Clean Techn Environ Policy
DOI 10.1007/s10098-014-0804-x
ORIGINAL PAPER
Simulation of biomass gasification in downdraft gasifier
for different biomass fuels using ASPEN PLUS
Ashok J. Keche • Amba Prasad Rao Gaddale •
Rajendrakumar G. Tated
Received: 27 February 2014 / Accepted: 10 June 2014
Ó Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014
Abstract Biomass utilization through gasification could
be a viable alternative energy source for meeting energy
demands in decentralized manner. Thermodynamic equi-
librium and other models have been proposed to explain
and understand the complex biomass gasification process,
design, simulation, optimization, and process analysis of
gasifiers. Present paper deals with a comprehensive process
model developed for biomass gasification in an atmo-
spheric fixed bed rector using the ASPEN PLUS. The
experimental facility of the gasifier developed by the
authors has a provision for proper cooling and filtration
system to derive satisfactory performance with low emis-
sions. Thus the model developed using ASPEN PLUS is
validated with experimental data obtained with four dif-
ferent types of feed stocks viz; babul wood, neem wood,
mango wood, and bagasse. The model has well-predicted
composition of H2, CO, and CO2 whereas it has under
predicted the CH4. The gasifier conversion efficiency was
observed to be higher with babul wood when compared
with other three types of wood due to its high carbon and
H2 and less ash concentrations.
Keywords Biomass gasification  Downdraft gasifier 
Equilibrium modeling  ASPEN PLUS  Gasifier
conversion efficiency
A. J. Keche  A. P. R. Gaddale (&)
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Institute of
Technology, Warangal 506 004, AP, India
e-mail: gap@nitw.ac.in
R. G. Tated
Sandip, Institute of Engineering and Management,
Nasik, MH, India
e-mail: rgtated@yahoo.com
List of symbols
Hg Calorific value of gas (MJ/Nm3)
Hw Average calorific value of wood (MJ/kg)
H2Vol Volume concentration of hydrogen (%)
COVol Volume concentration of carbon monoxide (%)
CH4Vol Volume concentration of methane (%)
CVH2 Calorific value of hydrogen gas (MJ/Nm3)
CVco Calorific of carbon monoxide gas (MJ/Nm3)
CVCH4 Calorific value of methane gas (MJ/Nm3)
Q Gas flow (Nm3/kg)
CZT Combustion zone temperature (°C)
R.P.M Revolution per minute
Greek letter
g Gasifier conversion efficiency (%)
Introduction
Energy plays a vital role in meeting day to day requirements
of human kind. The thirst for energy has exponentially
increased leading to mismatch between the available
resources and supply resulting in the degradation of envi-
ronment. Recently issues like the Greenhouse gas (GHG)
emission reduction and carbon-trading in the light of Clean
Development Mechanism (CDM) have gained prominence
to combat climate change. Subhas (2013) opined that rad-
ical innovations in solar, energy storage, and carbon
sequestration technologies would meet ever increasing
demands of energy. Energy conversion systems based on
biomass are attracting as its utilization effectively closes the
carbon cycle besides achieving self sustainability. Among
the various renewable sources, biomass as a resource for
energy conversion may be regarded as indirect use of solar
energy. Utilization of biomass through gasification is one
123

such technology which helps for conservation of environ-
ment from global warming and pollution and also encour-
ages energy plantation, thus resulting in a green
environment. Ojha (2010) reviewed the energy scenario in
India and stressed the need for independent rural power
production in decentralized manner from renewable energy
sources to promote sustainable and socially equitable rural
power sector development. Baredar et al. (2009) observed
that among the various alternative power sources, the wind
energy system grouped with solar photo voltaic panels and
biomass gasifier for the production of electricity is more
suitable. They developed a statistical correlation analysis of
the hybrid energy system for a remote area in India. Ewida
et al. (2006) conducted both experimental and modeling
studies with well-designed rice straw pellets in a fluidized
bed. The model was used to analyze the effect of opera-
tional parameters on the pellet combustion and the char-
acteristics including bed temperature, gas flow, and oxygen
concentration. Gasifier is a system wherein the biomass is
combusted in the presence of insufficient oxygen to obtain
synthesis gas or syngas (also called producer gas). Sheth
and Babu (2009) have investigated different parameters
influencing the biomass gasifier system and examined the
reliability of the results by performing material balance.
Experimental investigation was conducted by Zainal et al.
(2002) on a gasifier using wood chips and charcoal by
varying the equivalence ratio from 0.259 to 0.46. They
observed that even with optimum equivalence ratio, full
conversion of coal to gaseous fuel was not obtained. Bio-
mass either in the solid or powder or loose form could be
used in gasification process. Basavaraj and Jayanti (2014)
presented thermodynamic analysis of syngas-fueled,
chemical looping combustion-based power generation sys-
tem with carbon capture and sequestration. They observed
improved gross cycle efficiency and net cycle efficiency
after accounting for the energy cost of CO2. The ASPEN
PLUS process simulator has been used by different inves-
tigators to simulate the gasification process. Mansaray et al.
(2000) used ASPEN PLUS to simulate rice husk gasifica-
tion based on material balance, energy balance, and
chemical equilibrium relations. Nikoo and Mahinpey
(2008) have developed ASPEN PLUS reactor model and
external FORTRAN subroutines for hydrodynamics and
kinetics nested in ASPEN PLUS to simulate the gasification
process. Different sets of operating conditions for a lab-
scale pine gasifier are used to demonstrate and validate the
model. Ramzan et al. (2011) have developed steady state
simulation model for gasification using ASPEN PLUS.
They inferred that the model can be used as a predictive tool
for optimization of the gasifier performance. The investi-
gations were carried out based on the influence of Equiva-
lence ratio, temperature, and level of air preheating on gas
composition, heating value. Atnaw et al. (2011) have
123
A. J. Keche et al.
studied simulation of downdraft gasification of oil palm
fronds using ASPEN PLUS.
It is observed from the literature that among the various
alternative energy sources, biomass could be used through
gasification to meet energy demand in decentralized man-
ner. The present work aimed first at developing an original
equilibrium gasification model using ASPEN PLUS. The
results obtained through the model are validated with the
experimental results of a downdraft gasifier developed and
tested by the authors. Moreover, many researchers have
restricted their experimental studies to one type of wood.
The downdraft gasifier was run with three types of biomass
viz; babul wood (Arcacia arabica), neem wood (Aza-
dirachta indica), mango wood (Mangifera indica) and
sugarcane bagasse.
Biomass gasification and downdraft gasifier
Biomass is a natural substance available, which utilizes
solar energy for the process of photosynthesis. It chiefly
contains cellulose, hemicelluloses, and lignin, with slight
variations depending on the nature of the biomass. The
stoichiometric air-to-fuel ratio normally ranges from 6:1 to
6.5:1. Gasification is a popular method of extracting energy
from different types of organic materials in an effective
way. Gasifier is a system wherein gasification of biomass is
carried out with typical reactions of combustion producing
synthesis gas (syngas) or producer gas; a potential fuel. In
gasification the combustion is carried out at sub-stoichi-
ometric conditions with air-to-fuel ratio being 1.5:1–1.8:1.
Gasification is a two-stage reaction consisting of oxidation
and reduction processes. The first part, being exothermic,
of sub-stoichiometric oxidation leads to the loss of volatiles
from biomass; it results in peak temperatures of
1,400–1,500 K and generation of gaseous products like
carbon monoxide and hydrogen in varying proportions.
The carbon dioxide and water vapor which in turn are
reduced partially to carbon monoxide and hydrogen in the
hot bed of charcoal generated during the process of
gasification.
The gasifier unit consists of a downdraft gasifier oper-
ating nearly at atmospheric pressure under suction-induced
flow, which generates producer gas from wood as well as
bio-waste (or agro residue either in the form of pellets or
briquettes) and uses it to run an engine. The gasifier is
conical in shape, compact in design, and surrounded by a
water jacket for cooling the gas. Fuel wood or briquettes
from agricultural residues are fed to gasifier. The air inlet is
provided for partial combustion of biomass. The system
has provision for removal of ash and tar, the primary filter
unit comprises a series of rows of filtration units; each
series consists of a rod over which semicircular baffles
Biomass gasification in downdraft gasifier
Fig. 1 Schematic diagram of downdraft gasifier-based power generation unit
Fig. 2 Gasifier power plant setup
having perforations are welded. The filter, which is sur-
rounded by a water jacket, can be easily cleaned by pulling
out the rod with the baffles. The secondary filter has layers
of different sizes of bio-waste material with a cleaning gate
at the bottom for removing the tar. Besides, a fine filter is
provided for removing the remaining particulates. Though
the performance of gasifier depends upon various factors,
such as temperature, moisture content in the biomass, and
equivalence ratio, there appears to be some discrepancies
Fig. 3 Blue flame obtained from gasifier
in the quality of gas produced due to the variation in
quality of the feed stock. The schematic and photographic
illustration of the gasifier-engine setup is shown in Figs. 1
and 2, respectively. The cleaned gas can directly be sup-
plied to the engine; flame almost blue in color is obtained
before supplying producer gas to the engine (Fig. 3). The
specifications of the downdraft gasifier system are given in
Table 1.
123
 A. J. Keche et al.

Table 1 Specifications of gasifier system

Gasifier
Type Downdraft
Design capacity 35 kVA
Material for construction Mild steel, stainless steel (SS310), and PVC pipes
Number of slots for air (12 9 60 mm) 13
Grate mesh size Diameter 225 9 12 mm Thick.
Cooler and cleaner
Type Counter flow heat exchanger (condenser)
Filter media used Fabric, coarse filter, and fine filter
Engine
Type Self-start natural charged gas, SI engine
No. of cylinders 4
Rated capacity 63 BHP at 1,500 rpm
Alternator Inductive, Three phase, 415 V
Rated current (AMPS/PH) 70
Blower
Type DC motor of Maruti car (2,500 rpm)
Battery 12 V
Biomass fuel
Sr. Type Size Size Moisture Instrument used for moisture measurement
no distribution content (%)
01 Babul wood (Arcacia Square pieces Random 7–10.5 M.S.-7000 moisture (Digital) meter, range: moisture
arabica) 60 9 60 mm content from 0–50 %
02 Neem wood Square pieces Random 7–10.5 M.S.-7000 moisture (Digital) meter, range: moisture
(Azadirachta indica) 60 9 60 mm content from 0–50 %
03 Mango wood Square pieces Random 7–10.5 M.S.-7000 moisture (Digital) meter, range: moisture
(Mangifera indica) 60 9 60 mm content from 0–50 %
04 Bagasse Briquettes 80 mm * Random 10–15 M.S.-7000 Moisture (Digital) Meter, Range: Moisture
80 mm content from 0–50 %

Modeling following assumption were considered in modeling the

gasification process
Simulation software
1. The whole process is in steady state and the reactions
reach chemical equilibrium.
Advanced System for Process Engineering (ASPEN) is a
2. The heat exchange in a fixed bed is ideal and it is
softer package that gives a complete integrated solution to
isothermal in the same section.
chemical processes and reactors. It is a steady state
3. The heat exchange occurs instantaneously at equilib-
chemical process simulator, which was developed to
rium with volatile products including chiefly H2, CO,
evaluate producer gas constituents. It uses unit operation
CO2, CH4, and H2O.
blocks, which are the models of specific process operations
4. Tars are assumed to be negligible in the syngas.
(mixture, reactor, heat exchanger etc.). The user places
5. Char only contains carbon and ash; ash is inert and
these blocks on a flow sheet, specifying material, and
does not participate in chemical reactions.
energy streams. An extensive built-in physical properties’
database is used for the simulation calculations.
Model validation
ASPEN PLUS model and assumptions
The specifications of gasifier system, proximate and ulti-
The different stages considered in ASPEN PLUS simula- mate analysis of the biomass stocks, experimental setup
tion include stream mixing, chemical equilibrium, and heat parameters used in the simulation, and reaction block
exchange between streams, to improve the quality of pro- description utilized in the simulation are given in Tables 1,
ducer gas. The block diagram is shown in Fig. 4. The 2, 3, and 4, respectively. To validate the simulation results,

123
Biomass gasification in downdraft gasifier

Fig. 4 ASEPN PLUS flow sheet for the downdraft gasification process

Table 2 Proximate and ultimate analysis of the biomass stocks Table 4 Reaction blocks description utilized in the simulation
Characteristics Babul Neem wood Mango Bagasse Model Description Purpose Use
Proximate wood (Azadirachta wood
analysis (wt% (Arcacia indica) (Mangifera Mixer Stream Combine multiple Mixing tees, stream
dry basis) arabica) indica) mixer streams into one mixing operations,
stream adding heat
Fixed carbon 16.38 16.35 16.34 15.8 streams, adding
content work streams
Ash content 1.2266 1.35 1.36 2.8 REquil Equilibrium Chemical and phase Single- and two-
Volatile 82.40 82.35 82.30 80.7 reactor equilibrium by phase chemical
matter stoichiometric equilibrium and
calculations. simultaneous phase
Ultimate analysis (% Dry basis)
equilibrium.
Carbon 50.24 50.20 50.18 46.2
HeatX Two-stream Exchange heat Two-stream heat
Hydrogen 6.40 6.38 6.35 5.6 heat between two exchangers. Rating
Oxygen 43.24 43.28 43.34 40.3 exchanger streams shell and tube heat
Nitrogen 0.12 0.14 0.13 0.2 exchangers when
geometry is known.

Results and discussion

Table 3 Experimental setup parameters used in the simulation
Fixed bed reactor Performance of gasifier
Temperature 750–875 °C
Pressure 1.05 bar The gasifier unit was continuously run for 3 months, cur-
Air rent and frequency variations at different loadings were
Temperature 65 °C monitored. Quality of electricity generation from power
Flow rate 27.5–45 m3/h plant was assured at different loadings. The performance of
gasifier was monitored under different resistive loadings.
The temperature of producer gas at exit from the gasifier
varied from 220 to 240 °C. The producer gas engine gen-
experimental data from gasification of babul wood (Arca- erator coupled with 3-phase alternator was evaluated at
cia arabica), neem wood (Azadirachta indica) and mango different loadings. The frequency remained within allow-
wood (Mangifera indica), and bagasse in downdraft gas- able range i.e. 50 ± 1 Hz and 410 V. It is observed that
ifier power plant were used. within the specified voltage and frequency, maximum

123

Fig. 5 Resistive load VS power
generated
Fig. 6 Comparison of
hydrogen from four types of
biomass: experimental &
simulation
power ratings of 23.4, 22.17, 20.4, and 18.5 kW, respec-
tively, are obtained for babul, neem, mango wood, and
bagasse as shown in Fig. 5. However, with further increase
in fuel input to the unit, power could not be increased but
resulted in drop in frequency and voltage.
Typical producer gas composition obtained from
experiments and simulation are shown in Figs. 6, 7, 8, and
9. The model showed reasonable agreement with the
experimental results for all components with the exception
of CH4. The model under predicted CH4 which may be due
to the reason that the O2 in air reacts only with the char.
The under prediction resulted an error in the calculation of
the gas heating value and gas conversion efficiency which
is demonstrated in Fig. 6. The pyrolysis products are
cracked in a region of high temperature and in the presence
of O2, so it is probable that some of the CH4 produced will
undergo combustion with O2. The gas conversion effi-
ciency of babul wood is greater than other three types of
biomass because of higher carbon content, more H2, and
less ash present in it. The percentage of total combustible
123
A. J. Keche et al.
components such as H2, CO, and CH4 for Babul wood is
better than the neem wood, mango wood, and bagasse,
respectively. This is much better than that reported by other
investigators (Manurung and Beenackers 1993; Di Blasi
2000; Rogel and Aguillon 2006; Wang et al. 2009).
Gasifier efficiency
The conversion efficiency of gasifier is calculated from
experimental and simulation results. The conversion effi-
ciency of biomass gasifiers depends on gasifier operating
conditions and fuel properties. The heating values of these
gases were obtained from the standard gas tables; they are
10.1 MJ/Nm3 for hydrogen, 12.64 MJ/Nm3 for carbon
monoxide, and 38 MJ/Nm3 for methane. Although meth-
ane has a higher heating value than carbon monoxide and
hydrogen, its contribution to the producer gas heating
value is outweighed by that of hydrogen and carbon
monoxide because the latter gases are produced in larger
quantities than methane. The gasifier conversion
Biomass gasification in downdraft gasifier

Fig. 7 Comparison of methane

from four types of biomass:
experimental & simulation

Fig. 8 Comparison of carbon

monoxide from four types of
biomass: experimental &
simulation

Fig. 9 Comparison of carbon

dioxide from four types of
biomass: experimental &
simulation

123
 A. J. Keche et al.

Fig. 10 Comparison of gas

conversion efficiency for
different biomass fuels

Fig. 11 Comparison of
emissions with producer gas
against diesel-fueled engines

efficiency has been calculated from the percentage com- Calorific value of gas=kg of fuel
position of combustible gases (Mamphweli and Meyer g¼ ð2Þ
Avg:calorific value of 1 kg of fuel
2010).
The following equation was used to calculate the gas Therefore, conversion efficiency of gasifier is calculated
heating value at 850 °C combustion zone temperature as below:
Hg  Q
g ¼  100 %
ðH2Vol  CVH2 Þ þ ðCOVol  CVco Þ þ ðCH4Vol  CVCH4 Þ Hw
Hg ¼
100 % ð4:7789 MJ=Nm3  3:2364 Nm3 Þ
ð13:5  10:1Þ þ ð18  12:64Þ þ ð3  38Þ 19:68667 MJ
 1 kg
¼ kg
100 %
¼ 4:7787 MJ=Nm3 ¼ 78:56% ðFor Babul Wood Þ
ð1Þ It can be observed that the conversion efficiency of the
The following equation was used to determine the gasifier is directly proportional to the gas heating value.
conversion efficiency of the gasifier (Sharma 2009; Raj- The gasifier conversion efficiency was calculated using
vanshi 1986) Eq. (2) as demonstrated in Fig. 10. Gas flow from the

123
Biomass gasification in downdraft gasifier
gasifier are 3.2364, 3.0729, 2.988, and 2.8275 Nm3/kg for
babul wood, neem wood mango wood, and bagasse,
respectively. Average calorific values of three types of
wood are, respectively, taken as 19.68, 18.08, 17.57, and
19.258 MJ/kg for babul wood, neem wood, mango wood,
and bagasse.
Engine exhaust gas analysis
The engine exhaust emission species such as SO2, NOx,
and CO are measured at 250 °C as illustrated in Fig. 11.
The frequency was kept in the range of 50 ± 1 Hz most of
the time, indicating stable system operation by adjusting
the engine control system. Further with the help of gas
chromatography, engine exhaust was monitored for its CO
and other pollutant emissions SO2 and NOx were moni-
tored by a spectrophotometer. Irrespective of the type of
biomass, it is observed that NOx emissions are lower in
producer gas-operated engine, but CO emissions are higher
compared with the conventional diesel engine. The higher
CO levels could be due to the fuel composition of the
producer gas. Similar results have been reported by Sridhar
et al. (2005).
Emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides
(NOx) are lower than the conventional fossil fuels due to
characteristically low levels of sulfur and nitrogen associ-
ated with bagasse. It helps in reducing the greenhouse
gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere.
Conclusions
A model was developed for the gasification of biomass in
an atmospheric downdraft-fixed bed gasifier using the
ASPEN PLUS simulator. The experimental and simulation
study on a 35 kVA downdraft biomass gasifier power plant
with cooling-cleaning unit is carried out to evaluate its
efficacy in terms of producer gas constituents, volumetric
flow, and conversion efficiency of gasifier. From the
investigation, the following conclusions are arrived at:
1. The model predictions are in satisfactory agreement
with the experimental data. The volumetric composi-
tion of H2, CO, and CO2 are well predicted whereas
CH4 is under predicted.
2. The gas conversion efficiency obtained with babul wood
is better than neem wood, mango wood, and bagasse.
3. The babul wood is observed to be a better fuel as
compared with other types of fuel due to high carbon
content, more H2, and low ash content.
4. The specific fuel consumption values with different
types of wood are observed to be higher.
5. Emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides
(NOx) are lower than the fossil fuel-run engine.
Acknowledgments The authors are highly grateful to MIT, Au-
rangabad, Maharashtra, India for providing financial support. Thanks
are also due to Enviro Tech, Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India for their
cooperation.
References
Atnaw SM, Sulaiman SA, Yusup S (2011) A simulation study of
downdraft gasification of oil-palm fronds using ASPEN PLUS.
J Appl Sci 11(11):1913–1920
Baredar P, Sethi VK, Pandey M (2009) Correlation analysis of small
wind–solar–biomass hybrid energy system installed at RGTU
Bhopal, MP (India). Clean Technol Environ Policy. doi:10.1007/
s10098-009-0212-9
Basavaraj RJ, Jayanti S (2014) Syngas-fueled, chemical-looping
combustion-based power plant lay-out for clean energy gener-
ation. Clean Technol Environ Policy. doi:10.1007/s10098-014-
0781-0
Di Blasi C (2000) Dynamic behaviour of stratified downdraft
gasifiers. Chem Engg Sci 55:2931–2944
Ewida KT, El-Salmawy H, Atta NN, Mahmoud MM (2006) A
sustainable approach to the recycling of rice straw through
pelletization and controlled burning. Clean Technol Environ
Policy. doi:10.1007/s10098-006-0043-x
Mamphweli NS, Meyer EL (2010) Evaluation of the conversion
Efficiency Of the 180Nm3/h Johansson Biomass Gasifier TM. Int
J Energy Environ 1(1):113–120
Mansaray KG, Al-Taweel AM, Ghaly AE, Hamdullahpur F, Ugursal
VI (2000) Mathematical modeling of a fluidized bed rice husk
gasifier. Energy Sources 22:83–98
Manurung RK, Beenackers AACM (1993) Modelling and simulation
of an open core downdraft moving bed rice husk gasifier. In:
Bridgwater AV (ed) Advances in thermochemical biomass
conversion. Blackie A. & P, London, p 288
Nikoo MB, Mahinpey N (2008) Simulation of biomass gasification in
fluidized bed reactor using ASPEN PLUS. Biomass Bioenergy
32:1245–1254
Ojha K (2010) Need of independent rural power producers in India—
an overview. Clean Technol Environ Policy 12:495–501. doi:10.
1007/s10098-009-0263-y
Rajvanshi Anil K, Alternative Energy in Agriculture, Vol. II, Ed.
D. Yogi Goswami, CRC Press, (1986), 83-102
Ramzan N, Ashraf A, Naveed S, Malik A (2011) Simulation of hybrid
biomass gasification using ASPEN PLUS: a comparative
performance analysis for food, municipal solid and poultry
waste. Biomass Bioenergy 35:1–8
Rogel A, Aguillon J (2006) The 2D Eulerian approach of entrained
flow and temperature in a biomass stratified downdraft gasifier.
Am J Appl Sci 3(10):2068–2075
Sharma AK (2009) Experimental study on 75 kWth downdraft
(biomass) gasifier system. Renew Energy 34(7):1726–1733
Sheth PN, Babu BV (2009) Experimental studies on producer gas
generation from wood waste in a downdraft biomass gasifier.
Bioresour Technol 100(12):3127–3133
Sridhar G, Dasappa S, Sridhar HV, Paul PJ, Rajan NKS (2005)
Gaseous emissions using producer gas as fuel in reciprocating
engines. SAE Int 2005:01–1732. doi:10.4271/2005-01-1732
Subhas K (2013) Sikdar resurgence of fossil fuels? Clean Technol
Environ Policy. doi:10.1007/s10098-013-0601-y
Wang Z, Yang JN, Li Z, Xiang Y (2009) Syngas composition study.
Front Energy Power Eng Chin 3(3):369–372
Zainal ZA, Rifau A, Quadir GA, Seetharamu KN (2002) Experimen-
tal investigation of a downdraft biomass gasifier. Biomass
Bioenergy 23(4):283–289
123