Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today: Proceedings

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

Downdraft biomass gasification: A review on concepts, designs analysis,

modelling and recent advances
Prashant Sharma a,⇑, Bhupendra Gupta b, Mukesh Pandey c, Keshav Singh Bisen a, Prashant Baredar d
a
JEC Jabalpur, India
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, JEC, Jabalpur, India
c
Director and Dean, SOEEM, RGPV, Bhopal, India
d
Energy Centre, Maulana Azad National Institute of Technology, Bhopal, India

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

Article history: Amongst the entirely available renewable energy sources, biomass is measured as the maximum acces-
Received 20 August 2020 sible source. It has been estimated that half of the renewable energy can be accessed in terms of biomass.
Received in revised form 26 August 2020 Thermochemical conversion in form of gasification is one of the best ways of converting biomass energy
Accepted 29 August 2020
into producer gas. Producer gas produced after the gasification of biomass feedstock is suitable for appli-
Available online xxxx
cation as fuels for generating heat, electricity production, internal combustion engines etc. and even for
small scale application like heating, refrigeration. Downdraft gasifiers with the easy design, fabrication,
Keywords:
low tar production and easily controllable operations are the most suitable gasifiers for small scale appli-
Biomass
Thermochemical conversion
cations of gasification process with different end applications. Various researchers are continuously aim-
Gasification process ing their research to enhance the performance of downdraft gasification. The aim of this paper is to
Modelling review their work concentrating the downdraft gasification process, kinetics, modelling and pilot scale
Downdraft gasifier gasification systems using downdraft gasifiers. The review results observed that the enhancement of
Design etc technology now should be concentrated for the end application in rural areas.
Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Confer-
ence on Innovations in Clean Energy Technologies.

1. Introduction
In 1659, Thomas Shirley had carried out the first known exper-
imental investigation for generation of carburate hydrogen gas. As
the lighting and heating for households, Town gas produced by
gasification of coal had been innovated and utilized in Britain dur-
ing the years of 1850–70. But the innovation had been restricted as
the light bulb invented and requirement of lighting has been
shifted to the new one. The fuel demand had been filled by petro-
chemicals in the years of 19400 s the investigations in the field of
energy had been shifted to the petrochemicals. In the years of
19700 s as the parallel investigations had been carried out by the
researchers to find out the alternative sources, gasification
researches resumed. After that considerable advancement has
been carried out by various researchers. In nature, the most and
in abundant available material is biomass which consist all the
organics obtained from plant and animals. It includes all biological
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: pra.sharma30683@gmail.com (P. Sharma).
generated material obtained from alive and just alive plants from
roots to leaves and fruits. Biomass consists Cellulose, Hemi-
cellulose, Lignin, Extractives and ash. Solar energy is the basic
source of energy which stores in plant via photosynthesis in form
of chemical energy, and can be convert in useful form of energy
by various method developed [1]. It has been estimated that about
14% of world’s total required energy are fulfilled using biomass.
The biomass utilization is mostly in developing countries where
it has easily and lower cost availability. Woody biomass represents
major portion of total biomass.
In India about 68,434,000 ha land is covered with forests, which
contains about 2800 million metric tonnes of carbon as forest bio-
mass. India is in 9th position in world with approximate 28.3% of
forest land cover [2]. The major problem concerned with biomass
is its bulkiness, due to which inconvenient for transportation, han-
dling, and storing. This problem motivated the researchers for
development of conversion processes to convert solid biomass into
liquid and gaseous forms which can be easily transportable, han-
dled and stored. This chemical conversion has been achieved using
biological i.e., by microorganisms (bacterial, yeasts etc.) and ther-

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.08.789
2214-7853/Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Conference on Innovations in Clean Energy Technologies.

Please cite this article as: P. Sharma, B. Gupta, M. Pandey et al., Downdraft biomass gasification: A review on concepts, designs analysis, modelling and
recent advances, Materials Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.08.789
P. Sharma, B. Gupta, M. Pandey et al.
mally. The first method used processes like digestion, fermentation
and the last one is combustion, liquefication, pyrolysis, and gasifi-
cation. The basic problem with biological conversion is that it
required much time compare then thermochemical processes.
For digestion bacteria used for generation of CH4 and CO2 in
absence of external air, while yeasts produces ethanol or other bio-
fuels (liquid form) after fermentation process. On the other hand,
the thermochemical conversion is not much time consuming. The
combustion is oxidation in presence of excess air and produces oxi-
des of carbon, nitrogen, and other constituents contained by bio-
mass. The basic and big problem associated with it is losses in
complete conversion and environmental pollution. The gasification
is chemically controlled conversion in gaseous fuel at even con-
trolled environment. Pyrolysis is same as gasification with the dif-
ference that it occurs without oxygen and at low temperature. In
liquification the catalysts are used to convert the biomass into liq-
uid fuels at lower temperature. The requirement of bio or thermal
conversion is high as it improves the heating values of the fuel by
removing the non-combustible substance like H2O and N2, remov-
ing the Sulphur which produces atmospheric harmful oxides and
most important lowering the C/H ratio [1]. Downdraft gasifier
among all the type of gasifier which will be discussed in next sec-
tion is more appropriate for pilot-scale applications having energy
generation capacity of 10 kW–1 MW. The present review paper
aims to summarize the researches carried out by various research-
ers considering downdraft gasification process kinetics, modelling
and end applications.
2. Biomass gasification (Principle of gasification)
Gasification is a commercially applied technology from last cen-
tury for production of gaseous fuels for various application includ-
ing chemical productions. As discussed, earlier gasification is the
thermochemical bioenergy conversion process. Producer or Syn
gas is the product of gasification process. Having higher efficiency
in thermochemical conversion and flexibility numerous researches
has been carried out in the field of gasification process [3]. In the
process of gasification of biomass, the oxygen quantity is lower
than theoretical requirement for comprehensive combustion [4].
In such a circumstance, the volatile matter and char constituents
reacts with O2 is characteristically absorbed by the furthermost
reactive elements of the volatile matter and somewhat by char fol-
lowed by the oxidation which doesn’t take place and results con-
siderable amounts of CO and H2 and slight amounts of CH4 called
producer gas or syngas [5].To enhance the heating capacity or
calorific value and incineration characteristics of the product gas
of gasification process, H2 amount need to be enhance.
2.1. Phenomenon of gasification
The phenomenon of gasification includes the kinetics, thermo-
dynamics and stoichiometry’s analysis of the gasification process.
The basic thermodynamics and chemical kinetics for different bio-
mass gasification are different [6]. The different phenomena
include drying of biomass, biomass pyrolysis, different similar
and varied reactions for oxidation and reduction and different
technologies invented for gasification and property enhancements
[7]. The phenomenon for any gasification systems are modelled
including the thermodynamic and reaction kinetics for optimiza-
tion of design, performance prediction before model developed.
The Carbon, CO2, H2, H2O, and CH4 are the principle components
of any gasification process. The biomass in a gasifier passes from
a sequence of process like drying, pyrolysis or devitalization, com-
bustion and gasification.
2
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
The Boudouard, Water Gas and Methanation are the multiphase
or heterogeneous reactions (Table 1). Reactions 4–6 are used to
find out the equilibrium syngas compositions [8].The heteroge-
neous reactions are converted into CO shift and Steam Methane
Reforming Reaction as homogeneous reactions. Reaction 1, 4, 5,
and 6 are the diverse method for biomass gasification. The Bou-
douard Reactions describes the production of CO from pure Carbon
gasification from oxygen. Reaction 5 demonstrates the water gas
process. While the reaction 6 shows the Methanation reaction
which forms the foundation of all hydrogenating gasification pro-
cesses [8]. From the observations it can be stated that the principle
of biomass thermal conversion with pyrolysis and gasification of
biomass can be considered similar for same type of biomass. The
thermodynamics of any process includes the process conversion
states based on thermodynamic conditions like time, pressure
and temperature, heat absorption or dissipation etc. Reactions 4–
8 all are reversible reactions [9]. The direction depends on the
equilibrium stage and the available quantity of reactants. Homoge-
neous responses happening, for instance, in the gas stage can fre-
quently be depicted by a basic condition, yet heterogeneous
responses are inherently progressively confused [6]. This is surely
the situation with the biomass gasification. The biomass gasifica-
tion reasons mass exchange concepts [10].
2.2. Reactors (Gasifier) for gasification process
The reactors can be classified depends on the biomass gasifica-
tion technology, i.e., types of bed for the analysis. As the bed con-
siderations affects the process of gasification and products with
variations in parameters [11]. The simplest and oldest type of gasi-
fier is Moving-bed gasifiers also called fixed-bed gasifiers. This type
of gasifiers is mostly suitable for pilot scale production due to its
simplest design and construction [12]. Over other types these type
of gasifiers have not tedious biomass preparation and feeding, con-
trolling of gasification with variation in parameters and gasifica-
tion agent as oxygen. On the basis of feeding the gasifiers
classified as updraft and downdraft [13]. The two basic inputs for
the gasification is biomass and gasifying agent. In updraft the air
as gasifying agent introduced from the bottom side and product
from top side while it enters from just below the top in downdraft
gasifiers [14]. There are some limitations with the technologies
having considerable hydrocarbons (tars) in the product gas, pro-
duct gas cleaning requirement, heat recovery from the product
gas and long residence time in Hours, less carbon conversion (i.e.
80–90%). The biomass particle for this gasification having larger
size (more than 15–20 mm) [15]. The other classification is Flu-
idized Bed reactors (Fig. 1). The particle size is limited up to
6 mm. As the particle sizes lessening, the residence time prerequi-
site too reduces exponentially. This technology offers the consider-
able improved gas quality, with oxygen and steam as gasifying
agent with reasonable quantity, reasonably low fuel grounding,
and feeding along with high fuel suppleness, residence time in
minutes [16]. The limitations with the technology are the incom-
plete carbon translation of the less reactive fuels (e.g., hard coal)
but better carbon conversion (i.e., up to 95% for biomass), multi-
faceted process control, requirement of crushing for feedstock
preparation and high investment cost [17]. The third classification
is Entrained-flow processes which is the advancement of gasifica-
tion processes. The particle size required is lesser than 0.25 mm.
The advantage over the others are more than 95% carbon conver-
sion, complete Tar deterioration, residence time in seconds and
very high specific capacity [18]. The limitations of this technology
are high grinding requirement for feedstock, high oxygen con-
sumption and high investment for complex gasifier. The gasifica-
tion process and the reactors designs have been advances from
the day of inventions. The three main drivers to enhance the tech-
P. Sharma, B. Gupta, M. Pandey et al.
Table 1
Gasification reactions [8]
Reactions Reaction type
1 Combustion reactions
2 CO þ 12 O2 ! CO2 ð283MJ=kmolÞ
3 H2 þ 12 O2 ! H2 Oð242MJ=kmolÞ
4 Boudouard reactions
5 Water gas reaction
6 Methanation reaction
7 CO shift reaction
8 Steam methane reforming reaction
Fig. 1. Reactors (gasifier): updraft (left), downdraft (center) and bubbling fluidized-bed gasifier (right) [1].
nology are capital cost, efficiency improvements and versatility
with the low-grade biomass as feedstock [18].
3. Analysis of gasification process
3.1. Theoretical analysis of gasification process
For gasification process, theoretical method is adopted world-
wide. The method is based on fundamental equations like energy
transformation and species correlation for the process, which are
based on the experimental experiences. The variables for gasifica-
tion using theoretical approach doesn’t limited by number of vari-
ables [19]. It is also involved mathematical modelling.
3.2. Experimental analysis of gasification process
It has been observed that for experimental analysis, gasifier is a
complex equipment to understand and to function; its efficiency
be subject to on the series occurrences of process like pyrolysis,
incomplete oxidation of gaseous products, char gasification and
alteration of tar and inferior hydrocarbons [3]. Furthermore, the
examination of numerous operating conditions in experimental
apparatus is problematic and costly. Even though numerous appre-
ciated works examine the process performances over experiments,
several problems rise in the performance calculation due to inher-
ent process inconsistency [3]. In experimental analysis of gasifica-
tion process there are two variables that are mostly concerned by
the authors i.e., Controlled and Observed. The variable that can be
applied freely but in particular limit are called controlled and on
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
Temperature dependent equilibrium
constant (For Reversible Reactions)
C + 1/2 O2 ? CO (-111 MJ/kmol)
C þ CO2 $ 2COðþ172MJ=kmolÞ P2CO
PCO2
C þ H2 O $ CO þ H2 ðþ131MJ=kmolÞ PCO PH2
P H2 O
C þ 2H2 ! CH4 ð75MJ=kmolÞ
CO þ H2 O $ CO2 þ H2 ð41MJ=kmolÞ PCO2 P H2
P CO PH2 O
CH4 þ H2 O $ CO2 þ 3H2 ðþ206MJ=kmolÞ PCO PH2 3
PCH4 PH O
2
the other hand the variables which are obtained during the process
are called variables [21].
4. Modelling of gasification process
Modelling is the process for any system to forecasting the
results depends on inputs without the experimentation on physical
apparatus. Several authors have been carried out their research
considering modelling of biomass gasification or combustion on
fixed bed reactors. Broadly the Gasification models are grounded
on kinetics, thermodynamic equilibrium [22]. The parameters vary
in the gasifier spatially are be the considerations of modelling apart
of thermodynamic and kinetic modelling [23]. Modelling methods
are a stimulating substitute to increase insights observations of
gasification process. Moreover, an inclusive model can aid with
the plan, process, and regulation of gasifiers [24,44].
4.1. Thermodynamic modelling
Process analysis are the major concern for any thermodynamic
analysis and modelling which can predict the variables at each and
every stage of equilibrium of process. This analysis helps to find
out the optimum point of operating condition for any system the-
oretically, and act as a commanding tool for optimization [25]. The
thermodynamics of gasification includes the mass conservation,
laws of thermodynamics, thermal and chemical equilibrium along
with thermal and physical parameters like temperature, pressure
enthalpy etc. at working conditions [22]. The process description
and prediction of outcomes are the objectives for thermodynamic
3
P. Sharma, B. Gupta, M. Pandey et al.
analysis for any biomass gasification at the design as well as oper-
ating stages [26]. For gasification system it is mandatory to satisfy
the energy conservation and conservation law of energy which
includes the elementary formation enthalpies and changes in
entropy of all elements which takes parts for obtaining the chem-
ical equilibrium through the conversation process [23]. As the gasi-
fication process is the transformation of chemical to
thermodynamic equilibrium the 2nd law of thermodynamics
applied to find out final reaction condition for completely obtain-
ing the thermodynamic equilibrium, considering the time as vari-
able [23]. For the modelling the elemental contents of biomass
need to be determined. (i.e., C, H, N, O, and S) and also diffused liq-
uid, volatile matter, solid remains after combustion and remaining
char gratified. Mass conservation for such elements mass are con-
sidered during thermodynamic conversion [27]. The mass conser-
vation and thermodynamic equilibrium equations are need to be
satisfied in the same time. (Fig. 2). A comparative analysis between
the biomass gasification modelling concluded that the thermody-
namic modelling considering thermal equilibrium, is easily com-
prehensible and are using as an operative initial tool to examine
the consequences of process parameters as discussed earlier.
The thermodynamic modelling brings the system in equilib-
rium at each stage of conversion reactions. The various simulations
are also based on the same equilibrium process. The approach is
subdivided in non-stoichiometric (based on thermodynamic
potential analysis of individual compound) and stoichiometric
equilibrium approach (based equilibrium constant for each conver-
sion). As the problem associated with nonstoichiometric method is
the difficulty in convergence various researchers used stoichiomet-
ric model. E.S. Aydin et al. 2017 [28] developed stoichiometric
model. The first prediction model for downdraft gasification, model
had established by Zainal et al.; 2001[20]. Established model deter-
mines the configuration of product gas and heating value. Biomass
characteristics like diffused water particles, hotness and coldness
variation during process have been considered. As the review is
concerned with downdraft gasification process, thermodynamic
stoichiometric equilibrium model is main focus. S. Jarungthamma-
chote et al. 2007, Andrés Melgar et al. 2007, more over Jarungth-
ammachote made some modifications in order to enhance the
performance of their stoichiometric model by multiplying the
equilibrium constants with correction coefficients [25,29].
Gagliano et al. 2019 [9] considered global gasification reaction
mechanism with consideration of char and tar conversion rate as
input parameters. Diego Barba et al. 2016 [3] is applied the ther-
modynamic Model based on Gibbs Free Energy Gradient Method
(GMM), to the simulation. The thermal equilibrium models studied
by the various researchers are subject to reaction quotient and
chemical potential minimization at constant pressure and temper-
ature condition. Jia et al. 2018 [19] overcome the practical problem
and developed the mathematical model based on lumped capaci-
tance, chemical equilibrium for high temperature decomposition
region for a downdraft gasifier. Author concluded the respectable
lowest difference with investigational outcomes for product gas
configuration.
First Law
Reaction
of
Direction
Basic Thermo-
based on
Reactions dynamics,
Location i.e.
Formation
Spontaniety
Enthalpy
Fig. 2. Steps for thermodynamic modelling of gasification process.
4
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
4.2. Kinetic modelling
For gasification process optimization using kinetic modelling
technique, the prime considerations are the systematic reaction
steps which are followed during the conversion steps. The basic
problem with kinetic modelling is the associated high cost for com-
putation. The gasifier design is totally based on both type of mod-
elling i.e., thermodynamic and kinetic [10]. A kinetic model
establishes the mathematical explanation of the progression of
the process in terms of chemical components. The geometry, reac-
tion time and rate and fluid flow for the process in gasifiers. For
each type of gasifier, the reaction time is different as it depends
on the parameters like temperature, pressure, particle size distri-
bution [30]. The big particles required the higher time. Fig. 3 shows
the procedure for kinetic modelling for gasification system.
Ahmed M. Salem et al. 2019 [6] developed a kinetic model con-
sidering both type of homogeneous and heterogeneous gasification
reactions mechanism for downdraft gasification process. Author
carried out the experimental validation for wide range of biomass
feedstock. The kinetic model has the advantage that it predicts gas
composition, tar content, temperature and height of each zone, as
well as temperature, velocity and pressure distribution at reduc-
tion zone with heating value of product gas along with design
dimension of gasifier. A comprehensive kinetic model for the
development and creation of tar in a downdraft gasifier during
the gasification process have been built by Ahmed M. Salem
et al. 2019 [7]. Author challenged the development of such kind
of kinetic model first time and developed 18 different kinetic reac-
tions. The kinetic model developed considered the four basic tar
species (benzene, naphthalene, toluene, and phenol) and the model
is in respectable agreement with experimental analysis.
4.3. Spatial modelling
The spatial modelling of gasification process includes the 0D-S
Models, 1D-S Models, 2D-S Models, 3D-S Models, Dynamic, or
nD-D, Models. The describe the spatial model.
The solid and liquid phase modelling depends on mass and
energy balance for each phase has been carried out by Colomba
Di Blasi 2000 [30]. The model developed is 0-dimensional and con-
stant with respect to time. Marta Trninic et al. 2020 [31] developed
a 0D-S (Well-Stirred Reaction Models) mathematical model for
downdraft gasification of biomass in fixed or slowly moving bed
gasifiers. In addition, the model well defined the drying, pyrolysis
and gasification separately. With consideration of discrete particle
size distribution (DPSD) Carlos A. Estrada et al. 2019 [32] presented
a one-dimensional model of a downdraft biomass gasifier. H. Sid-
diqui et al. 2011 [33] developed a one-dimensional kinetic model
for reduction zone only for downdraft gasification process. The
model has good determination for critical temperature for thermo-
chemical conversion and bed dimensions [14]. Having one dimen-
sional kinetic model G.P. Oliveira et al. 2020 [34] discussed the A/F
ratio and diffused water particle content along with dimension of
reaction zone in addition to get the increment of syngas heating
Second Law of
Thermo- Thermo-
dynamics dynamic
End
Implemetation equillibrium
Product
using Temp. with time to
Pressure and establish
Species
P. Sharma, B. Gupta, M. Pandey et al. Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Result Evalation by
Kinetic Modelling
Measurements in an Means of Statistical
Experiments, Based on Mechanistic
Ideal Laboratory Scale Analysis for
Statistical Method Assumption, Fitting
Reactor Identification of
Parameters
Reactions.

Fig. 3. Kinetic modelling steps.

value, reduction in moisture content with high equivalence ratio. Table 2

Mathematical modelling for gasification domain has been carried Spatial modelling.

out by many researchers and they proved it faster and more eco- Models Description References
nomic compared to the experimental analysis. As per the analysis 0D-S Models Limited to basic Principle.Gasifier as Marta Trninic
various types of gasification model have been developed using unique region and applied basic laws of et al 2020[31]
described earlier i.e. thermodynamic equilibrium and kinetic mod- thermodynamics for entire Control
els and it also includes computational fluid dynamic (CFD), artifi- volume.Fast Reaction Rate.
1D-S Models Second Level of ModellingDifferent Carlos A. Estrad
cial neural networks (ANN). Dipal Baruah et al. 2017 [35] firstly
geometric regions can be identifiedOne et al 2019[32]
developed an artificial neural network (ANN) based model of bio- dimensional different controlled volume
mass gasification in the field of fixed bed downdraft gasifiers. consideredFlow between controlled
CFD analysis has been carried out by Janajreh and Shrah 2013 volumes.
2D-S Models Important when second dimensions
[36] for gasification of wood chips in a downdraft gasifier. Though,
cannot be neglected.
this model is problematic to precisely calculate the tar removal, 3D-S Models Usual complexity in modelling.Complex Carlos A. Estrad
and char ignition due to absence of characteristics of feedstock, geometric conditions.All space et al 2019[32]
approximate reaction rate dependent on investigational observa- coordinates are considered.Three-
tions. Umesh Kumar and Manosh C. Paul 2019 [37] carried out dimensional changes of the numerous
speciesUses momentum equations and
the 2D modelling with computational fluid dynamics (CFD) mod-
basic thermodynamic rules as main
elling method for 20 kW downdraft gasifier. The author carried equations considering all the three
out the step-by-step method for evaluation of product gas compo- directions.
sition resulted from volatile parts break-up throughout the gasifi- Dynamic, or n Models include time as variableProcess Juan F. Perez
D-D, starting and ending are observed. et al 2012, [5]
cation [10,36]. The thermal equilibrium models, the steady state
Models
and completed reactions are assumed, which is not taken places
completely in actual system. These are totally based on various
operating, geometrical and kinetic factors. Thus, it can be observed
that the complete combustion products are counted more compare 5. Integrated small-scale gasification technologies
then incomplete combustion products. Other limitations with the
equilibrium model are not considering the gasifier type for predic- In India biomass is the most available renewable energy in the
tion, applicability with more residence time for completion of reac- form of agricultural residues, MSW, forest generated etc. Thus, the
tions while the downdraft gasifier has more complete carbon biomass utilization using gasification routes is the prime consider-
translation, high residence time of objects and little gas velocity ations for the researchers in the field of renewable energy in India
[38]. C. Dejtrakulwong, and S. Patumsawad 2014 [39] developed [2]. A small scale gasifier in India is developed by Indian Institute of
a mathematical model for downdraft biomass gasification process Science in the year of 1988 at Hosahalli, a village situated at
considering the different module for all the four domains of gasifi- 100 km from Bangalore, Karnataka which is based on multi fuel
cation i.e., drying, pyrolysis, oxidation and reduction. The sequen- gasification system and supplied the product gas to the IC engine
tial analysis i.e., product of first is the initialization for second and generates about 3.75 kWe of energy in the form of electricity
domain considered. Modeling of downdraft gasifier considering for household application in the village [45]. The continuous
three different domains i.e., drying zone, high temperature reduc- improvements have been carried out by the researchers in the sys-
tion zone and the oxidation zone are carried out by C. Diyoke et al. tem and after 9 years of work the capacity improved up to 20 kWe.
2018 [40]. A dual entry system biomass downdraft gasifier has In India in the various industries like sugar, the biomass is directly
been modelled by C. Di Blasi and C. Branca 2013 [41]. The influence combusted. The total capacity based on biomass gasification is
of secondary air is studied by the researchers. For a complete about 140 MW at present and it is aiming to be 1400 MW in next
mathematical model, it is essential to forecast the feedstock ingest- years as the Indian government is promoting various gasification
ing rate, reaction equivalence ratio and temperature at different plants [46]. Maximum of the small-scale biomass gasifiers are of
zone [41]. Kitipong Jaojaruek 2014 [42] developed a mathematical the fixed-bed downdraft kind. A different type of small-scale gasi-
model varies with gasifier dimensions using heat promoted chem- fier having open core design with additional input of secondary air
ical transformation rules to find out mass-energy equivalence. The have been reported by C. Di Blasi and C. Branca; 2013[41]. C. God-
author promised the model utilization for design and development inez et al. 2012 carried out the steady-state simulation of gasifica-
of gasifiers with product gas generation and composition. They tion of agricultural biomass having a moving bed downdraft
found out that there is close validation for feedstock consumption gasifier with the aim of hydrogen increment, for utilizing the pro-
rate, reaction equivalence ratio and temperature profile from the duct gas as a feedstock in a molten carbonate fuel cell (MCFC) [47].
model, for all zones in experimental analysis. Mohamed Ali Mas- As discussed previously the downdraft gasifiers have been come
moudi et al. 2017 [43] carried out an experimental examination out with different advancement are one of the maximum used
for a downdraft gasification process considering almond shell as gasifiers for pilot scale energy generation. The syngas generated
feedstock. Author used this experimentation approach for 2D mod- from the system is used as a fuel for various energy convertors
elling and results a novel two-dimensional model for partial oxida- [48]. Advanced machineries like Gas turbines, fuel cells are inte-
tion and gasification zone. In this model a detailed tar oxidation grated with the system and increases the efficiency of end applica-
and cracking mechanism have observed (Table 2). tions [49]. The integrated system having combined heat and power

5
P. Sharma, B. Gupta, M. Pandey et al.
Table 3
Biomass Gasification Integrated Systems.
Objective
Municipal solid waste
gasification on
integrated gasification
system following high
heat decomposition with
increment in output
energy.
Performance analysis of
gasification of fine
corncob mixtures
considering small scale
electricity generation.
Objective
Gasification of opf (oil palm
fronds) using downdraft
gasification
Municipal sludge
gasification in a
downdraft type gasifier
at pilot scale.
Development of a mobile
power plant having a
patented downdraft
gasifier system with
switch grass and eastern
red cedar as feed stocks
The main objective is to
contribute with a techno
analysis about the small-
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
Gasification system Parameters and results Ref.
Downdraft gasification with multi integrated gas cleaner systems consisting cyclones and Parameters: a/f ratio, [51]
temperature variation within
the specified limit, LHV, tar
devolatizationResults:
optimum AFR is 0.54, Tar
reduction up to 90%.
strainerElectrical power: 100 w Temperature: 500–800 °c,
Downdraft gasification with power generation system of 18 Parameters: fractions of fine [52]
corncob.Results: corncob
having lesser calorific value
than coal, but high reactivity
due to volatile matter content.
With particle size less than
kWe. 10 mm produce better syngas
quality syn gas composition:
hydrogen: 17%, carbon mono
oxide: 17%, carbon dioxide:
6.2% and methane: 3.1%
Gasification system Parameters and results Ref.
Downdraft gasification system having batch feeding of Parameters: temperature on [53]
reaction and a/f ratio, calorific
value, gasification efficiency.
Results: above 850 °C the
conversion rate is high.Syn gas
LHV 5.2 MJ/Nm3, at the 0.37
biomass.
optimal a/f ratio with
approximate 93% conversion
rate.
Pilot scale down-draft type fixed bed gasifier Parameters: Temperature: [54]
1100–1150, syngas
characteristics, gasification
residues: char as hand glassy
material.Results: about 1 kWh
electrical power generated for
almost 1.2 kg municipal sludge
gasified.Heavy metals is
residing as glassy materialSyn
reactor gas composition: H2: 23.3%, CO:
18.5%, CO2: 13.4% and CH4: 1.2%
The experimentation of downdraft gasifier evaluation at diverse ERS with switch grass and Parameters: gasification with [55,56]
100 kg/h capacity. ER: 0.15–0.3.
Biomass configuration, product
gas quantity, heating value,
solid residues, yielding rates.
Results:Switch grass:
gasification efficiency 64%, cold
gas efficiency 64%, equivalent
red cedar as biomass. ratio 0.22, co 18.2%, H2 9.7%,
calorific value 5.8 MJ/
Nm3Redcedar: gasification
efficiency 80%, cold gas
efficiency 57%, equivalent ratio
0.24, CO 18.2%, H2 15% calorific
value 6 MJ/Nm3
Gasification unit coupled to engine generator Parameters: gasification yield, [57]
specific fuel consumption and
power generation efficiency.
6
P. Sharma, B. Gupta, M. Pandey et al.
Table 3 (continued)
Objective
scale electricity
generation through
gasification of wood
residues associated to an
engine generator.
Objective
The 50 kW downdraft
gasifier using coconut
shell with charcoal as
feedstock are
experimentally
investigated.
Downdraft gasification with
different stage of firing
design and development
for low tar content and
production of cleanGas
from biomass fuel, with
electricity generation as
end application.
Producing syn gas having
downdraft gasification
system for wood chip as
biomass.In combination
with a small gas engine
for power generation as
end application
Establishment of a novel
gasification system with
the end production of
heated water with
22kWth load along with
heat exchanger.
Objective
Established a design
methodology for small
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
Gasification system Parameters and results Ref.
Results:High efficiency for
biomass gasification process:
60–70%Overall efficiency of the
engine generator set: 4.5–17%
set
Gasification system Parameters and results Ref.
Parameters: pressure and [58]
temperature.Results: gas
composition: H2: 8.44%, CO:
15.4%, CO2: 5.4% and CH4: 1.6%
at air flow rate 132.086 Gal/
mAnother conclusion made by
Gasification reactor setup
the research that gasification of
plant dry matter as biomass
with charcoal can support to
practical and environmental
product gas.
The gasification system furnished with cleaning and cooling of product Parameters: dust and tar [59]
reduction, cleaning and cooling
of product gas.Results: along
with some improvement the tar
content decreases up to
100 mg N/m3.Cold gas
efficiency has enhanced up to
90%. Tar content reduces up to
gas.
67 mg N/m3 counters to
711 mg N/m3 as the earlier one.
Electric conversion efficiency:
21%
Downdraft gasification power generation Parameters: gasification [60]
temperature: 1000 °CAir ratio,
tar contentResults:low heating
value of 1100–1200 kcal Nm3
and a cold gas efficiency of 69–
72%.Tar generation: 3.9–4.4g
Nm3.
system.
Performance examination of hot water generator Parameters: downdraft [50]
gasification parameters having
end application of water
heating like biomass feedstock,
tar content etc.Results: the
system having thermal
efficiency about 48% which is
much more than conventional
designs system with 20–24%. It is a
detached type pilot scale
biomass based warm water
generation system.
Gasification system Parameters and results Ref.
Small downdraft gasifiers of 4kWth Parameters: gasification air [15]
flow rate and the fuel particle
(continued on next page)
7
P. Sharma, B. Gupta, M. Pandey et al.
Table 3 (continued)
Objective Gasification system
downdraft gasifier of 4
kWth and 2.5 kWth
nominal capacities for
domestic cook stove
application by
acclimating strategies
destined for bigger
gasifier.Considering
Syzygium cumini as
feedstock. capacity
production is particularly helpful for farming founded rural econ-
omy in developing nations like India to substitute petroleum’s
[50]. There are some restrictions which need continuous
researches in the field for best utilization of syn gas like cleaning,
filtrations of product gas, many types of biomass acceptances, cap-
ital investment in device [51]. Table 3 shows the biomass gasifica-
tion integrated technology which uses downdraft gasifiers and can
be applied for small scale power productions. The downdraft
gasifiers-based considerations have been carried out as it is the
prime considerations for the present review.
6. Conclusion
India is second largest country in population and according to
census 2011 it has been estimated that about 68.84% population
is based on rural areas. Another fact is that about 1.79 million
km2 land area is covered as agricultural land in India which pro-
duces large amount of biomass in the form of agricultural residues
at the time of harvest even after processing. About 500 Metric ton/
year of agricultural field residues are generated as per the ministry
of new and renewable energy India, and out of which 25% are sur-
plus which either burned in the fields or wasted in many forms. All
of these energies should be utilized with having pilot scale power
plants instead of big gasification power plant, so that it can utilize
the biomass potential with required end applications in the rural
areas. A detailed review for kinetic and thermodynamic modelling,
integration with end applications are carried out considering
downdraft gasifiers, as downdraft gasifiers are the most appropri-
ate gasifiers for pilot scale applications with advantages having
less controlling, less feed stock preparation, less capital cost etc.
It has been observed that the downdraft gasifier has the various
advantages but also have some limitations like lower quality of
product, moisture content, tar content etc. while using in as
small-scale applications. Various researchers have been carried
out their research to overcome these limitations but big move to
be needed for higher conversion and higher efficiencies of the pilot
plant.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Prashant Sharma: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Method-
ology, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing. Bhupen-
dra Gupta: Supervision, Visualization, Writing - original draft,
Writing - review & editing. Mukesh Pandey: Supervision. Keshav
8
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
Parameters and results Ref.
size, product gas calorific value,
process efficiency, biomass and
air mixture composition.
Results: different sizes of the
gasifier can have a different
hearth load.Combination of
high reactor temperature and
high surface area favours high
gasification efficiency
Singh Bisen: Writing - review & editing. Prashant Baredar: Super-
vision, Visualization, Resources.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] P. Basu, Introduction In: Biomass Gasification Design Handbook, Elsevier;
2010. pp.1–25.
[2] Indian State Forest Report 2019, Forest Survey of India, Ministry of
Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of India.
[3] D. Barba, M. Capocelli, G. Cornacchia, D.A. Matera, Theoretical and
experimental procedure for scaling-up RDF gasifiers: The gibbs gradient
method, Fuel 179 (2016) 60–70.
[4] F.V. Tinaut, A. Melgar, J.F. Pérez, A. Horrillo, Effect of biomass particle size and
air superficial velocity on the gasification process in a downdraft fixed bed
gasifier. An experimental and modelling study, Fuel Proc. Technol. 89 (11)
(2008) 1076–1089.
[5] J.F. Pérez, A. Melgar, P.N. Benjumea, Effect of operating and design parameters
on the gasification/combustion process of waste biomass in fixed bed
downdraft reactors: An experimental study, Fuel 96 (2012) 487–496.
[6] A.M. Salem, I.N. Zaini, M.C. Paul, W. Yang, The evolution and formation of tar
species in a downdraft gasifier: Numerical modelling and experimental
validation, Biomass and Bioenergy 130 (2019) 105377.
[7] A.M. Salem, M.C. Paul, An integrated kinetic model for downdraft gasifier based
on a novel approach that optimises the reduction zone of gasifier, Biomass and
Bioenergy 109 (2018) 172–181.
[8] C. Higman, M. Burgt. Gasification. New York: Elsevier Science; 2003.
[9] A. Gagliano, F. Nocera, M. Bruno, G. Cardillo, Development of an equilibrium-
based model of gasification of biomass by aspen plus, Energy Procedia 111
(2017) 1010–1019.
[10] U. Kumar, M.C. Paul, Sensitivity analysis of homogeneous reactions for
thermochemical conversion of biomass in a downdraft gasifier, Renew.
Energy 151 (2020) 332–341.
[11] V.S. Sikarwar, M. Zhao, Biomass Gasification, Vol. 3, Encyclopedia of
Sustainable Technologies. Elsevier; 2017. pp. 205–216.
[12] S.K. Sansaniwal, K. Pal, M.A. Rosen, S.K. Tyagi, Recent advances in the
development of biomass gasification technology: A comprehensive review,
Renew. Sustainable Energy Rev. 72 (2017) 363–384.
[13] A.A.P. Susastriawan, H. Saptoadi, Purnomo, Comparison of the gasification
performance in the downdraft fixed-bed gasifier fed by different feedstocks:
Rice husk, sawdust, and their mixture, Sustain. Energy Technol. Assessments
34 (2019) 27–34.
[14] T. Sharma, D.M.Y. Maya, F.R.M. Nascimento, Y. Shi, A. Ratner, E.E.S. Lora, An
experimental and theoretical study of the gasification of miscanthus
briquettes in a double-stage downdraft gasifier: Syngas, tar, and biochar
characterization, Energies, vol. 11, 2018.
[15] K.B. Sutar, S. Kohli, M.R. Ravi, Design, development and testing of small
downdraft gasifiers for domestic cookstoves, Energy 124 (2017) 447–460.
[16] E.G. Pereira, M.A. Martins, Gasification Technologies, Vol. 4, Encyclopedia of
Sustainable Technologies, Elsevier, 2017, pp. 315–325.
P. Sharma, B. Gupta, M. Pandey et al.
[17] P. Kamble, Z. Khan, S. Capper, J. Sharp, I. Watson, Improving downdraft gasifier
stability by robust instrumentation and control systems, Energy Procedia 142
(2017) 2214–2217.
[18] S. Safarian, R. Unnþórsson, C. Richter, A review of biomass gasification
modelling, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 110 (2019) 378–391.
[19] J. Jia, L. Xu, A. Abudula, B. Sun, Effects of operating parameters on performance
of a downdraft gasifier in steady and transient state, Energy Conv. Manage.
155 (2018) 138–146.
[20] Z.A. Zainal, R. Ali, C.H. Lean, K.N. Seetharamu, Prediction of performance of a
downdraft gasifier using equilibrium modeling for different biomass materials,
Energy Conv. Manage. 42 (12) (2001) 1499–1515.
[21] A. Chaurasia, Modeling, simulation and optimization of downdraft gasifier:
Studies on chemical kinetics and operating conditions on the performance of
the biomass gasification process, Energy 116 (2016) 1065–1076.
[22] P.P. Dutta, V. Pandey, A.R. Das, S. Sen, D.C. Baruah, Down draft gasification
modelling and experimentation of some indigenous biomass for thermal
applications, Energy Procedia 54 (2014) 21–34.
[23] T.B. Reed, Principles and technology of biomass gasification, Adv. Solar Energy
(1985) 125–174.
[24] T.K. Patra, K.R. Nimisha, P.N. Sheth, A comprehensive dynamic model for
downdraft gasifier using heat and mass transport coupled with reaction
kinetics, Energy 116 (2016) 1230–1242.
[25] A. Melgar, J.F. Pérez, H. Laget, A. Horillo, Thermochemical equilibrium
modelling of a gasifying process, Energy Conv. Manage. 48 (1) (2007) 59–67.
[26] B. Fortunato, G. Brunetti, S.M. Camporeale, M. Torresi, F. Fornarelli,
Thermodynamic model of a downdraft gasifier, Energy Conv. Manage. 140
(2017) 281–294.
[27] P.C. Roy, A. Datta, N. Chakraborty, Assessment of cow dung as a supplementary
fuel in a downdraft biomass gasifier, Renew. Energy 35 (2) (2010) 379–386.
[28] E.S. Aydin, O. Yucel, H. Sadikoglu, Development of a semi-empirical
equilibrium model for downdraft gasification systems, Energy 130 (2017)
86–98.
[29] S. Jarungthammachote, A. Dutta, Thermodynamic equilibrium model and
second law analysis of a downdraft waste gasifier, Energy 32 (9) (2007) 1660–
1669.
[30] C.D. Blasi, Dynamic behaviour of stratified downdraft gasifiers, Chem. Eng. Sci.
55 (15) (2000) 2931–2944.
[31] M. Trninić, D. Stojiljković, N. Manić, Ø. Skreiberg, L. Wang, A. Jovović, A
mathematical model of biomass downdraft gasification with an integrated
pyrolysis model, Fuel 265 (2020) 116867.
[32] C.A. Estrada, A. Melgar, J.F. Pérez, Performance prediction of a decentralized
power plant (120 kWe) using a multi-particle model of a downdraft biomass
gasification process, Energy Conv. Manage. 181 (2019) 258–271.
[33] H. Siddiqui, S.K. Thengane, S. Sharma, S.M. Mahajani, Revamping downdraft
gasifier to minimize clinker formation for high-ash garden waste as feedstock,
Bioresource Technol. 266 (2018) 220–231.
[34] G.P. Oliveira, M.E. Sbampato, C.A. Martins, L.R. Santos, L.G. Barreta, R.F. Boschi
Gonçalves, Experimental laminar burning velocity of syngas from fixed-bed
downdraft biomass gasifiers, Renewable Energy, June 2020, vol. 142(1), pp.
423–31.
[35] D. Baruah, D.C. Baruah, M.K. Hazarika, Artificial neural network based
modeling of biomass gasification in fixed bed downdraft gasifiers, Biomass
and Bioenergy 98 (2017) 264–271.
[36] I. Janajreh, M. Al Shrah, Numerical and experimental investigation of
downdraft gasification of wood chips, Energy Conv. Manage. 65 (2013) 783–
792.
[37] U. Kumar, M.C. Paul, CFD modelling of biomass gasification with a volatile
break-up approach, Chem. Eng. Sci. 195 (2019) 413–422.
[38] U. Kumar, A.M. Salem, M.C. Paul, Investigating the thermochemical conversion
of biomass in a downdraft gasifier with a volatile break-up approach, Energy
Procedia 142 (2017) 822–828.
[39] C. Dejtrakulwong, S. Patumsawad, Four zones modeling of the downdraft
biomass gasification process: effects of moisture content and air to fuel ratio,
Energy Procedia 52 (2014) 142–149.
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
[40] C. Diyoke, N. Gao, M. Aneke, M. Wang, C. Wu, Modelling of down-draft
gasification of biomass – An integrated pyrolysis, combustion and reduction
process, Appl. Thermal Eng. 142 (2018) 444–456.
[41] C. Di Blasi, C. Branca, Modeling a stratified downdraft wood gasifier with
primary and secondary air entry, Fuel 104 (2013) 847–860.
[42] K. Jaojaruek, Mathematical model to predict temperature profile and air–fuel
equivalence ratio of a downdraft gasification process, Energy Conv. Manage. 83
(2014) 223–231.
[43] M.A. Masmoudi, K. Halouani, M. Sahraoui, Comprehensive experimental
investigation and numerical modeling of the combined partial oxidation-
gasification zone in a pilot downdraft air-blown gasifier, Energy Conv. Manage.
144 (2017) 34–52.
[44] T.K. Patra, P.N. Sheth, Biomass gasification models for downdraft gasifier: A
state-of-the-art review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 50 (2015) 583–593.
[45] C.C. Xu, B. Liao, S. Pang, L. Nazari, N. Mahmood, M.S.H.K. Tushar, A. Dutta, M.B.
Ray, Biomass Energy, Comprehensive Energy System, 2018, vol. 1, pp. 770–
794.
[46] P. Garcia-Bacaicoa, R. Bilbao, J. Arauzo, M. Luisa Salvador, Scale-up of
downdraft moving bed gasifiers (25–300 kg/h) — Design, experimental
aspects and results, Bioresource Technol. 48 (3) (1994) 229–235.
[47] C. Godinez, F.J. Hernández-Fernández, A.P. de los Ríos, L.J. Lozano, D. Illán,
Hydrogen generation in a downdraft moving bed gasifier coupled to a molten
carbonate fuel cell, Chem. Eng. Res. Design 90 (5) (2012) 690–695.
[48] G. Vonk, B. Piriou, P. Felipe Dos Santos, D. Wolbert, G. Vaïtilingom,
Comparative analysis of wood and solid recovered fuels gasification in a
downdraft fixed bed reactor, Waste Manage. 85 (2019) 106–120.
[49] P. Prasertcharoensuk, D.A. Hernandez, S.J. Bull, A.N. Phan, Optimisation of a
throat downdraft gasifier for hydrogen production, Biomass and Bioenergy
116 (2018) 216–226.
[50] Sunil, R. Sinha, B. Chaitanya, B.K. Rajan, A. Agarwal, A.D. Thakur, R. Raj, Design,
fabrication, and performance evaluation of a novel biomass-gasification-based
hot water generation system, Energy 185 (2019) 148–157.
[51] A. Wiyono, I.M. Gandidi, E.T. Berman, Mutaufiq, N.A. Pambudi, Design,
development and testing of integrated downdraft gasifier and multi IGCS
system of MSW for remote areas, Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 20
(2020) 100612.
[52] L.V. Martínez, J.E. Rubiano, M. Figueredo, M.F. Gómez, Experimental study on
the performance of gasification of corncobs in a downdraft fixed bed gasifier at
various conditions, Renew. Energy 148 (2020) 1216–1226.
[53] S.M. Atnaw, S.A. Sulaiman, S. Yusup, Syngas production from downdraft
gasification of oil palm fronds, Energy 61 (2013) 491–501.
[54] A. Ayol, O. Tezer Yurdakos, A. Gurgen, Investigation of municipal sludge
gasification potential: Gasification characteristics of dried sludge in a pilot-
scale downdraft fixed bed gasifier, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 44 (32) (2019)
17397–17410.
[55] P.R. Bhoi, R.L. Huhnke, A. Kumar, N. Indrawan, S. Thapa, Co-gasification of
municipal solid waste and biomass in a commercial scale downdraft gasifier,
Energy 163 (2018) 513–518.
[56] P.R. Bhoi, R.L. Huhnke, A. Kumar, S. Thapa, N. Indrawan, Scale-up of a
downdraft gasifier system for commercial scale mobile power generation,
Renew. Energy 118 (2018) 25–33.
[57] L.I. Chaves, M.J. da Silva, S.N.M. de Souza, D. Secco, H.A. Rosa, C.E.C. Nogueira, E.
P. Frigo, Small-scale power generation analysis: Downdraft gasifier coupled to
engine generator set, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 58 (2016) 491–498.
[58] M.U. Monir, A. Abd Aziz, R.A. Kristanti, A. Yousuf, Gasification of lignocellulosic
biomass to produce syngas in a 50 kW downdraft reactor, Biomass and
Bioenergy 119 (2018) 335–345.
[59] P. Raman, N.K. Ram, R. Gupta, A dual fired downdraft gasifier system to
produce cleaner gas for power generation: Design, development and
performance analysis, Energy 54 (2013) 302–314.
[60] Y.-I. Son, S.J. Yoon, Y.K. Kim, J.-G. Lee, Gasification and power generation
characteristics of woody biomass utilizing a downdraft gasifier, Biomass and
Bioenergy 35 (10) (2011) 4215–4220.