Bioresource Technology 48 (1994) 229- 235

1994 Elsevier Science Limited

Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved
0960- 8524/ 94/ $7. 00
ELSEVIER
SCALE-UP OF DOWNDRAFT MOVING BED GASIFIERS
( 25- 300 k g / h ) - DESIGN, EXPERIMENTAL ASPECTS AND
RESULTS
Pedro Garcia-Bacaicoa, Rafael Bilbao,* Jestis Arauzo & M. Luisa Salvador
Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering, University of Zaragoza, 50009 Zaragoza, Spain
(Received 20 December 1993; revised version received 4 February 1994; accepted 15 February 1994)
Abstract i n s ome speci fi c i ndust r i al si t uat i ons (usi ng t he site
Two installations wi t h different bi omass processi ng waste). Gas i f i er / engi ne syst ems f uel l ed wi t h u n p r o -
capacities ( 25- 50 and 200- 300 kg/h) were desi gned and ces s ed bi omas s t e nd t o be of t he movi ng- be d down-
constructed f o r air gasification o f lignocellulosic biomass, dr af t t ype be c a us e of t he ability of downdr a f t gasifiers
This paper describes bot h installations as well as the t o p r o d u c e l ow- t ar gas ( Mendi s, 1989). Mor eover , t he
experi ment al procedure. The influence o f operating downdr a f t gasifier pr es ent s several s uppl e me nt a r y
condi t i ons on t he amount and qual i t y o f product s was advant ages (Bi l bao & Fer nandez, 1988) whi ch i ndi cat e
determined. The results obt ai ned f r o m processi ng t hat it is a ppr opr i a t e f or aver age pr oces s i ng capaci t i es.
forestry waste are analysed. Values above 90% f or mass I n t he 1980s a p r o g r a mme was i ni t i at ed t o de ve l op a
conversion efficiency and over 70% f or coM gas effi- gasifier syst em t o us e bi omas s ge ne r a t e d i n Spai n. T h e
ci encywere reached, opt i on c hos e n was ai r gasi fi cat i on i n a downdr a f t
movi ng- be d gasifier. T h e st udy of t he i nf l uence of bot h
Key words: bi omas s gasi fi cat i on, ai r gasi fi cat i on, down- oper at i ng condi t i ons a nd scal e- up i nvol ved t he con-
dr af t movi ng bed, gasifier desi gn, mass efficiency, s t r nct i on and ope r a t i on of several gasifiers ( Gr oe ne -
ener gy efficiency, vel d & Van Swaaij, 1979; L' Ecuyer & Huf f man, 1981;
Wal awender et aL, 1985). I n o r d e r t o s t udy t he scal e- up
pr obl e ms i n t he d e v e l o p me n t st age of o u r gasi fi cat i on
I NT RODUCT I ON opt i on, t wo di f f er ent pl ant s wer e des i gned, bui l t a nd
oper at ed. I nst al l at i on A, wi t h a pr oces s i ng capaci t y
Ai r gasi fi cat i on is a t h e r mo c h e mi c a l pr oces s whi ch be t we e n 25 and 50 kg bi oma s s / h and i nst al l at i on B
utilises l i gnocel l ul osi c wast es wi t hout any ext er nal wi t h a capaci t y be t we e n 200 and 300 kg bi omas s / h.
ener gy cont r i but i on. T h e ma i n ai m of t he pr oc e s s is t o Resul t s obt a i ne d i n c onve nt i ona l downdr a f t r eact or s
obt ai n gas of t he hi ghest possi bl e heat i ng val ue. I n ( For i nt ek Ca n a d a Cor por a t i on, 1981; Twe nt e Uni -
s ome cases o n e fact whi c h i mpr ove s t he e c o n o mi c versity, 1981; Hoi & Br i dgwat er , 1989; Lar s on, 1989;
viability of t he pr oces s is t he s i mul t aneous p r o d u c t i o n Me ndi s et aL, 1989; Sheng, 1989; Tal i b et aL, 1989)
of char coal whi c h has an addi t i onal ma r ke t val ue a nd i n st rat i fi ed o p e n - c o r e gasifiers (Walter et aL,
(Ferrero, 1990). 1985; Ea r p & Br i dgwat er , 1987; Tavangar, 1988;
Th e r e are essent i al l y t hr ee t ypes of r eact or f or Ti angco, 1990) have be e n r epor t ed. Mos t of t hes e
bi omas s gasification: movi ng be d ( or fi xed bed), fl ui d- gasifiers have a bi omas s c o n s u mp t i o n l ower t ha n
i sed b e d a nd e nt r a i ne d f l ow ( Gr oe ne ve l d & Van 100 kg/ h. Several d i f f i c u l t i e s a p p e a r wh e n t h e s e r e s u l t s
Swaaij, 1979). Bo t h t he f u n d a me n t a l pr i nci pl es and t he ar e c ompa r e d. T h e first is t hat each i nst al l at i on had its
r ange of p r o d u c t s of each t ype of gasifier are wel l o wn i dent i t y a nd t he r esul t s wer e obt a i ne d u n d e r
est abl i shed ( Reed et aL, 1980). T h e choi ce of gasifier similar, but not i dent i cal , ope r a t i ng condi t i ons. T h e
t ype d e p e n d s o n t he t ype of f uel t o be gasi fi ed a nd t he s e c ond is t he na r r ow r ange of oper at i ng condi t i ons i n
e nd- us e of t he gas p r o d u c e d . A gasifier c oupl e d t o an whi ch each wor k was done. Fi nal l y, aut hor s have pr e-
i nt er nal c o mb u s t i o n engi ne is cur r ent l y an at t ract i ve s ent ed t hei r r esul t s i n di f f er ent ways.
way of gener at i ng shaft p o we r or el ect ri ci t y f r o m bi o- I n this pa pe r t he resul t s obt a i ne d i n t wo di f f er ent
mass i n t he p o we r r ange of a f ew ki l owat t s t o several i nst al l at i ons of di f f er ent size, but usi ng t he s ame bi o-
megawat t s ( Beenacker s & Br i dgwat er , 1989). Thi s mass, ar e pr es ent ed. T h e ai m of t he wor k was t o sol ve
syst em coul d be at t r act i ve i n de ve l opi ng count r i es and t he scal e- up pr obl e ms a nd t o r each i n a s e mi - c omme r -
cial i nst al l at i on yi el ds at least si mi l ar t o t hos e obt a i ne d
*To whom the correspondence should be addressed, i n a smal l er pl ant .
229
230 P. Garcia-Bacaicoa et al.
METHODS s00
a ~
Both installations had a similar structure, although I Ain i
there were some differences bet ween t hem due mainly v a m~ s ,
to their different sizes. They basically consisted of 'i-" "g" ~ - -
gasifier and systems for biomass and air feeding, ash
removal system and gas conditioning (cyclone and heat ~'R~ ~ ~11
exchanger) systems. The processes occurring in the ~ ~ i~
g a sifie r are a l r e a d y k n o w n ( B a c o n e t a l . , 1 9 8 4 ; I ~ i
Buekens & Schoeters, 1985) and only some specific
aspects of the system design will be shown. ,' /t
An important aspect of this gasifier type is the r / /
design of its oxidation zone in order to crack the tars
and oils formed in the pyrolysis zone. Several met hods i
have been proposed (Groeneveld & Van Swaaij, 1980; ~ ~ ~ ~ ,,/,,
Kaupp & Goss, 1981; Van Swaaij, 1981; Esplin e t al.,
1986). From these met hods a reduction of the gasifier ~0
cross-section by means of a so-called throat was ~
selected. The air was i nt roduced from t he top of the
gasifier using a central air inlet. The throat size
depends on the value of the biomass consumpt i on- _ Ga~
area relationship and for a good operat i on should be
bet ween 0"05 and 1.0 kg biomass/s m 2 throat (Groene-
veld, 1980; Groenevel d & Van Swaaij, 1980; Kaupp & ('AS
Goss, 1981). SCREW CONVEYOR
Gases and charcoal from t he combustion zone react ~ 1 ~ 4AOk'
in t he reduct i on zone. The gas yield is a function of t he ' t . /
q
residence time in this zone. A volume of the reduct i on
zone greater than 0"5 m3/m 2 throat is widely accept ed Fig. 1. Main dimensions (in mm) of the gasifier in installa-
as sufficient (Twente University, 1981). tion A (25-50 kg/h).
Concerni ng t he biomass feeding and solid removal
systems, different designs for each installation were
used.
was i nt roduced into the gasifier by means of an elec-
Description of i ns t al l at i onA( 25- 50 kg/h) trically driven piston working in regular strokes. In
Figure 1 shows a plan of the gasifier where t he main each stroke, a batch of 5- 6 kg of material was intro-
dimensions are indicated. The gasifier wall consisted of duced.
two concentric, 110-ram-thick, brick layers. The i nner At the gasifier exit, t he gas product passed through a
layer was built of refract ory material (high alumina stainless-steel cyclone 250 cm in di amet er and through
content), whereas the out er layer was built of a ther- a heat-exchanger.
mally insulating material. The throat cross-section of Temperat ure was measured at several points in t he
the oxidation zone was designed using a nominal installation (in the gasifier and in the air and gas pipes)
biomass processing capacity of 50 kg/ h and a value of and t he gas composition (N2, H2, CO, CO2, CH4) was
0"283 kg/s m 2 throat, det ermi ned by chromatography.
The bed rest ed on a grid in the bot t om of the gasi-
tier. This grid was also used to regulate t he biomass Description of installation B ( 2 0 0 - 3 0 0 kg/h)
residence time in the gasifier by removing t he ash in t he Figure 2 shows the gasifier plan where the main dimen-
lower zone. The grid was covered with 10 mm dia- sions are indicated. Internally it was hexagonal in
met er holes and it was connect ed to a vibrator which shape. For a nominal biomass consumpt i on of
operat ed at constant time intervals. 200 kg/h t he throat design paramet er had a value of
A rootes blower provi ded an unchanging air flow 0"342 kg/s m 2 throat.
rate of 100 Nm3/h. A bypass system allowed air to be A ceramic material with a density of 350 kg/ m 3 was
fed to t he gasifier at lower rates as required. Ai r was used t o build the gasifier body. This material had good
preheat ed by being passed through a heat-exchanger, insulating properties. The external wall was a carbon-
The air flow rate was measured by means of a rota- steel shell.
met er with an aluminium float. The bed rested on an eccentric rotating grate in t he
The biomass feeding was connect ed directly to t he bot t om of t he gasifier. It was connect ed to a mot or
top of t he gasifier in or der to avoid leaks. It consisted which operat ed at constant time intervals which
of a 700 litre hopper in which t he biomass amount allowed regulation of t he residence time of the
required for a run was loaded in one batch. The feed biomass.
Downdraft moving bed biomass gasifiers 231
:_ 10ao . j compart ment (350 mm x 730 mm) cl osed at bot h ends
~" i .._ -, by t wo gate valves (350 mm diameter) which ensured
that the gas was sealed off. Biomass was t ransport ed to
the t op of the system from the fl oor level using a belt
conveyor. This system fed bi omass in a quasi-con-
tinuous way.
At the gasifier exit, gas passed through a stainless
steel cyclone 0-547 m in diameter. A heat exchanger
was fitted in the gas stream. The gas line was insulated
by ceramic wool as far as the cyclone exit. The off-gas
was burnt in a torch.
Temperat ure measurement s in the gasifier and at
several points on the air and gas pipes were carried out
by means of several t hermocoupl es. The pressure was
also measured at several points.
Gas composi t i on (N2, H2, CO, CO2, CH4, C2H6,
C2H4, C2H2) was det ermi ned in quasi-continuous
mode. A pump transferred a small gas-flow t o the
chromat ograph and this was analysed continuously.
The experimental pr ocedur e was very similar in
bot h installations. Each run was started with the
ignition of the charcoal bed remaining, up to the com-
bust i on zone, from a previ ous experiment. A root es
bl ower provi ded 75% of the air flow rate selected for
the experiment. Aft er 5- 10 min ignition was achieved,
the bi omass feeding system started and the air flow-
rate was increased up t o the selected value. When the
gasifier was full, the resi dence time cont rol devices
(vibrating gri d-eccent ri c rotating grate) were started. It
was consi dered that steady-state had been reached in
an experiment when the measured t emperat ures had
Fig. 2. Main dimensions (in mm) of the gasifier in installa- constant values. This situation was reached in
tion B (200-300 kg/h). 20- 30 min in installation A and in 40- 60 min in instal-
lation B. Experi ment s lasted at least 2.5 h in steady-
state.
Two different grate designs were analysed: As the bi omass consumpt i on depends on the air
flow-rate i nt roduced (Jenkins & Goss, 1980) and on
(a) Open-grat e design. The eccentric rotating grate the design of the ash-removal system (Reed et al.,
consisted of t hree circular rings pl aced one on
t op of the ot her (made of 8 mm stainless steel). 1989) the influences of bot h variables were analysed in
The l ower one was cent red with the axis of the an i ndependent way. For each ash removal design,
experiments for different air flow-rates were per-
gasifier and the ot her t wo out of line with the formed. In t hese experiments the solid height was kept
axis. Aft er several tests a distance of 6"5 cm
bet ween the rings was used. constant in the gasifier in or der t o avoid ot her addi-
tional variables being i nt roduced in t he process.
(b) Closed-grate design. The basic structure of t hree In each experiment the bi omass consumpt i on was
circular tings was maintained. The lateral faces not previously known, so the bi omass fed was the
of the grate consisted of a metal sheet (5 mm amount necessary to keep the solid-height constant in
thick stainless st eel ) wi t h 720 holes of 15r a m the gasifier ( 1 0 5 0 mm in the installation A and
diameter. Wi t h this design the amount of resid- 1800 mm in the B one). In installation A the bi omass
ual solid obt ai ned was less than that corre-
consumpt i on was calculated from the quantity of
sponding to the open-grat e design, bi omass remaining in the hopper after the experiment
The root es bl ower provi ded an unchanging air-flow- in relation t o the feeding time. In installation B the
rate of 400 Nm3/h, but a bypass system allowed air t o bi omass consumpt i on was calculated from an ash
be fed to the gasifier at lower rates. The air flow-rate balance, since the proxi mat e and ultimate charcoal
was measured by means of an annubar and the air was analyses were carried out for all the experiments. Mass
preheat ed by being passed through an air-gas heat- balances were conduct ed on all the ot her product s.
exchanger. When the experiment finished the air flow was
A new bi omass feeding system was designed in st opped and all ot her systems were t urned off. The
or der to ensure the plant aut onomy (for any processing installation was kept cl osed until it became extinct
capacity of the gasifier). This consisted of a cylindrical (approximately 1-5 days for installation A and 3 days for
232 P. Garcia-Bacaicoa et al.
Table 1. Mai n characteristics of gasified forestry waste Table 3. Composi ti on (% vol.) and l ow heati ng value of t he
gas produced in i nstal l ati on A ( 2 5 - 5 0 kg/ h)
Proximate analysis (% dry basis)
Fixed carbon 19. 65 Experi- N 2 CO CO 2 CH4 H2 LHV
Volatiles 77.70 ment (kcal/Nm 3)
Ash 2.66
Elementalanalysis (% dry basis) A-5 55"0 16. 3 13.0 0-6 15.1 1007
A-4 53.4 16.1 13.6 0.7 16.2 961
Carbon 45.80 A-2 54.1 13. 7 15.6 1.3 15.3 1006
Hydrogen 6-00
Nitrogen 0.30 A-6 54.0 16-4 13-2 1.2 15-2 1011
A-1 55'7 14. 9 10.9 1.3 17.2 940
Oxygen 47.90
A-11 48.3 24. 1 10.0 1.9 15-7 1292
Moisture level (wet basis) 12.10 A-2 52.7 14.1 16.0 1.6 15.6 1006
Low heating value (kcal/kg wet) 3590 A-7 49-8 19. 3 11-7 1-2 18.0 1147
Particle size 84% between 0.5 and 16 nun A-9 46.8 15.7 16.1 2.2 19.2 1129
Table 2. Operating condi t i ons and main values of the
results obtained in i nstal l ati on A ( 2 5 - 5 0 kg/ h) Table 4. Operating condi t i ons and main values of t he
results of t he experi ments performed in installation B
Experi- Air Grid Biomass Gas Solid ( 2 0 0 - 3 0 0 kg/ h)
ment (Nm3/h) vibration processed produced produced
(% time) (kg/ h) (Nm3/h) (kg/h) Experi- Air Biomass Gas Solid
ment (Nm3/ h) processed produced produced
A-5 50 16"0 25.4 75 0"25 (kg/ h) (Nm3/h) (kg/h)
A-4 50 22"0 28.1 75 0'31
A-2 50 29-0 34.0 79 0. 58 Open- gr at e design
A-6 50 38"0 37.8 72 1.02 P-3 250 220.4 318"7 31.8
A-1 50 50"0 46.1 73 3-04 P-4 250 214.7 340.5 25-6
A-11 40 29"0 31.7 65 1.43 P-22 250 251.4 283.2 23.5
A-2 50 29"0 34.0 79 0"58 P-30 250 262.8 325.2 23.7
A-7 60 29-0 39-3 95 0"79 P-5 300 231.6 375.4 26.6
A-9 70 29"0 48.9 117 0"73 P-13 300 291.7 416.4 39"5
P-20 300 259-0 365"3 42.3
P-32 300 315"3 371-1 31"1
P-12 350 334"5 500.3 59.8
P-25 350 316"6 503'7 31'1
installation B). Once the installation was cold, it was P-31 350 338-3 483.2 32.7
cleaned and the ash was removed from the cyclone and Closed-grate design
the hopper. G-1 250 208.8 372.1 18.0
G-2 250 220.0 379.5 16.7
G-8 250 191.3 372-6 10.8
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION G-6 300 264.4 492.5 12.1
G-7 300 265.0 518.0 15.8
Wood chips from forestry wastes were processed in G-9 300 246.9 481.6 12.6
both installations. Table 1 shows the main character- G-10 350 283.1 521.6 14-5
istics of this biomass. Several kinds of experiments G-11 350 299.0 553-5 15.3
were carried out. The main variables analysed were G-12 350 275.0 526.4 10.8
inlet air-flow, and design and operation of the grate.
In installation A, runs (A-i experiments) were per-
on the air introduced. Both values increased with
formed for different air flows (40-70 Nm3/h) and
different on/off times (16-50%) of the vibrator grid. the amount of air introduced.
For a gasifier and a given amount of air intro-
Tables 2 and 3 show the main results obtained.
In installation B two different experimental series duced, the biomass processed was influenced by
were done according to the design of the eccentric the design and operation of the ash-removal
rotating grate. Both grate models were described system. It can be observed in Table 2 that the
previously. For the open-grate design P-i experiments biomass consumption increased with the grid
were performed, and for the closed-grate design G-i operation time. In installation B, Table 4, a
ones. Table 4 shows the operating conditions and the greater biomass consumption was obtained (for
main values of the results obtained. Tables 5 and 6 the same air-flow rate) in the P-i experiments than
show the main characteristics of the gas and the solid in the G-i ones. The different designs of the grate
generated, also influenced the amount of gas and solid pro-
The main features of these results are listed below, duced. In the G-i experiments more gas and less
solid were produced than in the P-i experiments.
For a gasifier and a given design and operation of The low heating values of the gas obtained with
the ash-removal system, the amounts of biomass the closed-grate design (G-i experiments) were
processed and of gas produced depended mainly higher than those corresponding to the open-
Downdraf t movi ng bed biomass gasifiers 233
Table 5. Composition (% vol.) and low heating value of the gas produced in the experiments performed in installation B
(200-300 kg/h)
Experi- N z CO CO 2 CH 4 H2 C2H4 C2H6 C2H2 LHV
ment (kcal/N m3)
Open-grate design
P-3 54.7 26.5 9-4 2"0 7-0 0.26 0.10 0"12 1209
P-4 54.4 19.1 14.5 3.2 8"0 0.58 0-15 0"10 1166
P-22 70.0 15.2 9-5 0.6 4-6 0.07 0.04 0-01 636
P-30 60-7 14.4 7.0 2.9 13"3 0.40 0-18 1"11 1259
P-5 63"1 17.0 12.9 3"0 2.9 0.65 0.18 0'30 1000
P-13 56'8 21.6 9"6 2.2 9.1 0.20 0.09 0"43 1119
P-20 53.4 25-6 12.4 2"3 5-8 0.32 0.12 0.08 1189
P-32 63-9 13.2 6"4 3.0 13"0 0.32 0.18 0.04 1069
P-12 55.2 15.2 15-7 3"9 9-0 0"70 0.22 0"13 1162
P-25 55"4 9.2 19.1 1.7 14"3 0.23 0.11 0.01 838
P-31 57.2 8.4 19"4 1-6 13"0 0.25 0.11 0.07 788
Closed-grate design
G-1 53"1 16-6 17"3 2.9 9-5 0.26 0.15 0.17 1079
G-2 47-8 19.8 16"0 3.4 12.4 0"33 0.18 0.13 1296
G-8 47.8 26.3 10-1 2"1 13-2 0.31 0.11 0.04 1394
G-6 47.3 22.1 13"8 2-9 13"4 0"38 0.11 0.05 1336
G-7 43.9 22.1 12"2 2.6 18.6 0.37 0.11 0.04 1445
G-9 48.6 19.8 14"0 2"5 14.6 0"33 0.10 0"08 1265
G-10 43.0 25-0 11-1 3"6 16-7 0.47 0.15 0-05 1588
G-11 45'6 23.5 12"3 3"0 15" 1 0"33 0" 13 0.00 1420
G-12 44-4 21-5 14"4 3"3 16-0 0"33 0.13 0.00 1436
Table 6. Main characteristics of the solid generated in the Different mass and energy performance values
experiments performed in installation B (200-300 kg/b) defined by Walawender et al. (1988) were evaluated.
Experi- Ash Vol at i l es Fixed C. LHV The mass performance values used were: (i) the mass
ment (% wt.) (% wt.) (% wt . ) ( kcal / kg) air/biomass (dry basis) relationship (A/F); (ii) the mass
gas/air relationship (G/A); (iii) the mass gas/biomass
Open-grate design (dry basis) ratio (G/F); and (iv) the mass conversion
P-3 16.26 10.65 73.09 6195 efficiency (MCE) defined as the mass ratio of the dry
P-4 19-67 9-86 70-47 5885 gas output rate to the combined input rates of both wet
P-22 26.08 9.96 63"96 5285
P-30 26.89 21-30 51.81 4765 feed and air. To quantify the energetic yield, the cold
P-5 20.65 9.35 70.00 5876 gas efficiency (CGE) was used, defined as the ratio of
P- 13 17.85 11.05 71.10 6129 the energy content of the dry gas to the energy content
P-20 14.48 11.13 74.39 6513 of the dry feed. Table 7 shows the values of ER and of
P-32 23-95 24.85 51.20 4846 the performances evaluated.
P-12 13.19 10-70 76.11 6495
P-25 23.26 16.43 60.31 5257 An important parameter in the gasifier yields is the
P-31 25.46 19-75 54.79 4994 A/F relationship (Desrosiers, 1979; Chen, 1986). For
Closed-grate design each experimental series similar results of the influence
G-1 27.38 15.41 57.21 4825 of the air flow on the A/F ratio were obtained and the
G-2 31-08 17.70 51.22 4424 affirmation that the A/F relationship tends to regulate
G-8 43.76 14.12 42.12 3592 itself to a given value (Jenkins & Goss, 1980) was
G-6 51.75 14.24 34.01 2743 confirmed. In our case, in the A-i series (29% vibration
G-7 40.68 15.12 44.20 3801
G-9 47.78 13.88 38.34 3215 time of the grid), an average A/F value of 2"082 kg air/
G-10 47.39 11'34 41.27 3471 kg feed (dry basis) was obtained. For series P-i and G-i,
G-11 46.76 9.11 44.13 3578 values of 1.578 and 1.756 were respectively deter-
G-12 61.45 8.04 30.51 2572 mined. Similar values are reported in the bibliography.
Thus, Chee (1990) showed values between 1-62 and
grate design (P-i experiments). This was mainly 1"84, Groeneveld et al. (1983) obtained a value of 1.81
due to the higher hydrocarbon concentrations and Walawender et al. (1985) reported values between
0"99 and 2.08.
obtained in the gas in the G-i experiments. With respect to the gas product obtained, the
The influencing variables (amount of air introduced average values of G/ A and G/ F obtained in each
and design and operation of the grate) have been experimental series are shown in Table 8. The G/ A
grouped in the equivalence ratio (ER), defined as the values corresponding to the A-i and G-i experiments
percentage between the real and the stoichiometric were similar to those reported by Chee (1990)
oxygen/biomass relationship. (between 1.47 and 1-52 kg gas/kg air). The G/ F values
234 P. Garcia-Bacaicoa et al.
Table 7. Throughput and performance indicators of t he 1, 0 ~, o
experiments performed in both i nstal l ati ons [] t~ ~i'~Atx" o o o
[] o
Experi- ER A/F G/A G/F MCE CGE 0,8 O
ment (%) ( mass ( mass (mass o
units) units) units) 0,6 lID
ne
Open-grate design in installation B 0
P-3 22. 2 1. 660 1. 276 2.117 0.757 0.487 X 0,4
P-4 22. 8 1. 704 1. 383 2. 355 0.829 0.515
P-22 19. 5 1. 455 1. 153 1. 677 0.647 0.200
P-30 18. 7 1. 392 1. 189 1. 654 0.654 0.434 0 , 2
P-5 25. 4 1. 895 1. 311 2.484 0.819 0.452
P-13 20. 2 1. 505 1. 349 2.029 0.768 0.445
P-20 22. 7 1. 695 1. 247 2.113 0.746 0.467 0,0 . . . .
P-32 18. 7 1. 392 1. 143 1. 591 0.629 0.350 15 2 0 2 5 3 0 35 4 0
P-12 20. 5 1. 531 1. 445 2. 212 0.829 0.484 Ell (%)
P-25 21. 7 1. 617 1. 422 2.300 0.835 0.371
P-31 20. 3 1. 514 1. 363 2. 063 0.778 0.314 Fig. 3. Mass conversion efficiencies for different equiva-
lence ratios.
Closed-grate design in installation B
G-1 23. 4 1. 752 1. 513 2.650 0.917 0.563
G-2 22. 2 1. 663 1. 487 2. 473 0.883 0.623 1,0
G-8 25. 6 1. 912 1. 372 2. 623 0.860 0.756
G-6 22. 2 1. 660 1. 577 2. 619 0. 936 0.693
G-7 22. 2 1. 656 1. 542 2.554 0.914 0.787 0,8 A A o
G-9 23. 8 1. 778 1. 504 2. 673 0.917 0.687 A A ~ o o o
G-10 24. 2 1. 809 1. 339 2. 422 0.822 0.815 A o
G-11 22. 9 1. 713 1. 466 2. 511 0. 881 0.732 0,6 o
, , ,
G-12 24. 9 1. 862 1. 393 2. 595 0. 865 0.766 O [] ~ []
For different airflows in installation A 0 0,4 o
A-11 24. 7 1. 845 1. 423 2. 624 0.880 0.734 [] [] o
I : : : ' , t
A-2 28. 8 2. 152 1. 436 3.089 0.939 0.652
A-7 31. 1 2. 235 1. 388 3. 103 0.920 0.775 0,2 []
A-9 32. 1 2. 094 1. 528 3.199 0.990 0.750
0 0 . . . .
I
15 20 25 30 35 40
Table 8. Average values of gas/air and gas/ feed (in mass
uni ts) obtai ned in each experimental series Ell (%)
Fig. 4. Cold gas efficiencies for different equivalence
Experimental G/A G/F ratios.
series (kg gas/kg air) (kg gas/kg biomass)
A-i 1-44 3.00 throughput. Biomass consumption can be increased by
P-i 1.30 2.05
G-i 1.47 2.57 (i) increasing the operation of the grate, or (ii) increas-
ing the flow area of the grate.
Air flow is an influential variable and it determines
of G-i experiments were similar to those of Chee the biomass consumption and the gas and solid pro-
(between 2-47 and 2.70). ductions. The air/biomass ratio self-regulates at a given
The influence of ER on the MCE is shown in Fig. 3. value. Also the gas/air ratio and the solid yield remain
It can be observed that MCE increases with ER. In the virtually unchanged for each design and operation of
A-i and G-i experiments values above 0"9 have been the solid-removal system.
reached, whereas in the P-i experiments lower values Mass conversion efficiency (MCE) and cold gas effi-
were obtained. Other values reported in the literature iency (CGE) values increase with the equivalence ratio
were 0"91 (Chee, 1990) and 0"90 (Forintek Canada values. Both values of MCE above 0.9 and of CGE
Corporation, 1981; Twente University, 1981). over 0-7 have been reached in the gasifiers. It can be
The influence of ER on the CGE values is shown in concluded that in a semi-commercial installation yields
Fig. 4. In the A-i and G-i experiments values of 0"7 similar to those in corresponding smaller plants were
were obtained. In the P-i experiments the CGE ranged obtained.
between 0"35 and 0-48. Chee (1990) reported values
between 0"66 and 0.71, which are similar to those
obtained in the A-i and G-i series. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors express their gratitude to DGICYT (Pro-
CONCLUSIONS ject PB91-0284) and to Consejer/a de Economia y
Hacienda de la Junta de Castilla-Le6n, IDAE and
The design and operation of the solid-removal system CIEMAT (PIEPMA Programme) for providing finan-
of the gasifier allows one to modify the biomass cial support for this work.
Do wndraft moving bed biomass gasifiers 235
REFERENCES Kaupp, A. & Goss, J. R. (1981). State of Art for Small Scale
(to 50 kw) Gas Producer-Engine Systems (Final Report).
Bacon, D. W., Downie, J., Hsu, C. C. & Larish, G. K. (1984). Department of Agricultural Engineering, University of
Technical Assessment of Downdraft Wood Gasifiers, Final California, Davis, CA, USA.
Report, ENFOR Project C-197(2), Canada. Larson, L. E. (1989). Development of a downdraft wood
Beenackers, A. A. C. M. & Bridgwater, A. V. (1989). gasification system for electricity utility boiler applica-
Gasification and pyrolysis of biomass in Europe. In tions. EnergyBiomass Wastes, 12, 805- 31.
Pyrolysis and Gasification, ed. G. L. Ferrero, K. Maniatis, L'Ecuyer, A. & Huffman, D. R. (1981 ). Operation of a fixed-
A. G. Buekens & A. V. Bridgwater. Elsevier Appl. bed downdraft gasifier on a low quality residue fuels.
Science, London, UK, pp. 129-57. Thi rd Bio-Energy R&D Seminar, National Research
Bilbao, R. & Fernandez, E (1988) Gasificaci6n de biomasas Council of Canada, Ottawa, Canada, NRCC no. 19515.
en un lecho m6vil de corrientes paralelas. Ingenieria Mendis, M. S. (1989). Biomass gasification: Past experiences
Quimica, 20 (226) 199-203. and future prospects in developing countries. In Pyrolysis
Buekens, A. G. & Schoeters, J. G. (1985). Modelling of and Gasification, ed. G. L. Ferrero, K. Maniatis, A.
biomass gasification. In Fundamentals of Thermochemical Buekens & A. V. Bridgwater. Elsevier Appl. Science,
Biomass Conversion, ed. R. P. Overend, T. A. Milne & London, UK, pp. 111-28.
L. K. Mudge. Elsevier Appl. Science, London, UK, pp. Mendis, M. S., Stassen, H. E. M. & Stiles, H. N. (1989).
619-89. Biomass gasification: Field monitoring results. Part I and
Chee, C. S. (1990). Analysis, modeling and control of acom- Part II. Biomass, 19, 1-35.
mercial-scale downdraft gasifier. PhD thesis, Kansas State Reed, T. B., Jantzen, D., Desrosiers, D. & Milne, T. (1980). A
University, KS, USA. Survey of Biomass Gasification (Vol. III. Current Tech-
Chen, J. S. (1986). Kinetic engineering modeling of co- nology and Research) ed. T. B. Reed. SERI-TR-33-239,
current moving bed gasification reactors for carbonaceous Washington, DC, USA, pp. 1-147.
materials. PhDthesis, Cornell University, NY, USA. Reed, T. B., Levie, B. & Graboski, M. S. (1989). Funda-
Desrosiers, R. (1979). Thermodynamics of gas-char reac- mental, Development and Scaleup of the Air-Oxygen
tions. In A Survey of Biomass Gasification (Vol. II). SERI/ St rat i f i ed Downdrafi Gasifier, ed. T. B. Reed. SERI-PR-
TR-33-239, pp. 133-75. 234-2571, Washington, DC, USA.
Earp, D. M. & Bridgwater, A. V. (1987) Research into trans- Sheng, G. X. (1989). Biomass gasifiers: From waste energy
parent open core downdraft gasifier. In Biomass for production. Biomass, 20,3-12.
Energy and Industry, ed. E. Gassi, B. Delmon, J. E Molle Talib, A., Goss, J. R., Flanigan, V. J., Grover, P. D., Mathur,
& H. Zibetta. Elsevier Appl. Science, London, UK, pp. H. B. & Durgaprasad, M. B. (1989). Development and
1068-72. field testing of small biomass gasifier-engine systems in
Esplin, G. J., Fung, D. P. C. & Hsu, C. C. (1986). Ac o m- India: A joint project by an American and Indian team.
parison of the energy and product distribution from Bi omas s , 19, 99- 122.
biomass gasifiers. Can. J. Chem. Engng, 64, 651- 62. Tavangar, M. R. (1988). Gasification of mesquite chips in a
Ferrero, G. L. (1990). Implementation and results of the downdraft gasifier. Thesis, Texas A&I University, TX,
Commission's energy demonstration programme. In USA.
Biomass for Energy and Industry, ed. G. Grassi, G. Gosse Tiangco, V. M. (1990). Optimization of specific fuel conver-
& G. dos Santos. Elsevier Appl. Science, London, UK, pp. sion rates for a rice hull gasifier coupled to an internal
2. 1158-64. combustion engine. PhD thesis, University of California,
Forintek Canada Corporation (1981). Evaluation of Fuels for Davis, CA, USA.
Operation in a Fixed Bed, Downdraft, Commercial Twente University of Technology, Laborat ory of Chemical
Gasifier. Final Report. ENFOR Project C-92, Canada. Reaction Engineering (1981). Energy Recovery by Gasifi-
Groeneveld, M. J. (1980). The co-current moving bed cation of Agricultural and Forestry Wastes in a Co-current
gasifier. PhD thesis, Twente University of Technology, Moving Bed Reactor. Final Report. Commission of the
The Netherlands. European Communities, Contract 662-78-IESN.
Groeneveld, M. J. & Van Swaaij, W. P. M. (1979). Gasifica- Van Swaaij, W. P. M. (1981). Gasification, the Process and the
tion of solid waste-potential and application of co-current Technol ogy (Report). Commission of the European
moving bed gasifiers. Appl. Energy, 5 ( 3 ) 165-78. Communities, Luxembourg.
Groeneveld, M. J. & Van Swaaij, W. P. M. (1980). The design Walawender, W. P., Chern, S. M. & Fan, L. T. (1985). Wood
of cocurrent moving bed gasifiers fuelled by biomass. In chips gasification in a commercial downdraft gasifier. In
Thermal Conversion of Solid Wastes and Biomass, ed. J. L. Fundament al s of Thermochemical Biomass Conversion,
Jones & S. B. Radding. American Chemical Society, eds R. P. Overend, T. A. Milne & L. K. Mudge. Elsevier
Washington, DC, USA. Appl. Science, London, UK, pp. 911-21.
Groeneveld, M.J.,Gellings, P. E. &Hos , J. J. (1983). Produc- Walawender, W. P., Chee, C. S. & Fan, L. T. (1988).
tion of a tar-free gas in an annular co-current moving bed Operating parameters influencing downdraft gasifier
gasifier. In Energy from Biomass and Wastes VII. Institute performance. In Energy from Biomass and Wastes XI, ed.
of Gas Technology, Chicago, IL, USA, pp. 433-54. D. L. Klass, Institute of Gas Technology, Chicago, IL,
Hoi, W. K. & Bridgwater, A. V. (1989). Gasification of USA, pp. 411-45.
charcoal in Malaysia. In Pyrolysis and Gasification, ed. Walter, P., Walawender, W. P., Chern, S. M. & Fan, L. T.
G. L. Ferrero, K. Maniatis, A. Buekens & A. V. Bridg- (1985). Wood chip gasification in a commercial downdraft
water. Elsevier Appl. Science, London, UK, pp. 598-602. gasifier. In Fundamentals of Thermochemical Biomass
Jenkins, B. M. & Goss, J. R. (1980). Effect of air blast rate on Conversi on, eds. R. P. Overend, T. A. Milne & L. K.
fixed bed gasifiers. Paper no. PR 80-028 presented at Mudge. Elsevier Appl. Science, London, UK, pp. 911-21.
ASAE Pacific Regional Annual Meeting.