekker Inc,
2005.
[114] Y. Tsuji, T. Kawaguchi, T. Tanaka, Discrete particle simulation of two-
dimensional fluidized bed, Powder Technology 77 (1) (1993) 79e87.
[115] H. Kobayashi, J.B. Howard, A.F. Sarofim, Coal devolatilization at high tem-
peratures, in: Proc. 16th International Symposium on Combustion, 1976.
[116] C.X. Chen, M. Horio, T. Koijima, Numerical simulation of entrained flow coal
gasifiers. Part I: Modeling of coal gasification in entrained flow gasifier,
Chemical Engineering Science 55 (2000) 3861e3874.