BULK DENSITY OF WET AND DRY WHEAT STRAW

AND SWITCHGRASS PARTICLES

P. S. Lam, S. Sokhansanj, X. Bi, C. J. Lim, L. J. Naimi, M. Hoque,

S. Mani, A. R. Womac, X. P. Ye, S. Narayan

ABSTRACT. Bulk density is a major physical property in designing the logistic system for biomass handling. The size, shape,
moisture content, individual particle density, and surface characteristics are few factors affecting the bulk density. This
research investigates the effects of true particle lengths ranging from 6 to 50 mm and moisture contents ranging from 8% to
60% wet basis (wb) on the bulk density of wheat straw and switchgrass. Three types of particle densities of straw and
switchgrass measured were: a hollow particle density assuming a hollow cylindrical geometry, a solid particle density
assuming a solid cylindrical geometry, and a particle density measured using a gas pycnometer at a gas pressure of 40 kPa.
The bulk density of both loose‐fill and packed‐fill biomass samples was examined. The calculated wet and dry bulk density
ranged from 24 to 111 kg m ‐3 for straw and from 49 to 266 kg m ‐3 for switchgrass. The corresponding tapped bulk density
ranged from 34 to 130 kg m ‐3 for straw and 68 to 323 kg m ‐3 for switchgrass. The increase in bulk density due to tapping the
container was from 10% for short 6‐mm particles to more than 50% for long 50‐mm particles. An equation relating the bulk
density of stems as a function of moisture content, dry bulk density, and particle size was developed. After the validation of
this bulk density equation, the relationship would be highly useful in designing the logistics system for large‐scale transport
of biomass to a biorefinery. The bulk density and particle density data of uniform particles would be important, if straw and
switchgrass is used for pulping and paper making.
Keywords. Bulk density, Particle density, Straw, Switchgrass, Packing, Porosity, Fibrous biomass.

B
ulk density is an important characteristic of
biomass that influences directly the cost of
feedstock delivered to a biorefinery and storage
cost (Sokhansanj and Fenton, 2006). It also
impacts storage requirements, the sizing of the material
handling system and how the material behaves during
subsequent thermo‐chemical and biological processes.
(McKendry, 2002). The engineering design and operation of
transport equipment, storages, and conversion processes
Submitted for review in November 2007 as manuscript number FPE
7262; approved for publication by Food & Process Engineering Institute
Division of ASABE in April 2008. Presented at the 2007 ASABE Annual
Meeting as Paper No. 076058.
The authors are Pak Sui Lam, ASABE Member, Graduate Research
Associate, Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering,
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada;
Shahab Sokhansanj, ASABE Member, Adjunct professor, Department of
Chemical and Biological Engineering, University of British Columbia,
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada and Distinguished Research
Scientist Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Environmental Sciences
Division, Oak Ridge, Tennessee; Xiaotao Bi, Professor, C. Jim Lim,
Professor, Ladan J. Naimi, ASABE Member, Graduate Research
Associate, Mozammel Hoque, ASABE Member, Posdoctoral Associate
Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, University of British
Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada,; Sudhagar Mani,
Assistant Professor, Faculty of Engineering, Driftmier Engineering Center,
University of Georgia, Athens Georgia; Alvin Ray Womac, ASABE
Member, Professor, X. Philip Ye, Assistant Professor, Department of
Biosystems Engineering and Soil Science, The University of Tennessee,
Knoxville, Tennessee; Sundar Narayan, Professor, Lambton College,
Sarnia, Ontario, Canada. Corresponding author: Pak Sui Lam,
Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, University of British
Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, V6T1Z3; phone:
604‐827‐3413; fax: 604‐802‐6003; e‐mail: plam@chml.ubc.ca.
depends on bulk density and flow characteristics of feedstock
(Woodcock and Mason, 1987). A recent study by Ryu et al.
(2006) investigated the effect of bulk density on the
combustion characteristics of biomass. They found that the
ignition front speed was inversely proportional to bulk
density, while the burning rate tends to decrease linearly. As
a physical property, bulk density (rb ) depends on material
composition (c), particle shape (f) and size (l, d), orientation
of particles (s), specific density of individual particles (rp ),
particle size distribution (PSD), moisture content (mc), and
applied axial pressure (p) (Peleg, 1983; Lang et al., 1993;
Sokhansanj and Lang, 1996).
ò = f ( c , ò , l , d , f , s , PSD , mc , p ) (1)
b p
where l and d are length and diameter of particles. The
variables in the right side of equation 1 are not all
independent of each other. For example, moisture content has
an effect on particle density and surface characteristics.
Similarly, particle size and distribution depends on upstream
processes such as chopping, drying, grinding, sieving, etc.
Length (l) and diameter (d) define a shape factor (f) for the
particle. Other factors such as surface characteristics also
affect the bulk density and flow characteristics of biomass.
The agricultural biomass particles are usually cylindrical
or disk shape depending upon the part of the plant they
originate. The long particles with aspect ratio (l/d) of greater
than one are classified as cylindrical while the short particles
(l/d<1) are classified as disk. The packing behavior of these
non‐spherical shapes usually starts from studying the
mono‐sized particles (Zou and Yu, 1996a; Zhang et al., 2006)
and then gradually moves to the particle mixtures with

Applied Engineering in Agriculture

Vol. 24(3): 351‐358 E 2008 American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers ISSN 0883-8542 351
different shapes and volume fractions (Yu and Zou, 1996;
Zou et al., 1997).
Zou and Yu (1996a) and Yu and Zou (1996) developed
equations to estimate the porosity of mono‐sized
non‐spherical particles by defining a sphericity factor. In a
subsequent publication, Zou et al. (1997) reported that the
packing of long cylindrical particles was dependent on the
length distribution of particles and the porosity of bulk
cylindrical particles could not be estimated from packing
relations for spherical particles. The shape and size effect
contribute to the packing structure of the non‐spherical
particles and the shape effect dominates the packing structure
with the particle length distribution. They assumed a
well‐defined solid cylindrical geometry in their analysis. The
applicability of this phenomenon to biomass particles may be
questionable as straws and switchgrass are hollow‐tube
structures with non‐uniform diameter along the particle
length.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this research is to measure the bulk
density of straw and switchgrass with respect to some of the
measurable physical attributes (particle length and moisture
content) and to develop predictive equations for bulk density
of biomass.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
SAMPLE PREPARATION
The wheat straw was collected from Richmond Country
Farms, Richmond, BC. The bales were of rectangular shape
with a moisture content of 8.45% wet basis (wb) as received.
The switchgrass was a round bale acquired from a farm in
Manitoba. The moisture content of switchgrass was 7.96%
wet basis (wb) as received. The moisture contents were
measured using ASAE Standard S358.2 FEB 03 (ASABE
Standards, 2006) for forages. The procedure specifies drying
5‐ to 20‐g samples of chopped or ground material in a
convection oven at 105°C for 24 h. The moisture content is
determined by subtracting the dried mass from original wet
mass divided by the wet mass.
The stems of straw and switchgrass were sorted out
manually. The leafy material and small pieces were removed.
The stems were cut into sizes of 50.80, 25.40, 12.70, and
6.35 mm (2, 1, 1/2, and 1/4 in.) using a scissor. The actual
particles size of switchgrass and straw are listed in table 1.
The moisture content of switchgrass and straw was
adjusted by spraying a predetermined amount of distilled
water uniformly over the samples in a container. The
moistened samples were thoroughly mixed and sealed inside
a plastic bag. The bags were placed inside a sealed plastic
container for 48 h at 4°C to allow the samples to equilibrate
to three levels of target moisture content (i.e., 20%, 40%, and
60% wb). The final moisture contents were measured using
air oven method (ASAE Standard S358.2 FEB 03, ASABE
Standards, 2006).
BULK DENSITY
Bulk density of wheat straw and switchgrass was
determined according to the ASAE Standard S269.4 DEC 91
(ASABE Standards, 2007) for cubes, pellets, and crumbles.
Three cylindrical containers each with a specific inside
diameter (DT) were used for determination of bulk density of
different particle sizes (table 1). Figure 1 shows a plexiglass
container loosely filled with the same size switchgrass
particles to measure bulk density. Each measurement was
repeated for five refills using the same straw or switchgrass
sample. Biomass was poured into the container from a certain
height to facilitate the free flowing of the samples until the
container was overflowed. The height of pour for 50‐ and
25‐mm long particles was 500 mm and for 12.5‐ and 6‐mm
long particles was 200 mm. The height of pour was measured
from the bottom of the container. The excess material was
removed by striking a straight edge across the top. The weight
of the material with the container was recorded. The net
weight of the sample was obtained by subtracting the weight
of the empty container. For tapped density, the loosely filled
container was tapped on the laboratory bench five times by
dropping the container from a height of 50 and 10 cm for the
long and short particles, respectively. Tapping was done by
the same individual. Filling and tapping was repeated until
the container was overflowed. The filled container was
weighed to 0.01‐g precision. Bulk density was calculated by
dividing the mass over the container volume.
PARTICLE DENSITY
The straw and switchgrass are hollow cylindrical particles
as shown schematically in figure 2. Cleaned stems of straw
and switchgrass were oven dried at 105°C for 24 h. The
volume of a single particle was measured in three ways: by
geometrical dimensions (assumed as hollow and solid) and
by gas displacement. These volume measurements are
described below.

Table 1. Measured dimensions and mass of single particles (n=10).

Length, L (mm) Diameter, Din (mm) Thickness, t (mm) Mass, mp (g)
Type of
Biomass Average SD Average SD Average SD Average SD
56.598 2.708 2.648 0.419 0.146 0.053 0.029 0.010
34.503 2.045 2.914 0.542 0.145 0.035 0.024 0.008
Wheat straw
17.172 1.432 2.952 0.346 0.125 0.025 0.010 0.003
9.078 0.530 3.380 0.485 0.216 0.073 0.008 0.003
51.774 1.990 2.600 0.581 0.340 0.108 0.064 0.019
28.974 3.013 2.855 0.565 0.581 0.239 0.043 0.019
Switchgrass
14.721 1.079 2.916 0.562 0.486 0.152 0.025 0.015
8.042 1.064 2.420 0.468 0.486 0.152 0.008 0.002

352 APPLIED ENGINEERING IN AGRICULTURE

 radius of the hollow stem (m), Vp, hollow is the actual volume
of the hollow cylindrical samples (m3), and Vp, solid is the
actual volume of the solid cylindrical samples (m3).

Gas Displacement
A gas multipycnometer (Quantachrome Corp., Boynton
Beach, Fla.) that measures the volume of a group of particles
was used. The measurement is based on the pressure
difference between a known reference volume (VR ) and the
volume of the instrument's sample cell (Vc ). Nitrogen is used
as the gas to fill the reference and sample cells. The pressure
is set at around 40 kPa (near maximum as specified by the
instrument specifications). The pycnometer volume of the
sample (Vp) is calculated from
⎛P ⎞ (6)
V p = Vc − V R ⎢⎢ 1 − 1⎟⎟
⎝ P2 ⎠
where P1 is the pressure reading after pressurizing the
reference cell (kPa), P2 is the pressure after connecting the
Figure 1. A container filled with 14.7‐mm Switchgrass particles for bulk reference cell to the sample cell. The particle density (ρs ) of
density measurement.
the sample is its mass mp divided by the pycnometer particle
volume (Vpvc )
Dimensional Measurement
mp (7)
The length (l), diameter (Dout ), and the thickness (t) of ò =
10 particles in each size group were measured using a s
V pvc
150‐mm Mastercraft digital caliper with a precision of
0.01 mm. The weight (mp ) of each particle was measured The instrument readings on each sample were repeated three
using A&D GR200 digital balance with a precision of 0.1 mg. times.
The average diameter of the samples was taken as the average
value of the diameter in both ends and the middle of the WET AND DRY BULK DENSITY RELATIONSHIPS
samples along the length of the sample. The particle density The relationship between the wet (w) and dry (d) bulk
measurement of each sample was determined from the density of the samples is represented as a mixture equation in
following equations: two forms of equation 8 (Peleg, 1983) and equation 9
mp (2) (Hollenbach et al., 1982)
òp =
V p , hollow 1 1− Mw Mw (8)
= +
ò ò ò
b d w
Dout − Din (3)
t=
2 ò = ò (1 + M ) (9)
b d w
where ρb is the wet bulk density of the samples (kg m‐3) at
V p , hollow = (2rt + t 2 )pl (4)
moisture content of Mw, ρd is the bulk density (kg m‐3)
measured using a bone dried sample. Mw is the moisture
V p , solid = pr 2 l (5) content of the wet samples (decimal wet basis), ρw is the bulk
density of water (1000 kg m‐3).
where rp is the particle density of the samples (kg/m3), mp is
the mass of the samples (kg), t is the thickness of the wall of
the tube (m), Din is the inner diameter of the samples (m),
Dout is the outer diameter of the samples (m), r is the inner RESULTS
PARTICLE VOLUME AND DENSITY
L Table 1 lists the length, diameter, tube thickness, and the
mass of each of the cut stems of straw and switchgrass. The
t average lengths deviated from the target lengths by a few
millimeters. In most cases, the coefficient of variations
(standard deviation divided by average) among 10 samples
in each length group were around 0.10 to 0.15 (10% to 15%).
Dout
Outside diameter of the particles ranged from 2.4 to 2.9 mm
Din except the 9‐mm wheat straw. Switchgrass stems were more
than twice in thickness than the straw and that reflected in the
Figure 2. Dimensions of a stem assuming cylindrical shape (L: length,
Dout: outer diameter, t: wall thickness, Din: inner diameter of the hollow mass of most of the individual particles.
stem).

Vol. 24(3): 351‐358 353

 Table 2. Volume and density of individual particles calculated from dimensional measurement and from gas displacement.
Volume (cm3) Particle Density (g cm‐3)
Nominal Lengths
Biomass (mm) Hollow Solid Pycn[a] Hollow Solid Pycn[a] Pycn[b]
50.80 0.074 0.316 0.027 0.497 0.093 1.058 1.275
25.40 0.050 0.239 0.026 0.557 0.106 0.930
Wheat
12.70 0.021 0.118 0.008 0.519 0.084 1.178
6.35 0.023 0.083 0.008 0.395 0.093 1.038
50.80 0.169 0.285 0.102 0.544 0.241 0.630 1.179
25.40 0.193 0.189 0.069 0.377 0.227 0.619
Switchgrass
12.70 0.080 0.101 0.038 0.454 0.244 0.657
6.35 0.036 0.038 0.012 0.366 0.223 0.657
[a] Readings from gas displacement pycnometer at 40‐kPa pressure.
[b] Particle density of the finely ground biomass (sieved through 60 mesh 0.25 mm) measured with pycnometer.

Table 2 lists the calculated volumes from dimensional
measurements and gas displacement (pycnometer). The
volumes calculated from a hollow cylinder was less than that
calculated from a solid cylinder. Single particle volumes
measured by pycnometer showed switchgrass have more
solids than the straw. The volumes of individual particles
measured using pycnometer were generally less than the
volumes calculated from dimensional measurements
indicating that the gas in pycnometer had filled some of the
cellular voids. The last column lists the particle density of
powdered switchgrass and straw. The particle density for
wheat straw appears to be nearer to the particle density of
finely ground sample. But for switchgrass, the particle
density of finely ground sample was almost twice the particle
size of the large particles. The applied pressure of 40 kPa on
gas was not adequate to penetrate all of the voids in the
switchgrass particle.
BULK VOLUME AND DENSITY
Table 3 lists the results of mass and bulk volume of dry and
wet biomass and the calculated bulk density for each size
group. The ratio of the container diameter to the length of the
particles ranged from 5.38 to 24. Zou and Yu (1996b) states
that the diameter of the column should be at least 20 times the
equivalent volume diameter of cylindrical particle in order to
minimize the edge effect. We noticed larger variations in
measured bulk mass of larger particles than in measured bulk
mass of smaller particles and this may be due to the edge
effect. This needs to be verified by constructing a larger
diameter container for measuring the bulk density of larger
particles (i.e. to have the ratio of container diameter over the
largest particle length more than 20). If we assume a diameter
to particle length ratio of 20 for the 50‐mm length particle,
the container diameter should be at least a meter.
The wet bulk density increases as the particle size
decreases and moisture content increases. The least bulk
density was 24 kg m‐3 for 8% moisture content of 56.6‐mm
straw particle in a loose fill and that increased to a maximum
of 111 kg m‐3 for 61.2% moisture content with the 9.1‐mm
particle. The tapped density of the straw increased from
34 kg m‐3 for 8.5% moisture content to 130 kg m‐3 for 61.2%
moisture content. The least bulk density of switchgrass for
loose fill was 49 kg m‐3 for 8% moisture content of 51.8‐mm
particle and increased to the maximum density of 323 kg m‐3
for 59.4% moisture content of 8‐mm particles when tapped.
Arthur et al. (1982) reported that the average bulk density of
tub ground wheat straw using 50.8‐mm screen size was about
56 kg m‐3 and was highly varied with particle size
distribution of the sample. Ebeling and Jenkins (1985)
reported that loose bulk density of wheat straw was about
20 kg m‐3 and was increased to 65 kg m‐3 when the sample
was chopped into smaller sizes( 10% moisture content).
Switchgrass had a higher bulk density (on average 125 kg m‐3
for loose‐fill and 147 kg m‐3 for tapped) than straw (50 kg m‐3
for loose‐fill and 65 kg m‐3 for tapped). Bulk density
increased with moisture content of particles. The tapped bulk
densities of wheat straws and switchgrass ranged from 34 to
130 kg m‐3 and 68 to 323 kg m‐3, respectively, for the
moisture content of 8% to 60% for four different particle
sizes. The percent increase in bulk density due to tapping was
the highest for longer biomass particles than for shorter
particles. For most tests, tapping switchgrass produced a
larger percentage increase in bulk density than wheat straw.
Visually, we could not detect any influence of moisture
content on bulk density change due to tapping.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WET AND DRY BULK DENSITY
Equations 8 and 9 were used for predicting the wet bulk
density from the dry bulk density. We assumed the measured
bulk density at 8% moisture content to be the dry bulk
density. We then calculated bulk density of switchgrass and
straw for moisture contents at 20%, 40%, and 60% wb.
Figure 3 shows sum of square of errors (SSE) between the
predicted and measured values. For switchgrass, the SSE for
equation 9 was higher than the SSE for equation 8. The SSE
values were small for larger particles. The SSE values
increased for the smaller particles. For wheat straw, the SSE
for equation 9 was slightly lower than the SSE for equation 8,
but the SSE increased at high moisture of 60%. For
equation 8, the SSE values appeared to be more random than
those for equation 9. We recommend equation 8 for further
analysis.
The relationship between the dry bulk density and particle
size can best be described by power law equations in the
following form,
ò = ax −b (10)
b
where rb is the dry bulk density and x is the nominal particle
size. Table 4 lists constants a and b and R2 for equation 10.
The estimated values for a and b in table 4 were averaged and
it was observed that the constant a did not change much

354 APPLIED ENGINEERING IN AGRICULTURE

 Table 3. Volume and mass of straw and switchgrass for calculating bulk density.
Loose Fill (n = 5) Tapped Dense (n = 5 )
Moisture Content (%wb) Stem
Length Mean SD Volume Density Mean SD Density
Target Measured SD Mean (mm) Mass (g) Mass (g) (cm3) (kg m‐3) Mass (g) Mass (g) (kg m‐3)
Wheat Straw
8.50 0.1 56.6 287.0 10.0 11880 24 548.1 3.7 46
34.5 383.2 19.1 11880 32 401.0 10.1 34
8
17.2 105.0 1.5 2300 46 139.7 1.7 61
9.1 121.5 1.9 2300 53 168.1 1.9 73
21.6 0.7 56.6 322.0 6.7 11880 27 440.0 7.1 37
19.6 1.0 34.5 415.0 6.0 11880 35 525.4 7.6 44
20
20.7 0.6 17.2 98.2 6.5 2300 43 112.2 0.5 49
18.7 1.3 9.1 119.6 1.7 2300 52 141.6 1.7 62
43.7 1.0 56.6 348.8 3.0 11880 29 526.6 7.3 44
48.1 2.4 34.5 491.6 4.0 11880 41 683.8 3.9 58
40
43.1 12.1 17.2 131.6 1.1 2300 57 161.6 1.1 70
41.4 5.0 9.1 162.6 0.9 2300 71 197.2 2.3 86
58.6 1.1 56.6 634.0 10.0 11880 53 912.8 3.7 77
56.4 1.5 34.5 472.6 22.7 11880 40 728.4 7.9 61
60
64.6 2.7 17.2 192.8 6.0 2300 84 239.8 1.9 104
61.2 3.6 9.1 255.6 2.1 2300 111 300.0 1.6 130
Switchgrass
8.0 0.2 51.8 587.4 4.4 11880 49 804.0 8.2 68
29.0 1012.6 13.6 11880 85 1102.6 0.9 93
8
14.7 286.0 4.6 2300 124 355.6 2.4 155
8.0 50.0 -- 310 161 50.0 -- 161
23.0 1.5 51.8 616.8 5.6 11880 52 815.2 13.3 69
24.0 0.2 29.0 972.0 3.7 11880 82 1252.6 6.4 105
20
19.0 1.9 14.7 275.6 2.3 2300 120 337.2 2.6 147
22.8 2.0 8.0 55.0 -- 390 141 55.0 -- 141
43.0 3.6 51.8 704.4 10.2 11880 59 1063.4 11.3 90
39.2 3.2 29.0 1096.4 12.3 11880 92 1492.4 11.2 126
40
41.5 1.3 14.7 350.0 2.9 2300 152 432.6 2.4 188
36.0 1.3 8.0 67.0 -- 410 165 67.0 -- 196
57.6 0.7 51.8 881.4 40.9 11880 74 1336.0 31.6 112
54.7 0.4 29.0 1753.6 7.3 11880 148 2181.2 13.7 184
60
58.6 1.1 14.7 512.8 5.9 2300 223 662.6 4.3 288
59.4 3.5 8.0 101.0 -- 380 266 101.0 -- 323

between loose and tapped fill for straw and switchgrass.
Overall estimates for a and b were found by trial and error
procedure as a = 166.24, b = 0.41 for straw, and a = 574.5 and
b = 0.54 for switchgrass. For estimating the tapped density,
the values of b decreased to 0.33 for straw and 0.46 for
switchgrass.
Figure 4 is the plot of wet bulk density of biomass
calculated by combining equations 8 and 10, and using the
values of a and b from table 4.
1 1− M w MW
= +
òb ax −b òw
Visually, the equation represents the wet bulk density of
biomass reasonably good. As it was shown in figure 3, the
predictions become less accurate for smaller size particles.
DISCUSSION
Biomass samples used in this research had several
characteristics that would influence the applicability of the
results to real situations: (1) samples were clean and made up
solely of stems, (2) samples were cut to exact lengths and the
bulk density of each size groups were measured separately,
and (3) samples were artificially wetted by spraying water on
the sample in order to attain high moisture conditions. The
lengths studied were limited to a range between 6 mm to just
(11) over 50 mm. Uniform size of straw and switchgrass particles
results in low bulk density due to large pore spaces among
particles. The higher bulk density due to reorientation of the
particles was achieved by tapping the container five times on
the work bench. In practice, this kind of tapping is not
practical and needs to be replaced by vibration. The
direction, amplitude, and frequency of vibrations to achieve

Vol. 24(3): 351‐358 355

 2500
WS Series
WS Parallel
2000
SG Series
SG Parallel

Square of errors 1500

1000

500

0
20% 20% 20% 20% 40% 40% 40% 40% 60% 60% 60% 60%
50 mm 25 mm 12 mm 6 mm 50 mm 25 mm 12 mm 6 mm 50 mm 25 mm 12 mm 6 mm

Figure 3. The square of errors of the values obtained from series and parallel equation for the prediction of wet based bulk density from dry based bulk
density at different moisture content and particle sizes of wheat straw (WS) and switchgrass (SG).

maximum bulk density needs to be explored. The real bulk CONCLUSIONS

biomass is made up of particles of varying sizes and various
parts of the plant (leaves, nodes, stems). The question is how
deviations from a bulk of stems of a single size would affect
the bulk density of a group of heterogeneous material. The
high moisture content biomass used in these experiments was
artificially moistened by adding water. The artificially
wetted material will have bulk properties different from
naturally moist biomass. It is important to quantify and
develop relationships that would reflect the real samples. The
present results would be highly valuable where uniform sized
straw and switchgrass particles are used. In paper making
process, the properties of uniform particle sizes are very
important during pulping and fiber making process. Wheat
straw and switchgrass are potential, low‐cost feedstock for
paper making and preparing uniform sized particles are very
important to maintain minimum fiber length during pulping
process.
The following conclusions are drawn from this work:
1 The bulk density of switchgrass ranged from 49 to
266 kg m‐3 for loose fill and from 68 to 288 kg m‐3 for
packed fill after tapping. For straw these values ranged
from 24 to 111 kg m‐3 for loose fill and from 37 to
130 kg m‐3 for the packed fill.
2 Longer particles resulted in a larger percentage increase in
packing than the smaller particles by tapping. In some
cases the increase in bulk density as a result of packing was
more than 50%. Increase in bulk density of small particles
(6 mm) was about 10%.
3 For estimating bulk density of a moist material from the
bulk density of dry material we found less bias and
deviation from actual measured values when using
1 1 − M w M W where rb is the wet bulk density of
= +
òb òd òw
biomass at a moisture content of Mw (decimal fraction wet
basis), x is the particle length (mm).

Table 4. Relationship between biomass particle size and bulk and tapped densities.
Bulk Density, ρb (kg/m3) Tapped Density, ρtb (kg/m3)
Moisture
Biomass Content a b R2 RMSE[a] a b R2 RMSE
8 113.79 0.39 0.98 5.08 150.95 0.37 0.99 9.00
20 98.80 0.32 0.97 3.08 97.88 0.25 1.00 3.03
Wheat straw
40 161.64 0.43 0.99 6.63 155.20 0.31 1.00 6.39
60 290.71 0.51 0.99 14.51 261.04 0.37 1.00 14.34
8 502.10 0.57 0.98 11.04 494.82 0.49 0.96 14.45
20 378.10 0.49 0.96 10.58 397.28 0.43 0.94 16.40
Switchgrass
40 479.77 0.52 0.94 16.50 448.51 0.40 0.92 17.37
60 938.03 0.61 0.93 26.18 938.67 0.52 0.93 28.84
[a] The root mean square error.

356 APPLIED ENGINEERING IN AGRICULTURE

 350
300
Bulk density (wb) (kg/m3)
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 10
Figure 4. Measured (symbols) and calculated wet bulk density (solid lines) of switchgrass (SG) and wheat straw (WS) at different sizes and moisture
contents for the loose packing using equation 11 and constants from table 4.
4 Individual particle density was dependent upon the way
we calculated or measured the volume of the particles.
Assuming that a particle was a solid cylinder, the particle
density of wheat straw was about 90 kg m‐3, assuming it
was a hollow cylinder, the particle density was 500 kg m‐3,
and measuring the volume using a pycnometer, the
particle density was roughly 1100 kg m‐3. The
corresponding values for switchgrass were 230 for solid,
400 for hollow, and 650 kg m‐3 for pycnometer
measurements. We concluded that the biomass needs to be
pulverized in order to have an accurate particle density
(solid density) measurements.
5 Further work is required to determine an optimum size for
the container for bulk density measurement and a
procedure for loose and pack fills. We also need to
measure the volume change of a given quantity of biomass
of mix of sizes. This work should be repeated with freshly
harvested material of high moisture content.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This research is made possible through a USDA/DOE
Grant to the University of Tennessee and a sub contract to the
University of British Columbia. The financial assistance
from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in support of the
logistics project is acknowledged. NSERC's Discovery and
Strategic Grants supported the work of graduate students on
this and related projects.
REFERENCES
Arthur, J. F., R. A. Kepner, J. B. Dobie, G. E. Miller, and P. S.
Parsons. 1982. Tub grinder performance with crop and forest
residues. Transactions of the ASAE 25(6): 1488‐1494.
ASABE Standards. 2006. S358.2. Moisture measurement - Forages.
St. Joseph, Mich.: ASABE.
Vol. 24(3): 351‐358
WS 8% mc WS 20% mc
WS 40% mc WS 60% mc
SG 8% mc SG 20% mc
SG 40% mc SG 60% mc
20 30 40 50 60
Nominal particle size (mm)
ASABE Standards. 2007. S269.4. Cubes, pellets and crumbles -
Definitions and methods for determining density, durability and
moisture content. St. Joseph, Mich.: ASABE.
Ebeling, J. M., and B. M. Jenkins. 1985. Physical and chemical
properties of biomass fuels. Transactions of the ASAE 28(3):
898‐901.
Fasina, O. O. 2006. Flow and physical properties of switchgrass,
peanut hull and poultry litter. Transactions of the ASABE 49(3):
721‐728.
Hollenbach, A. M., M. Peleg, and R. Rufner. 1982. Effect of four
anticaking agents on the bulk characteristics of ground sugar. J.
Food Sci. 47(2): 538‐544.
Lang, W., S. Sokhansanj, and F. W. Sosulski. 1993. Bulk volume
shrinkage during drying of wheat and canola. J. Food Process
Eng. 16(4): 966‐5334
McKendry, P. 2002. Energy production from biomass (part 1):
Overview of biomass. Bioresour. Technol. 83(1): 37‐46.
Mani, S., L. G. Tabil, and S. Sokhansanj. 2004. Grinding
performance and physical properties of wheat and barley straws,
corn stover and switchgrass. Biomass Bioenergy 27(4): 339‐35.
Peleg, M. 1983. Physical characteristics of food powders. In
Physical Properties of Food, 293‐321. Westport, Conn.: AVI
Publishing Co., Inc.
Ryu, C., Y. B. Yang, A. Bhor, N. E. Yates, V. N. Sharifi, and J.
Switenbank. 2006. Effect of fuel properties on biomass
combustion: Part 1. Experiments‐fuel type, equivalence ratio and
particle size. Fuel 85(7‐8): 1039‐1046.
Sokhansanj, S., and W. Lang. 1996. Prediction of kernel and bulk
volume of wheat and canola during adsorption and desorption.
J. Agr. Eng. Res. 63(2): 129‐136.
Sokhansanj, S., and J. Fenton. 2006. Cost benefit of biomass supply
and pre‐processing, BIOCAP research integration program
synthesis paper. Ottawa, Canada: BIOCAP Canada Foundation.
Yu, A. B., and R. P. Zou. 1996. Modifying the linear packing model
for predicting the porosity of nonspherical particle mixtures. Ind.
Eng. Chem. Res. 35(10): 3730‐3741.
Zhang, W., K. E. Thompson, A. H. Reed, and L. Beenken. 2006.
Relationship between packing structure and porosity in fixed
beds of equilateral cylindrical particles. Chem. Eng. Sci. 61(24):
8060‐8074.
357
Zou, R. P., and A. B. Yu. 1996a. Evaluation of the packing mp Mass of the samples (g)
characteristics of mono‐sized non‐spherical particles. Powder P1 Pressure reading after pressurizing the reference
Technol. 88(1): 71‐79. volume (kPa)
Zou, R. P., and A. B. Yu. 1996b. Wall effect on the packing of P2 Pressure after including the volume of the cell (kPa)
cylindrical particles. Chem. Eng. Sci. 51(7): 1177‐1180.
r Inner radius of the hollow stem (m)
Zou, R. P., X. Lin, A. B. Yu, and P. Wong. 1997. Packing of
cylindrical particles with a length distribution. J. Am. Ceram. t Thickness of the inner wall of the samples (mm)
Soc. 89(3): 646‐652. Vp, hollow Actual volume of the hollow cylindrical samples
Zou, R. P., C. L. Feng, J. Q. Xu, and A. B. Yu. 2005. Predictions of (m3)
the porosity of multicomponent mixtures of wet coarse spheres. Vp, solid Actual volume of the solid cylindrical samples (m3)
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 44(22): 8401‐8408. Vpvc Pycnometer particle volume (m3)
Woodcock, C. R., and J. S. Mason. 1987. Bulk Solids Handling: An ρb Wet based bulk density of the samples (kg/m3) at
Introduction to the Practice and Technology. Glasgow, Scotland: moisture content of Mw
Blackie and Son Ltd. ρb,wet_tapped Tapped bulk density (wb) of the samples
(kg/m 3)
ρb,wet_loose Loose bulk density (wb) of the samples (kg/m3)
NOMENCLATURE ρd Dry based bulk density (kg/m3) at bone dry sample
Ap Actual surface area of the particle (m2) ρp Particle density of the samples after drying (kg/m3)
a, b Biomass species constants ρs Particle density measured by pycnometer (kg/m3)
Din Inner diameter of the samples (mm) ρw Bulk density of water (1000 kg/m3)
Dout Outer diameter of the samples (mm)
DT Diameter of the container for bulk density
measurement (mm)
l Particle length (mm)
Mw Moisture content of the wet samples (decimal wet
basis)

358 APPLIED ENGINEERING IN AGRICULTURE