Sustainability 2022 , 14 , 4669
10of 18
16
12
8
4
0
-4
CO (vol.%)
ƀȱǻǯƖǼƀȱǻǯƖǼ ƂȱǻǯƖǼƀ ƂȱǻǯƖǼ
LHV (MJ/Nm3)
Syngas properties
Experimental Result Simulation Result Deviation (%) Average Deviation (%)
Figure 2. Comparison between simulation results predicted during gasification model calibration and experimental outcomes with the corresponding deviation.
100
6
80
4
60
40
2
20
0
0
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
ER (-)
ƀDZȱ¡
ƀDZȱ
CO: Experiment
CO: Simulation ƂDZȱ
ƀDZȱ¡ LHV: Experiment
ƀDZȱ ƂDZȱ¡
LHV: Simulation Figure3. Difference between the predicted syngas composition and LHV and the experimental data during model validation. It can be observed that the developed model has a good agreement with the experi- mental analysis as the average deviation of the syngas composition is 3.46% during model calibration and 11.31% during validation, which satisfies the limit (lower than ± 20%) sug- gested in the literature [24,41,56]. The maximum deviation is obtained for the constituents with the lowest concentration in syngas (C 2 H 4 during calibration and CH 4 for validation). However, the average deviation obtained in the present simulation is substantially lower compared to that of other similar studies that are in the range of 13.70–28.37% [24,41,49,60]. The estimated energy content of the syngas is 1.91%, lower than the experimental one during calibration, due to the over-prediction of CO 2 , which does not directly affect the LHV but creates a dilution effect [54,61,62]. Syngas LHV is over- or underpredicted due to CO 2 under- or overprediction during model validation. After validation, the developed model is used to predict the optimum operating conditions of temperature and ER for the conversion of the M2 pellet to syngas through a sensitivity analysis.
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker