processes

Article
Design and Evaluation of the Lab-Scale Shell and
Tube Heat Exchanger (STHE) for Poultry Litter to
Energy Production
Xuejun Qian 1,2, * , Yulai Yang 1,2 and Seong W. Lee 1,2
1 Industrial and Systems Engineering Department, Morgan State University, 1700 East Cold Spring Lane,
Baltimore, MD 21251, USA; yuyan1@morgan.edu (Y.Y.); seong.lee@morgan.edu (S.W.L.)
2 Center for Advanced Energy Systems and Environmental Control Technologies, School of Engineering,
Morgan State University, 5200 Perring Parkway, Baltimore, MD 21239, USA
* Correspondence: xuqia1@morgan.edu; Tel.: +1-443-885-2772




Received: 9 April 2020; Accepted: 24 April 2020; Published: 25 April 2020


Abstract: Poultry litter is one type of biomass and waste generated from the farming process. This
study performed a performance and process analysis of poultry litter to energy using the lab-scale
shell and tube heat exchanger (STHE) system along with a Stirling engine and a swirling fluidized bed
combustor (SFBC). The effects of tube shape, flow direction, and water flow rates on water and trailer
temperature changes were investigated during the poultry litter co-combustion process. Energy flow
analysis and emissions were also studied. Results showed that the water outlet temperature of 62.8 ◦ C
in the twisted tube was higher than the straight tube case (58.3 ◦ C) after 130 min of the co-combustion
process. It was found that the counter-current direction had higher water temperature changes, higher
logarithmic mean temperature difference (LMTD), and higher trailer temperature changes than the
co-current direction. A water flow rate of 4.54 L/min showed adequate heat absorption in the lab-scale
STHE system and heat rejection in the trailer. Results indicated that the lab-scale STHE system has a
conversion efficiency of 42.3% and produces hot water (at about 63.9 ◦ C) along with lower emissions.
This research study confirmed that poultry litter can be used to generate energy (e.g., hot water and
electricity) by using a lab-scale biomass conversion system for space heating applications.

Keywords: shell tube heat exchanger; design; analysis; poultry litter; energy; hot water; electricity;
trailer temperature; temperature change; space heating

1. Introduction
Fossil fuel depletion and adverse environmental factors (i.e., greenhouse gas emissions causing
climate change) play a significant role in seeking alternative renewable energy sources that can replace
fossil fuels during energy production processes [1]. Among all the renewable sources, there is an
increasing interest in biomass utilization for energy production due to the benefits of the CO2 neutral
effect, large availability, and low cost of biomass fuels all over the world [2]. Biomass energy sources
are classified into five categories: woody biomass, agricultural biomass, aquatic biomass, animal
and human waste, and industrial waste [1,3]. Poultry litter is one type of biomass and animal waste
occurring during the poultry farming process. Poultry litter refers to a mixture of poultry manure
(excreta), bedding materials (e.g., wood shavings, sawdust, straw, and pine or rice husk), spilled
feed, and feathers [4]. In 2009, assuming 1.4 tons of litter per 1000 birds, a total of about 25 million
tons of poultry litter was generated by the US and the EU [4]. Poultry growers from the Maryland
Eastern Shore region produced over 285 million broilers, resulting in almost 350,000 tons of poultry
litter annually [5]. Due to its rich nutrient contents (e.g., N, P, K), most types of poultry litter have

Processes 2020, 8, 500; doi:10.3390/pr8050500 www.mdpi.com/journal/processes

Processes 2020, 8, 500 2 of 13

Processes 2020, 8, 500 2 of 13

traditionally been utilized as a source for organic fertilizer on agricultural land [6]. However, excess
However,
land excessofland
application application
poultry litter hasofled poultry litter has led toofan
to an overabundance overabundance
nutrients of nutrients
(e.g., nitrogen, phosphorus)(e.g.,
nitrogen,
in phosphorus)
the watershed, resultingin the watershed, resulting
in eutrophication on waterinbodies eutrophication
and pollution on water bodiescontamination)
(e.g., nitrate and pollution
(e.g., nitratealong
particularly contamination)
the shores of particularly
the Chesapeake alongBay, the shores of the
the largest Chesapeake
estuary system in Bay,
thethe
Unitedlargest estuary
States [4,7].
system
This posesin the United
a risk to theStates
health [4,7].
and This poses a risk
well-being to the health
of humans, and and
animals, well-being of humans,
the aquatic ecosystem, animals,and
and the aquatic
therefore, presents ecosystem,
an urgentand need therefore,
for efficientpresents an urgent need for
and environmentally efficient
friendly and environmentally
approaches to dispose of
friendly
the excess approaches
amount ofto dispose
poultry of the
litter excess amount of poultry litter [8,9].
[8,9].
According to the farm visit survey from 2017, the annual electricity bill was $15,000 and $36,000
theBethel
for the Bethel Farms Farms (Salisbury,
(Salisbury, MD, MD, USA) USA) and Golden and Golden
Egg Farm Egg Farm (Bishopville,
(Bishopville, MD, USA), MD, USA),
respectively.
respectively.
The cost of heatingThe cost of heating
accounted for accounted
a large partfor of athe large part of the
bill because bill because
heating heating
is critical is critical
to effectively raiseto
effectivelyPre-heating
chickens. raise chickens. Pre-heating
of a poultry houseofisaimportant,
poultry house and itisbegins
important,
at leastand it begins
24 to 48 h priorat least 24 to 48
to placement
h prior
of to placement
new flocks of babyofchicks new flocks
[10]. The of babyproperchicks [10]. The proper
maintenance maintenance
of temperature of temperature
for the chicken houses for
the chicken
during houses
different during
growth different
periods growth
is also periods
important forispromoting
also important for promoting
efficient growth. The efficient growth.
recommended
The recommended
temperature settings temperature
of the broilers settings
are as of follows:
the broilers are as follows:
pre-heating to 31–32 ◦ C two days
pre-heating to 31–32before °Cbaby
two
days before
chickens movebaby chickens
into move houses,
the poultry into the 30–34 ◦
poultryChouses, for the30–34 °C fordays,
first seven the first seven
28–31 ◦ C days,
for days28–31 °C
8–14,
for days
24–27 ◦ C 8–14,
for days 24–27 °C 21–24
15–21, for days ◦ C for15–21,
days21–2422–28,°C thenforto days
21 C◦ 22–28,
by thethen4th toweek21 °C by the 4th week
of development [11]. ofIf
development
the house temperature[11]. If the house
falls too temperature
low, chicks will falls too huddle
often low, chicksand will
fail tooften huddle
actively seekandoutfail to actively
feed. Instead,
seek use
they out the feed.feedInstead, they useenergy
to metabolize the feed for to metabolize
warmth in place energy for warmth
of growth [12]. Over in place
the last of several
growthyears,[12].
Over has
there the beenlast increasing
several years, interest there has the
across been increasing
poultry industry interest across the
in developing poultry
different industry
kinds of space in
developing
heating different
systems. kinds in
As shown ofFigure
space 1,heating
three types systems. As shown
of space heatingin Figureare
systems 1, most
threeused typesamong
of space the
heating systems
poultry houses: are forcedmost airused
furnace among (or the
boxpoultry
heater),houses:radiantforced air furnace
gas heat, and radiant (or box
tube heater),
heating. radiant
Due
gasthe
to heat, and radiant
intense heat sourcetube heating.
in the radiant Due totube the intense
heater near heat the
source in the
ceiling, theradiant
burners tube heateranear
become seriousthe
ceiling,
fire hazard,the burners
especially become
when athe serious fire hazard,
tube heater is not especially when theThe
installed correctly. tuberadiant
heatergas is not installed
heater adds
correctly.
stress The radiant
to users becausegas heater must
workers adds stress
raise the to users
heaters because
beforeworkers
clean-out must andraise
a newthe flock,
heaters tobefore
allow
clean-out
tractors andand a new flock,
equipment to allow
to enter tractors
the house and equipment
safely. This process toisenter the house safely.
labor-intensive. This process
Furthermore, forced is
labor-intensive.
air furnaces require Furthermore,
high energy forced air furnaces
to heat up the air require high energy
by convection andto are
heatlikely
up the airleast
the by convection
preferred
and are likely
method the leastbaby
for brooding preferred
chicksmethod [10,12].for brooding
Propane andbaby chicks
natural gas[10,12]. Propane
are currently andasnatural
used a heating gas
are currently
source for major used as a heating source
space systems foramong
major the space heating
poultry systems
houses. among the
In addition to poultry
the higher houses.
energy In
addition to the higher energy costs, propane-based space
costs, propane-based space heating systems produce a high concentration of CO2 and moisture as well heating systems produce a high
concentration
as room-relative of CO 2 and moisture
humidity as well as
[13]. Increased airroom-relative
moisture andhumidity [13]. Increased
room-relative humidityair moisture
content and
(above
room-relative
70%) can react with humidity poultry content (above 70%)
litter, resulting can react
in increased with poultry
ammonia productionlitter,and
resulting
potentially in increased
negative
ammonia
effects on production
both bird health and potentially
and well-being negative effects
[10,14]. Highon both bird health of
concentrations and well-being
ammonia [10,14].
(above High
70 ppm)
concentrations
can reduce growth of ammonia
performance, (above which70 ppm)results can inreduce
lower body growth performance,
weight which results
gain and higher in lower
feed conversion
body weight
ratios [14]. Ingain responseand higher feed conversion
to elevated fuel prices, ratiospoultry [14]. In response
health, and excess to elevated
poultry fuel
waste prices,
issues,poultry
there
health,
is and excessinterest
overwhelming poultryinwasteburning issues, there is overwhelming
and converting poultry litterinterest
into energyin burning
which and may converting
be used to
poultry on-farm
provide litter intospace energy which
heating may be used
requirements forto provide
poultry on-farm space heating requirements for
houses.
poultry houses.

Figure 1. Major
Figure 1. Major space
space heating
heating systems
systems in
in the
the poultry
poultry houses: (a) Forced
houses: (a) Forced air
air furnace. (b) Radiant
furnace. (b) Radiant gas
gas
heater. (c) Radiant tube heater.
heater. (c) Radiant tube heater.

Heat exchangers are used for transferring thermal energy between two or more fluids, or solid
particulates and a fluid, at different temperatures and in thermal contact [15]. Different types of heat
exchanger are used worldwide that differ from each other because of their specific requirements.
Double pipe, shell and tube, plate fin, plate and shell, pillow plate are just a few examples of the types
Processes 2020, 8, 500 3 of 13

Heat exchangers are used for transferring thermal energy between two or more fluids, or solid
particulates and a fluid, at different temperatures and in thermal contact [15]. Different types of heat
exchanger are used worldwide that differ from each other because of their specific requirements.
Double pipe, shell and tube, plate fin, plate and shell, pillow plate are just a few examples of the
types of heat exchangers being used on an industrial scale [16]. The shell and tube heat exchanger
(STHE) is one of the most common type of exchanger apparatus widely used in several industries,
such as the chemical, petroleum refining, and power generation [16,17]. According to Master et al. [18]
and Master et al. [19], more than 30–35% of heat exchangers are the STHE types due to their robust
geometry construction, easy maintenance, and possible upgrades. In addition, STHEs are used in
different type of industries because they have much lower production cost, are easily cleaned, and
considered as more flexible in utility when compared with other heat exchangers. The STHE mainly
consists of a shell (vessel with different sizes) and a bundle of tubes inside a shell. In STHE, two fluids of
different temperature flow through the heat exchanger without mixing with one another. One working
fluid runs through the tubes (the tube side), and the other working fluid flows between the outside
tubes and the shell (the shell side). Heat is transferred from one fluid to the other through the tube
walls, either from the tube side to the shell side or vice versa to equalize the temperature. The fluids
can either be liquids or gases on either the shell or tube side [20]. The type of tube plays an important
role in heat transfer enhancement technique, having a great effect on the overall heat transfer process.
There are several types of tubes, such as plain, twisted and longitudinally finned, that are available in
the current market [20]. Among other types of tubes, twisted tube is a typical passive heat transfer
enhancement technique. Twisted tubes can be manufactured from a full range of materials including
carbon steels, stainless steels, titanium, copper, and nickel alloys [21]. A summary of typical twisted
tubes investigation with various working fluid and tube configurations has been carried out [22].
Qian et al. [23] found that there are various working fluids, such as diesel, air, and water used to test the
performance of twisted tubes. However, there has been limited study on investigating the heat transfer
performance of the STHE system by using flue gas from the biomass (i.e., poultry litter) combustion
process and water as the working fluid. Flue gas from biomass combustion was used to evaluate other
types of heat exchangers. Yrjölä and Paavilainen [24] studied the use of heat of flue gas from biomass
combustion to heat air in a recuperative heat exchanger and the use of heated air to dry the fuels in a
drying silo. Stehlik et al. [25] investigated the performance of a heat exchanger (e.g., air pre-heater,
plate heat exchanger, radiation recuperative exchanger) during the biomass combustion process.
The objective of this study was to design, fabricate, and evaluate the lab-scale STHE system during
the poultry litter and natural gas co-combustion process. In previous studies, the Stirling engine was
integrated into the lab-scale swirling fluidized bed combustor to evaluate electrified outputs and
emissions during the poultry litter and natural gas co-combustion process. In this study, the lab-scale
STHE system was integrated into the lab-scale swirling fluidized bed combustor (SFBC) and Stirling
engine to evaluate performance and analyze the process of converting poultry litter into useful energy
(e.g., hot water, electricity).

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Design Phase of the Lab-Scale Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger
During the design phase, detailed dimensions, numbers and materials for the tubes, baffles, shell,
and connections in the lab-scale STHE system were calculated and determined. The lab-scale STHE
system consists of tubes, shell, and segmental baffles. There are two types of tubes: straight tube
and twisted tube which were used to investigate the effects of tube shape on system performance.
Twisted tubes were used to improve the synergy between the velocity and temperature gradient. As
a result, the twisted tube was expected to have better heat transfer performance than the straight
tube. Segmental baffles were added to not only support the tube bundles, but also to maintain the
desired velocity of hot flue gas flow. Moreover, the baffles were used to create turbulence which resists
Processes 2020, 8, 500 4 of 13

vibrations in order to enhance the fluid and effectively increase the heat transfer coefficient. As shown
in Figure 2, a 3D design of tubes with baffle and connections as well as the detailed 2D design of the
baffle along with dimensions were completed by using the AutoCAD and ANSYS software. There
are six tubes,
Processes five segmental baffle and one shell in the lab-scale STHE prototype. The tube (copper
2020, 8, 500 4 of 13
tube, Type L Hard Temper ASTM—B88, Cerro Flow Products, Inc., Sauget, IL, USA) has a length
has a length
of 584.2 mm, of 584.2
inner mm, inner
diameter diameter
(ID) of 12.7 mm, (ID)
andof15.88
12.7 mmmm,outer
and 15.88 mm(OD).
diameter outerSegmental
diameter (OD).
baffle
Segmental
(aluminum baffle (aluminum
plate, Model, plate, Country)
Company, Model, Company,
has a 152.4 Country)
mm OD, 3.18 has mm
a 152.4 mm OD,
thickness, 3.18 mm
and 92.08 mm
thickness, and 92.08 mm height with four holes (15.88 mm ID). The cylinder
height with four holes (15.88 mm ID). The cylinder shell (carbon steel schedule 40, DS Pipe & Steel shell (carbon steel
schedule 40, DS
Supply, LLC., Pipe & Steel
Baltimore, MD, Supply, LLC.,
USA) has Baltimore,
a length MD,mm,
of 685.8 USA) has amm
177.8 length
OD of 685.8
and 152.4mm,
mm 177.8 mm
ID with
OD
two and 152.4
flanges mm mm
(228.6 ID with two flanges
rectangular plate(228.6 mm rectangular
with 168.28 mm OD center platehole
withand
168.28
fourmm12.7 OD
mmcenter hole
OD corner
and four 12.7 mm OD corner holes, a 381 mm OD circular plate with 168.28 mm
holes, a 381 mm OD circular plate with 168.28 mm OD center hole and four 12.7 mm OD corner holes). OD center hole and
four 12.7 mm OD corner holes). Multiple connections (e.g.,
◦ 12.7 mm × 12.7 mm
Multiple connections (e.g., 12.7 mm × 12.7 mm copper 90 sweat × sweat Elbow, 12.7 mm Copper Cup copper 90° sweat ×
sweat
× CupElbow,
× Cup Tee 12.7Fitting,
mm Copper
and 12.7Cupmm × four-way
Cup × Cup castTee Fitting,
copper pipeand 12.7were
cross) mmselected
four-way to cast copper
connect the
pipe cross) were selected to connect the tubes. During the design phase, the quantity
tubes. During the design phase, the quantity of pipes was decided by the space between the available of pipes was
decided by the space
market connections between
while the ofavailable
the length tube wasmarket connections
determined while the
by the distance length
between theofcombustion
tube was
determined by
chamber and cyclone. the distance between the combustion chamber and cyclone.

(a) (b)

Figure 2. Design
Design ofof the lab-scale shell and tube heat exchanger (STHE) components: (a)
(a) 3D model
without shell (b) 2D baffle (units: mm).

2.2. Fabrication Phase of the Lab-Scale Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger (STHE)
2.2. Fabrication Phase of the Lab-Scale Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger (STHE)
As shown in Figure 3, fabrication of the lab-scale STHE was performed in four steps: (1) raw
As shown in Figure 3, fabrication of the lab-scale STHE was performed in four steps: (1) raw
material selection, (2) cutting, welding, and bending, (3) soldering and assembly, and (4) integration.
material selection, (2) cutting, welding, and bending, (3) soldering and assembly, and (4) integration.
Raw materials, such as the copper tubes, carbon steel pipe, and aluminum plate, were selected and used
Raw materials, such as the copper tubes, carbon steel pipe, and aluminum plate, were selected and
to fabricate the tubes, shell, and baffles for the lab-scale STHE prototype in the Center for Advanced
used to fabricate the tubes, shell, and baffles for the lab-scale STHE prototype in the Center for
Energy Systems and Environmental Control Technologies (CAESECT) at Morgan State University.
Advanced Energy Systems and Environmental Control Technologies (CAESECT) at Morgan State
Cutting machines, 14-gauge swivel head shears (Item 68199, Chicago Electric Power Tools, Calabasas,
University. Cutting machines, 14-gauge swivel head shears (Item 68199, Chicago Electric Power
CA, USA), Bi-metal and hole saw set (Item 68113 68990, WARRIOR, Camarillo, CA, USA), high pressure
Tools, Calabasas, CA, USA), Bi-metal and hole saw set (Item 68113 68990, WARRIOR, Camarillo, CA,
hydraulic drilling machine, hammer and tube cutter were used to drill holes, and to fabricate segmental
USA), high pressure hydraulic drilling machine, hammer and tube cutter were used to drill holes,
baffles and the straight tube. Straight tubes were further twisted and slightly bent to make twisted
and to fabricate segmental baffles and the straight tube. Straight tubes were further twisted and
tubes due to the lack of manufacturing sources in the U.S. that fabricated twisted tubes. Technical
slightly bent to make twisted tubes due to the lack of manufacturing sources in the U.S. that fabricated
staff in the Plumbing Department at Morgan State University assisted in welding the flanges to each
twisted tubes. Technical staff in the Plumbing Department at Morgan State University assisted in
side of the cylinder shell. Hard soldering tools, include Berzomatic Map-Pro gas cylinder (14.1 oz)
welding the flanges to each side of the cylinder shell. Hard soldering tools, include Berzomatic Map-
along with a hard soldering kit and 15% Phos-Copper Silver Brazing Alloy rod (12.7 mm × 3.18 mm)
Pro gas cylinder (14.1 oz) along with a hard soldering kit and 15% Phos-Copper Silver Brazing Alloy
were acquired to perform hard soldering process at temperature (around 450 ◦ C) between tubes and
rod (12.7 mm × 3.18 mm) were acquired to perform hard soldering process at temperature (around
multiple connections of the lab-scale STHE prototype. The surfaces of each pipe and connection were
450 ℃) between tubes and multiple connections of the lab-scale STHE prototype. The surfaces of each
cleaned by a brush. Flux was applied to enhance sealing and to prevent water leakage. Fabricated
pipe and connection were cleaned by a brush. Flux was applied to enhance sealing and to prevent
baffle, copper tube, and other connections were assembled and integrated to complete the lab-scale
water leakage. Fabricated baffle, copper tube, and other connections were assembled and integrated
STHE system prototype.
to complete the lab-scale STHE system prototype.
Processes 2020, 8, 500 5 of 13
Processes 2020, 8, 500 5 of 13

Figure 3. Fabrication process of the lab-scale STHE prototype.

Figure 3. Fabrication process of the lab-scale STHE prototype.
2.3. Experimental Setup for Process Analysis and Performance Evaluation
2.3. Experimental Setup for Process Analysis and Performance Evaluation
Figure 4 illustrates the experimental setup for process analysis and performance evaluation of the
Figure
lab-scale STHE 4 illustrates the experimental
system during the poultrysetup litter for process analysis
co-combustion and The
process. performance
lab-scale STHEevaluation
system of
the
was lab-scale
combinedSTHE with thesystem
SFBC during
chamber, the poultry(B-24.64
radiators litter co-combustion
ECO, eComfortprocess.Holdings, The lab-scale
Inc., STHE
Buffalo Grove,
system
IL, USA), pump, connection pipes, and trailer (2438.4 mm width × 6096.0 mm length × 2438.4 Inc.,
was combined with the SFBC chamber, radiators (B-24.64 ECO, eComfort Holdings, mm
Buffalo
height, Grove,
Mobile IL, USA),
Mini pump,
Storage connection
Solutions, Middle pipes, and trailer
River, MD, USA) (2438.4to mm widththe
simulate × space
6096.0heating
mm length of a
× 2438.4 mm height, Mobile Mini Storage Solutions, Middle River,
poultry house. Natural gas was provided at a height of 120.0 mm for ignition and co-combustion MD, USA) to simulate the space
heating of a poultry
with poultry house. Natural
litter. Poultry litter wasgas fedwas intoprovided
the chamber at a height
by the of 120.0 mm
biomass for ignition
feeder. In addition,and co-
the
combustion with poultry litter. Poultry litter was fed into the chamber
primary and secondary blowers along with a voltage regulator were responsible for supplying the by the biomass feeder. In
addition, the primary and secondary blowers along with a voltage
combustion air. The 1 kW free piston Stirling engine (E1.4B-00001, Microgen Engine Corporation, regulator were responsible for
supplying
Doetinchem, theGelderland,
combustionThe air.Netherlands)
The 1 kW free waspiston
insertedStirling engine
into the SFBC(E1.4B-00001,
system at a heightMicrogen Engine
of 406.4 mm
Corporation, Doetinchem, Gelderland, The Netherlands) was inserted
to simultaneously generate electricity and heat [7,23]. Hot flue gas from the combustion chamber still into the SFBC system at a
height of 406.4 mm to simultaneously generate electricity and heat
carries residual heat and it was supplied into the shell. Then, it was passed through the segmental [7,23]. Hot flue gas from the
combustion
baffles to heat chamber
the waterstillin
carries residualSTHE
the lab-scale heat and it wasThere
system. supplied
wereinto the shell.
a total of fiveThen, it wasinpassed
radiators trailer
through the segmental baffles to heat the water in the lab-scale STHE
house to mimic space heating of the poultry house in this study. The processed hot water from the system. There were a total of
five radiators in trailer house to mimic space heating of the poultry house
lab-scale STHE system was able to supply the five radiators in series and returned as cold water into in this study. The processed
hot
the water
STHE from system. the lab-scale STHE system was able to supply the five radiators in series and returned
as cold water into
Vortex flow meters the STHE system.
(SV4610, Ifm electronic company, Essen, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany),
Vortex flow meters (SV4610,
K-type thermocouples (Omega TJ36-CASS-18U-6, Ifm electronic OMEGA company, Essen, Nordrhein-Westfalen,
Engineering, Norwalk, CT, USA)Germany), along with
K-type
a data acquisition system (Omega OMB-DAQ-2416, OMEGA Engineering, Norwalk, CT, USA)along
thermocouples (Omega TJ36-CASS-18U-6, OMEGA Engineering, Norwalk, CT, USA) were
with a data
carefully acquisition
installed system
to monitor (Omega
water flowOMB-DAQ-2416,
rate, water temperature, OMEGA Engineering,
flue gas, and chamber Norwalk, CT, USA)
temperatures.
were
An enginecarefully
controlinstalled to monitor
box, along with a water
Microgen flowTest rate,
Rigwater
Data temperature, flue gas, and chamber
Viewer and micro-emission analyzer
temperatures. An engine control box, along with a Microgen Test
(Model 500, Enerac, Inc., Holbrook, NY, USA) were used to analyze electricity output and major gaseous Rig Data Viewer and micro-
emission analyzer (Model 500, Enerac, Inc., Holbrook, NY, USA)
emissions (e.g., CO, NOx ) after steady-state combustion with an O2 volume between 10% and 12%. were used to analyze electricity
output and major gaseous
Water temperature changesemissions (e.g., CO,
were calculated from NO x) after steady-state combustion with an O2 volume
the temperature difference between water outlet (hot
between 10% and 12%. Water temperature
water) and water inlet (cold water). Trailer temperature changes werewascalculated
calculated from the real-time
by the temperature difference
average trailer
between water outlet (hot water) and water inlet (cold water). Trailer
temperatures in three positions: window side, door side, and room side. Hot flue and water were temperature was calculated by
the
used real-time averagefluid
as the working trailertotemperatures
investigate the ineffect
threeof positions:
tube shape window
(straightside,
and door side, and
twisted), flow room side.
direction
Hot flue and water were used as the working fluid to investigate
(co-current and counter-current), water flow rate, and heat input on the lab-scale STHE prototype the effect of tube shape (straight
and
and twisted),
space heatingflow direction
performance. (co-current and counter-current),
The energy flow was analyzed, waterandflow
therate, and heat
conversion input onwas
efficiency the
lab-scale
calculatedSTHE whileprototype
emissionsand werespace heatingduring
monitored performance. The energyprocess.
the co-combustion flow was analyzed, and the
conversion efficiency was calculated while emissions were monitored during the co-combustion
process.
Processes 2020, 8, 500 6 of 13

Heat transfer of the STHE system can be determined by the measurement of the thermal energy
Processes 2020, 8, 500 6 of 13
transferred from one point to another and determined by the specific heat, mass, and temperature
change.
HeatThe heat content,
transfer Q, issystem
of the STHE calculated
can as
be follows:
determined by the measurement of the thermal energy
transferred from one point to another and determined by the specific heat, mass, and temperature
Q=
change. The heat content, Q, is calculated as m × cp × ∆T,
follows: (1)

where Q = heat content of medium, in Joules; Q=mm ×= × ∆T,in kg; cp = specific heat, in J/g ◦ C; and
cp mass, (1)
∆T = change in temperature, in ◦ C. The specific heat of the flue gas and water were assumed to be
where Q◦ = heat content of medium, in Joules; m = mass, in kg; cp = specific heat, in J/g °C; and ΔT =
2.01 J/g C and 4.186 J/g ◦ C, respectively [22]. Heat capture efficiency was calculated by dividing water
change in temperature, in °C. The specific heat of the flue gas and water were assumed to be 2.01 J/g
heat content by flue gas energy content. The logarithmic mean temperature difference (LMTD) was
°C and 4.186 J/g °C, respectively [22]. Heat capture efficiency was calculated by dividing water heat
determined from two temperature differences ∆t1 and ∆t2 at each end of the heat exchanger.
content by flue gas energy content. The logarithmic mean temperature difference (LMTD) was
determined from two temperature differences
∆t1 − ∆t2 Δt 1 and Δt2 at each end of the heat exchanger.
∆𝑡 −∆𝑡 =
LMTD ∆t1 = T1 − t2 ∆t2 = T2 − t1 , (2)
LMTD = 1 ∆𝑡1 2 ln ∆t1 ∆𝑡1 = 𝑇1 − 𝑡2
∆t ∆𝑡2 = 𝑇2 − 𝑡1 , (2)
ln
∆𝑡2 2

where T1 = shell-side inlet temperature (°C), T2 = shell-side outlet temperature (°C), t1 = tube-side inlet
where T1 = shell-side inlet temperature (◦ C), T2 = shell-side outlet temperature (◦ C), t1 = tube-side
temperature (°C), and t 2 = tube-side outlet temperature (°C).
inlet temperature (◦ C), and t2 = tube-side outlet temperature (◦ C).

Figure 4. The experimental STHE system setup for process analysis and performance evaluation.
Figure 4. The experimental STHE system setup for process analysis and performance evaluation.
3. Results and Discussion
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Effect of Tube Shape: Straight Tube, and Twisted Tube
3.1. Effect
Figureof Tube Shape: Straight
5 summarizes Tube, and
the effects Twisted
of tube Tube(e.g., straight, twisted) on performance (water
shapes
temperature, trailer temperature)
Figure 5 summarizes of the
the effects lab-scale
of tube shapes STHE
(e.g.,system.
straight,Stwisted)
denotes ontheperformance
straight tube(water
and T
denotes the twisted
temperature, tube in Figureof5. the
trailer temperature) It was observed
lab-scale STHE thatsystem.
CO andS NO x emission
denotes was increased
the straight tube andandT
SO emission was decreased as the mixing ratio of the poultry litter with natural
denotes the twisted tube in Figure 5. It was observed that CO and NOx emission was increased and
2 gas increased from
1.89
SO to 7.42 [7]. Therefore, 7.08 kg/h of poultry litter was fed at the start into the combustion chamber
2 emission was decreased as the mixing ratio of the poultry litter with natural gas increased from
at a to
1.89 mixing ratio
7.42 [7]. of 2.00 to
Therefore, minimize
7.08 gas emissions
kg/h of poultry litter wasduring
fed atthe
theco-combustion process. The
start into the combustion initial
chamber
water inlet temperature was 17.8 ◦ C and the water flow rate of 6.81 L/min was kept as constant. It
at a mixing ratio of 2.00 to minimize gas emissions during the co-combustion process. The initial
was found
water inlet that water temperature
temperature was 17.8 ℃ changes
and the were similar
water flowatrate
the of
beginning
6.81 L/min30 min
wasofkept
the as
co-combustion
constant. It
process. After 135 min of the co-combustion process, the water inlet temperature
was found that water temperature changes were similar at the beginning 30 min of the co-combustion was increased to
process. After 135 min of the co-combustion process, the water inlet temperature was increased to
49.4 ℃ and the water outlet temperature increased to 62.8 ℃ in the twisted tube case. At the same
time in the straight tube case, the water inlet temperature was increased to 49.4℃ and the water outlet
temperature increased to 58.3 ℃. It was found that the water temperature change in the twisted tube
Processes 2020, 8, 500 7 of 13

49.4 ◦ C and the water outlet temperature increased to 62.8 ◦ C in the twisted tube case. At the same
time in the ◦
Processes 8, 500 tube case, the water inlet temperature was increased to 49.4 C and the water outlet
2020,straight 7 of 13
temperature increased to 58.3 ◦ C. It was found that the water temperature change in the twisted
tube ◦ C) was higher than the straight tube (6.9 ◦ C). This difference was made more obvious
(13.4 (13.4
℃) was higher than the straight tube (6.9 ℃). This difference was made more obvious at
at co-combustion
co- combustion times timesof of
6060 min,
min, 75 75 min,
min, 105105 min,
min, andand120120
min.min. In addition,
In addition, results
results alsoalso indicated
indicated that
◦ ◦ ◦ ◦
that the trailer
the trailer temperature
temperature increased
increased fromfrom23.923.9
℃ to C to 38.3℃ C(14.4
38.3 (14.4℃Cincrement),
increment),26.1 38.9 ◦℃
26.1 ℃C to 38.9 C
(12.8 ◦ C increment) using the twisted and straight tube based STHE system, respectively. In summary,
(12.8 ℃ increment) using the twisted and straight tube based STHE system, respectively. In
twisted tubes weretubes
able were
to produce ◦ C), as well as a higher
summary, twisted able toaproduce
higher water
a higher temperature (about 4.5
water temperature (about 4.5 ℃), well as a
trailer ◦
highertemperature (about 1.6
trailer temperature (aboutC), 1.6
than℃),straight tubes over
than straight tubestheover
coursetheofcourse
the co-combustion process.
of the co-combustion
Tan et al. [26,27] also concluded that the heat transfer coefficient for the twisted
process. Tan et al. [26,27] also concluded that the heat transfer coefficient for the twisted tube heat tube heat exchanger
is higher than
exchanger for other
is higher thantypes of heat
for other exchangers.
types Better heatBetter
of heat exchangers. performance associatedassociated
heat performance with a twisted
with
tube based
a twisted STHE
tube basedsystem
STHEwas observed
system because the
was observed helical
because thechannel formed formed
helical channel in the inner
in thetube can
inner be
tube
considered as a series of consecutive short sections to change the constant
can be considered as a series of consecutive short sections to change the constant direction and direction and interrupt
the steadythe
interrupt velocity
steadyprofile
velocityofprofile
the waterof theflow.
waterThese
flow.numerous interruptions
These numerous can also
interruptions achieve
can good
also achieve
transverse mixing and maintain turbulent flow to increase the high convective
good transverse mixing and maintain turbulent flow to increase the high convective heat transfer heat transfer coefficients
while achieving
coefficients while better heat transfer
achieving better heatperformance than laminarthan
transfer performance flow.laminar flow.

Figure 5. Comparison performance of the straight tube-based STHE and twisted tube-based
tube-based STHE.
STHE.

3.2. Effect of
3.2. Effect of Flow
Flow Direction: Co-Current and
Direction: Co-Current and Counter-Current
Counter-Current
As
As shown
shown in in Figure
Figure 6,6, the
the effect
effect of
of flow
flow direction
direction on on the
the water
water temperature
temperature changes,
changes, LMTD,
LMTD, and and
trailer
trailer temperature by using the twisted tube based STHE system were further studied. Co-current
temperature by using the twisted tube based STHE system were further studied. Co-current
refers
refers to
to the
the direction
direction of of flue
flue gas
gas flow
flow inin the shell when
the shell equivalent to
when equivalent to the
the direction
direction of of water
water flow.
flow.
Counter-current
Counter-current refers to the direction of flue gas flow in the shell when opposite to the direction of
refers to the direction of flue gas flow in the shell when opposite to the direction of
water
waterflow.
flow.InInboth
bothdirections,
directions, water temperature
water temperature changes werewere
changes sharply increased
sharply duringduring
increased the firstthe
90 min
first
and then and
90 min plateauing at a constant.
then plateauing at a This is because
constant. This the total heat
is because theinput
totalofheat
fuelsinput
was kept as 42.20
of fuels was MJ/h
kept asat
the beginning and increased to 180.32 MJ/h by addition of poultry litter (PL =
42.20 MJ/h at the beginning and increased to 180.32 MJ/h by addition of poultry litter (PL = 7.08 kg/h)7.08 kg/h) into natural gas
(NG = 0.31 ×gas
into natural 10−3(NGm3 /s) in the
= 0.31 × remaining
10−3 m3/s) co-combustion
in the remaining process. It was found
co-combustion that water
process. It wastemperature
found that
change in the counter-current is larger than the co-current direction. For instance,
water temperature change in the counter-current is larger than the co-current direction. For instance, counter-flow has the
largest water temperature change (33.3 ◦ C) with reduction of flue gas temperature (276.6 ◦ C) while
counter-flow has the largest water temperature change (33.3 ℃ ) with reduction of flue gas
co-current has(276.6
water℃) temperature change has ◦ C) with reduction of flue gas temperature (330.4 ◦ C).
(20.6water
temperature while co-current temperature change (20.6 ℃) with reduction of
Heat is transferred
flue gas temperature at (330.4
a high ℃).
rateHeat
throughout the entire
is transferred heat exchanger
at a high rate throughoutwith counter-current direction
the entire heat exchanger
when
with counter-current direction when compared to co-current direction. This is likely due to between
compared to co-current direction. This is likely due to the high temperature difference the high
the cold and hot water. In addition, LMTD of the counter-current flow
temperature difference between the cold and hot water. In addition, LMTD of the counter-current direction is larger than the
flow direction is larger than the co-current flow direction. These results imply that the heat transfer
process under counter-current condition is more effective than the co-current condition.
Counter- current flow extracted a higher proportion of the heat content from the heating fluid (i.e.,
hot flue gas) into the cold fluid (i.e., water). The possible reason may be that the hot fluid cools off to
some extent but is much warmer than the cold fluid. Thus, cold water entering from right side of the
Processes 2020, 8, 500 8 of 13

co-current flow direction. These results imply that the heat transfer process under counter-current
condition is more effective than the co-current condition. Counter-current flow extracted a higher
proportion of the heat content from the heating fluid (i.e., hot flue gas) into the cold fluid (i.e., water).
Processes 2020, 8, 500 8 of 13
The possible reason may be that the hot fluid cools off to some extent but is much warmer than the cold
fluid.
STHEThus,system cold water
could entering
absorb heatfrom
fromright sideflue
the hot of the
gasSTHE system
gradually could
and absorb
close to theheat
inletfrom the hot flue
temperature of
gas
hot gradually
flue gas when and close to the
the cold inlet is
water temperature of hot flue
moving towards the gas
left when
side ofthe cold
the STHEwater is moving
system. This towards
process
the
mayleft side of the
increase the STHE system.
possibility to This process
achieve may increase
a higher water the possibilitythan
temperature to achieve a higher water
the co-current case.
temperature than the co-current case. Moreover, the trailer temperature was increased from 6.1 ◦ C to
Moreover, the trailer temperature was increased from 6.1 ℃ to 22.8 ℃ with an average outside
22.8 ◦ C with an average outside temperature of 1.38 ◦ C under the counter-current condition. Under a
temperature of 1.38 ℃ under the counter-current condition. Under a co-current condition, the trailer
co-current condition, ◦ C to 24.4 ◦ C with an average outside
temperature changedthe fromtrailer
8.3 ℃temperature
to 24.4 ℃ changed from 8.3 outside
with an average temperature of 5.3 ℃. To that
temperature of 5.3 ◦ C. To that end, counter-current direction was observed to have higher water
end, counter-current direction was observed to have higher water temperature changes, LMTD, and
temperature
increment of changes, LMTD, andthan
trailer temperature increment of trailer
co-current flow temperature
direction. than co-current flow direction.

Figure 6. Effect of flow direction on water and trailer temperature changes.

Figure 6. Effect of flow direction on water and trailer temperature changes.
3.3. Effect of Flow Rates: 3.22 L/min, 4.54 L/min, 6.44 L/min
3.3. Effect of Flow Rates: 3.22 L/min, 4.54 L/min, 6.44 L/min
Cold water absorbed heat from the hot flue gas and was converted into hot water in the lab-scale
STHECold
systemwater absorbed
while hot waterheatejected
from the hotinto
heat fluethe
gascold
andairwasofconverted
the trailer into
househotandwater in the into
changed lab-scale
cold
STHE in
water system while hot The
the radiators. water ejected
flow ratesheat into the
of water arecold air ofinthe
critical trailer house
determining theand
heatchanged
transferinto cold
rate in
waterthe
both in the radiators.
lab-scale STHE The flow rates
system and of water are
radiators in critical in determining
the trailer. This is becausethe heat
the transfer
flow ratesrateofinwater
both
the lab-scale
multiplied bySTHE system
a constant and radiators
specific in the trailer.change
heat and temperature This is because the heat
determine flow absorption
rates of water and
multiplied
rejection by Figure
rate. a constant specific heat
7 summarizes theand temperature
influence of the change
water flow determine
rates onthe theheat
waterabsorption
temperature and
rejectionand
change rate. Figure
trailer 7 summarizes
temperature. It wasthefound
influence of the water changes
that temperature flow rates on the the
between water
coldtemperature
water inlet
change
and hot and
water trailer
outlettemperature.
were in the range 10.0 ◦ C
It wasoffound that 19.4 ◦ C, 7.7 ◦ Cchanges
to temperature to 12.8 ◦between
C, 3.3 ◦ Cthe cold◦water
to 12.2 inlet
C on using
andlab-scale
the hot water outlet tube-based
twisted were in theSTHE 10.0 ℃
rangeatofwater flow to rates ℃,3.22
19.4 of ℃ to 12.8
7.7 L/min, 4.54℃, 3.3 ℃
L/min, andto 6.44 ℃ on
12.2 L/min,
using the lab-scale twisted tube-based STHE at water flow rates of 3.22
respectively. Lower flow rates had a larger temperature change between cold water inlet and hot water L/min, 4.54 L/min, and
6.44 L/min,
outlet because respectively. Lower flow
there was sufficient timerates had a larger
to absorb temperature
heat from change
the hot flue gasbetween
into the cold
water water
medium.inlet
and hot water
However, thereoutlet because on
is a limitation there
thewas sufficient
amount of heat time to absorb
rejection heat from
associated withthe hot flue
a lower watergasflow
intorate
the
water medium. However, there is a limitation on the amount of heat rejection
during the space heating process of the trailer house. Trailer temperatures were observed to have associated with a lower
water flow
increased to rate ◦ C, 33.3 the
24.4 during ◦ C and
space 38.3 ◦ C at water
heating process flowofrates
the trailer
of 3.22 house.
L/min, Trailer temperatures
4.54 L/min, were
and 6.44 L/min,
observed to have
respectively. increased
The trailer hadto the24.4 ℃, 33.3
highest ℃ and 38.3
temperature ℃ at◦ C
of 38.3 water flow rates
at a water rate of 6.44
3.22 L/min
L/min,after4.54
L/min, and 6.44 L/min, respectively. The trailer had the highest temperature
135 min of co-combustion. A higher water flow rate (6.44 L/min) had a better heat transfer process of 38.3 ℃ at a water rate
in
of 6.44
the L/min
trailer thanafter
lower 135 minrates
flow of co-combustion.
because high amountsA higherofwaterheat atflow rateflow
higher (6.44rate
L/min)
werehad a better
ejected fromheatthe
transfer
hot waterprocess in the trailer
in the radiators into than lower
the cold air flow
of therates because
trailer. highthe
However, amounts
amountofofheat at higher
rejected flow
heat in therate
hot
were ejected from the hot water in the radiators into the cold air of the trailer. However, the amount
of rejected heat in the hot water of the radiators is still lower than the required heat in the cold air of
the trailer. Thus, a higher water flow rate is required in the trailer to eject sufficient heat into the cold
air and have equilibrium between the hot water and the cold air. The trailer temperature changers
were 10.6 ℃, 16.1 ℃ and 14.4 ℃ water flow rates of 3.22 L/min, 4.54 L/min, 6.44 L/min respectively.
Results also indicate that higher water flow rates had higher trailer temperature increments to
Processes 2020, 8, 500 9 of 13

water of the radiators is still lower than the required heat in the cold air of the trailer. Thus, a higher
water flow rate is required in the trailer to eject sufficient heat into the cold air and have equilibrium
between the hot water and the cold air. The trailer temperature changers were 10.6 ◦ C, 16.1 ◦ C and
14.4 ◦ C water flow rates of 3.22 L/min, 4.54 L/min, 6.44 L/min respectively. Results also indicate that
Processes 2020, 8, 500 9 of 13
higher water flow rates had higher trailer temperature increments to achieve the equilibrium between
Processes 2020, 8, 500 9 of 13
the air and water temperature.

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 7. Effect of flow rates on water temperature changes of: (a) STHE, (b) Trailer.
Figure
Figure 7.
7. Effect
Effect of
of flow
flow rates
rates on
on water
water temperature
temperature changes
changes of: (a)
(a) STHE,
STHE, (b)
(b) Trailer.
Trailer.
3.4. Energy Flow, Conversion Efficiency, and Emissions Analysis
3.4. Energy
3.4. Energy Flow,
Flow, Conversion
Conversion Efficiency,
Efficiency, and
and Emissions
Emissions Analysis
Analysis
Energy flow analysis is an effective tool to perform an analysis and to propose sustainable
Energy
Energy
systems. flow analysis
flow
As shown analysis is8,an
in Figureis an effective tool
effective
a schematic tool to perform
to perform
diagram, an
an analysis
the energy analysis andand
and
production to
to propose
heat flowsustainable
propose sustainable
during the
systems.
systems. As shown
As shown
co-combustion in Figure
in Figure
process 8, a schematic
in the8,lab-scale
a schematic diagram,
diagram,
biomass the energy
the energy
conversion systemproduction
production and heat flow during the
and heat flow during
was analyzed. the
co-combustion process in the lab-scale biomass conversion system was
co-combustion process in the lab-scale biomass conversion system was analyzed. analyzed.

Figure 8. Energy production and heat flow of poultry litter in the energy conversion process.
Figure 8. Energy production and heat flow of poultry litter in the energy conversion process.
TheFigure
higher8.heating value (HHV)
Energy production andofheat
poultry litter
flow of and litter
poultry natural gasenergy
in the was found to be process.
conversion 11.30 MJ/kg and
46.52The higher
MJ/kg, heating value
respectively (HHV)was
[28]. HHV of poultry
multiplied litter
byandthe natural
mass flowgasrate
wastofound
derivetothe be total
11.30heating
MJ/kg
and The
input46.52 higher
MJ/kg,heating
of poultry value HHV
respectively
litter. Then, (HHV) ofof
[28]. HHV poultry litter
wasand
was multiplied
natural gas bynatural gas
the mass
multiplied was
flow
by the found
rate totoderive
volumetric beflow
11.30
the
rateMJ/kg
total
and
and 46.52
heating MJ/kg,
input of respectively
poultry litter. [28].
Then, HHV
HHV was
of multiplied
natural gas by
was the mass
multiplied flow
by
density to calculate the total heating input of natural gas. The density of air and natural gas were rate
the to derive
volumetric the
flow total
rate
heating
and density
assumed input toof
to be calculate
poultry
1.225 kg/m 3 and
the
litter.
total
Then,
heating
0.8 HHV
kg/m 3inputof natural
of natural
, respectively. gas gas.
was The
multiplied
Thereafter, density
the totalby
ofmass
the
air and
volumetric
flownatural
rate offlow
gas
fuelwere
rate
and
and density
assumed
air were to 1.225
to be calculate
calculated. Thethe
kg/m 3 total0.8
and
specific heating
kg/m
heats of,input
3 of natural
respectively.
flue gas ◦ C) The
J/ggas. and density
(2.01 Thereafter, the total
water ofmass
airJ/g
(4.186 and ◦ C)
flow natural
rate
were gas
fuelwere
ofassumed.
and
assumed to be 1.225 The
air were calculated. kg/m 3 and 0.8
specific kg/m
heats of3,flue
respectively.
gas (2.01 J/gThereafter, the total
°C) and water mass
(4.186 J/gflow
°C) rate
wereofassumed.
fuel and
air
Thewere
flue calculated.
gas temperature The specific
changeheats of°C)
(681.2 fluewasgas measured
(2.01 J/g °C) to and waterthe
calculate (4.186
heatJ/g °C) werein
generated assumed.
the flue
The flue gas(71.14
gas stream temperature
MJ/h). Inchange (681.2 °C) it
the meantime, waswasmeasured
found that to calculate theheat
the partial heatwasgenerated
used toinproduce
the flue
gas stream(about
electricity (71.14 MJ/h).
1 kW) In the ameantime,
with conversion it was found of
efficiency that20%.
the partial
Thus, the heattotal
was energy
used to from
producethe
electricity
combustion(about
process 1 was
kW) divided
with a into
conversion
the flue efficiency
gas streamof(58.3%),
20%. Thus,
Stirlingtheengine
total (14.7%),
energy from
and heatthe
Processes 2020, 8, 500 10 of 13

The flue gas temperature change (681.2 ◦ C) was measured to calculate the heat generated in the flue gas
stream (71.14 MJ/h). In the meantime, it was found that the partial heat was used to produce electricity
(about 1 kW) with a conversion efficiency of 20%. Thus, the total energy from the combustion process
was divided into the flue gas stream (58.3%), Stirling engine (14.7%), and heat loss (27.0%). There was
heat loss through conduction and radiation from the combustion chamber surface and bottom ash
production. Results indicated that the flue gas was decreased from 681.2 ◦ C to 389.9 ◦ C while the water
temperature was increased from 44.4 ◦ C to 58.3 ◦ C at a flow rate of 4.43 L/min in the STHE system. It
was found that the lab-scale STHE system was used to collect 44.3% of the residual heat (15.44 MJ/h)
from the flue gas stream (31.49 MJ/h) to produce hot water (about 57.2 ◦ C). The produced hot water
was sent to the radiators in the trailer and ultimately transferred heat into the cold air.
In order to evaluate the conversion efficiency of the STHE system, the amount of heat change
in the water was divided by the amount of heat change in the flue gas under different operating
conditions. Table 1 summarizes the results of the measured system output (e.g., flue gas temperature
from biomass combustion, water temperature) and the calculated conversion efficiency at various
operating conditions (e.g., flow direction, feeding rate of fuels, and water). Results indicated that the
lab-scale STHE system may have produced hot water (about 63.9 ◦ C) with higher efficiency (up to
42.3%). Accordingly, the system may have a lower hot water temperature (about 30.6 ◦ C) at a lower
conversion efficiency (close to 22.8%). It was also found that the counter-current flow with lower water
flow rate may have a higher conversion efficiency than the co-current flow with a higher water flow
rate because this setting provided enough water transport time and heat absorption time. It was also
found that the conversion efficiency was increased by increasing the mixing ratio and higher energy
content of poultry litter in the natural gas during the co-combustion process.

Table 1. Conversion efficiency of STHE system under various operating conditions.

Poultry Litter Water Gas Temp. (◦ C) Water Temp. ( ◦ C) Conversion

Flow Direction (kg/h)/Natural Flow Rate Efficiency
Gas (m3 /h) (L/min) Hot Cold Cold Hot (%)
Co-current 2.09/1.13 2.40 516.2 190.9 17.8 30.6 22.8
Co-current 7.08/1.13 2.40 537.6 255.9 26.1 42.2 30.3
Co-current 9.71/1.13 2.40 670.5 340.1 32.2 52.8 31.6
Counter-current 2.09/1.13 1.70 494.2 276.5 13.9 34.4 37.9
Counter-current 7.08/1.13 1.70 547.3 314.8 16.7 41.7 39.4
Counter-current 9.71/1.13 1.70 674.5 397.9 30.6 63.9 42.3

Emission standards and regulations vary by country, as well as issue date of license, biomass
fuel type, heat output, and reference O2 concentration. As shown in Table 2, the NOx emission from
co-combustion in the lab-scale biomass conversion process is significantly lower than the European
emission limits. The lower emission of NOx can be explained by the combination effect of the decreased
freeboard temperature in reducing the small amount of thermal NOx formation and increased species,
such as char and CO in the fuel bed region to form a reducing environment. Therefore, NO can be
reduced by the char suspended within the freeboard, i.e., 2NO + 2C → N2 + CO. In addition, NOx
reduction appears when a large amount of CO emissions splashed and entrained into the freeboard
and interacted with NO emission (2NO + 2CO → 2CO2 + N2 ) [7,9,23]. It is not surprising, therefore,
that the CO emission is a little higher than the emission limits because there are two possible causes of
CO increment: (1) added moisture from poultry litter, which may have caused convective cooling in
the bed region and inhibited conversion of CO into CO2 , and (2) the high volatile content of poultry
litter attributed to the cooling effect and remaining unburnt in the upper part of the combustor [4,7,23].
Processes 2020, 8, 500 11 of 13

Table 2. Summary and comparison of emissions standards and tested results.

Country Heat Output (MW) Fuel Type CO (ppm) NOx (ppm) Ref.
Germany 0.1–1.0 straw (or similar) 218.3 265.8 [29]
Belgium 0.5–1.0 clean wood 218.3 265.8 [29]
Norway 0.5–1.0 biomass 140.0 132.9 [29]
Emission results of the lab-scale biomass conversion system
U. S. 33.9 kW poultry litter 180–350 8–35 N/A

4. Conclusions
Owing to the increasing cost of fuels and environmental problems associated with excess
production and land application of poultry litter, it is imperative that poultry litter is converted into
useful energy via the lab-scale STHE system. In this study a lab-scale STHE system was designed,
fabricated, and evaluated. Effects of tube shape, flow direction, and water flow rates on system
performance were investigated. Results showed that the twisted tube had a better performance than
the straight tube in terms of higher water temperature changes (about 4.5 ◦ C) and trailer temperature
increment (about 1.6 ◦ C). It was observed that the counter-current flow of the flue gas and the water
had higher water temperature changes, LMTD, and trailer temperature increments, compared to co-
current flow. In the meantime, water flow rate of 4.54 L/min was preferred because a higher water
flow rate reduced the water temperature changes in the STHE system while a lower water flow rate
decreased the trailer temperature increment. It is recommended to use the twisted tube at a water
flow rate of 4.54 L/min and co-current direction to increase system performance. Energy flow analysis
found that the lab-scale STHE system was able to collect 42.3% of residual heat from the flue gas and
produce hot water (about 63.9 ◦ C). Emission results indicate that NOx emission is significantly lower
and CO emission is slightly higher than the European emission limits. This study showed that it is
possible for poultry litter to be a viable source of space heating in order to reduce propane consumption
and address run-off issues. It also provided a drier heat to mitigate ammonia concentration in the
poultry house. An effective and environmentally friendly modality for space heating from a poultry
litter combustion process using lab-scale STHE along with the Stirling engine and SFBC system can
save energy costs, protect the environment, and increase the yield of chickens. In future study, the
combination effect of water flow rates and flow direction on conversion efficiency of the lab-scale STHE
system will be further investigated. In addition, heat transfer analysis and energy production of the
SFBC and pilot-scale STHE system will be performed in poultry houses to identify the feasibility of
space heating in the field.

Author Contributions: S.W.L. and X.Q. coordinated projects and received grants from the Abell Foundation.
X.Q. conducted the literature reviews and found the research gaps. X.Q. and S.W.L. conceived and designed the
approach to set up the testing facility and collected results. X.Q. and Y.Y. collected poultry litter samples from a
poultry farm and performed the combustion test. X.Q. and S.W.L. collected and analyzed experimental results
in this study. X.Q. and S.W.L. wrote the draft manuscript. S.W.L. reviewed this manuscript and provided his
constructive comments and suggestions to improve the quality of the article. All authors have read and agreed to
the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the Abell Foundation and the APC was partially funded by the School of
Graduate Studies at Morgan State University.
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to acknowledge the Abell Foundation and Office of Technology at
Morgan State University for providing sponsorship and financial support to conduct this research. In addition,
authors would like to appreciate the kind support of the research staff and facilities from the Center for Advanced
Energy Systems and Environmental Control Technologies (CAESECT).
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Processes 2020, 8, 500 12 of 13

References
1. Patel, M.; Zhang, X.; Kumar, A. Techno-economic and life cycle assessment on lignocellulosic biomass
thermochemical conversion technologies: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 53, 1486–1499.
[CrossRef]
2. Saidur, R.; Abdelaziz, E.A.; Demirbas, A.; Hossain, M.S.; Mekhilef, S. A review on biomass as a fuel for
boilers. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2011, 15, 2262–2289. [CrossRef]
3. Tripathi, M.; Sahu, J.N.; Ganesan, P. Effect of process parameters on production of biochar from biomass
waste through pyrolysis: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 55, 467–481. [CrossRef]
4. Lynch, D.; Henihan, A.M.; Bowen, B.; Lynch, D.; McDonnell, K.; Kwapinski, W.; Leahy, J.J. Utilisation of
poultry litter as an energy feedstock. Biomass Bioenergy 2013, 49, 197–204. [CrossRef]
5. Parker, D.; Li, Q. Poultry Litter Use and Transport in Caroline, Queen Anne’s Somerset and Wicomico
Counties in Maryland: A Summary Report. Mid-Atlantic Regional Water Program. 2006. Available online:
https://p2infohouse.org/ref/41/40131.pdf (accessed on 23 March 2019).
6. Kelleher, B.P.; Leahy, J.J.; Henihan, A.M.; O’dwyer, T.F.; Sutton, D.; Leahy, M.J. Advances in poultry litter
disposal technology–a review. Bioresour. Technol. 2002, 83, 27–36. [CrossRef]
7. Qian, X.; Lee, S.; Chandrasekaran, R.; Yang, Y.; Caballes, M.; Alamu, O.; Chen, G. Electricity evaluation and
emission characteristics of poultry litter co-combustion process. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 4116. [CrossRef]
8. Abelha, P.; Gulyurtlu, I.; Boavida, D.; Barros, J.S.; Cabrita, I.; Leahy, J.; Kelleher, B.; Leahy, M. Combustion of
poultry litter in a fluidised bed combustor. Fuel 2003, 82, 687–692. [CrossRef]
9. Li, S.; Wu, A.; Deng, S.; Pan, W.P. Effect of co-combustion of chicken litter and coal on emissions in a
laboratory-scale fluidized bed combustor. Fuel Process. Technol. 2008, 89, 7–12. [CrossRef]
10. Cui, Y.; Theo, E.; Gurler, T.; Su, Y.; Saffa, R. A comprehensive review on renewable and sustainable heating
systems for poultry farming. Int. J. Low-Carbon Technol. 2020, 15, 121–142. [CrossRef]
11. Liang, Y.; Tabler, G.T.; Watkins, S.E.; Xin, H.; Berry, I.L. Energy use analysis of open-curtain vs. totally
enclosed broiler houses in northwest Arkansas. Appl. Eng. Agric. 2009, 25, 577–584. [CrossRef]
12. May, J.D.; Lott, B.D. The effect of environmental temperature on growth and feed conversion of broilers to 21
days of age. Poult. Sci. 2000, 79, 669–671. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
13. Smith, S.; Meade, J.; Gibbons, J.; McGill, K.; Bolton, D.; White, P. Impact of direct and indirect heating systems
in broiler units on environmental conditions and flock performance. J. Integr. Agric. 2016, 15, 2588–2595.
[CrossRef]
14. Yi, B.; Chen, L.; Sa, R.; Zhong, R.; Xing, H.; Zhang, H. High concentrations of atmospheric ammonia induce
alterations of gene expression in the breast muscle of broilers (Gallus gallus) based on RNA-Seq. BMC Genom.
2016, 17, 598. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
15. Bichkar, P.; Dandgaval, O.; Dalvi, P.; Godase, R.; Dey, T. Study of shell and tube heat exchanger with the
effect of types of baffles. Procedia Manuf. 2018, 20, 195–200. [CrossRef]
16. Salahuddin, U.; Bilal, M.; Ejaz, H. A review of the advancements made in helical baffles used in shell and
tube heat exchangers. Int. Commun. Heat Mass 2015, 67, 104–108. [CrossRef]
17. Duan, Z.; Shen, F.; Cao, X.; Zhang, J. Comprehensive effects of baffle configuration on the performance of
heat exchanger with helical baffles. Nucl. Eng. Des. 2016, 300, 349–357. [CrossRef]
18. Master, B.I.; Chunangad, K.S.; Pushpanathan, V. Fouling mitigation using helixchanger heat exchangers. In
Proceedings of the ECI Conference on Heat Exchanger Fouling and Cleaning: Fundamentals and Applications,
Santa Fe, NM, USA, 18–22 May 2003; pp. 17–322.
19. Master, B.I.; Chunangad, K.S.; Boxma, A.J.; Karl, D.; Stehlik, P. Most frequently used heat exchangers from
pioneering research to worldwide applications. Heat Transf. Eng. 2006, 27, 4–11. [CrossRef]
20. Dubey, V.V.P.; Verma, R.R.; Verma, P.S.; Srivastava, A.K. Performance analysis of shell and tube type heat
exchanger under the effect of varied operating condition. IOSR J. Mech. Civ. Eng. 2014, 11, 8–17. [CrossRef]
21. Danielsen, S.O. Investigation of a Twisted-Tube Type Shell-and-Tube Heat Exchanger. Master’s Thesis,
Institutt for Energi-og Prosessteknikk, Trondeim, Norway, June 2009.
22. Yang, S.; Zhang, L.; Xu, H. Experimental study on convective heat transfer and flow resistance characteristics
of water flow in twisted elliptical tubes. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2011, 31, 2981–2991. [CrossRef]
23. Qian, X. Statistical Analysis and Evaluation of the Advanced Biomass and Natural Gas Co-Combustion
Performance. Ph.D. Thesis, Morgan State University, Baltimore, MD, USA, 2019.
Processes 2020, 8, 500 13 of 13

24. Yrjölä, J.; Paavilainen, J. Modelling and analyses of heat exchangers in a biomass boiler plant. Int. J. Energy
Res. 2004, 28, 473–494. [CrossRef]
25. Stehlik, P. Heat exchangers as equipment and integrated items in waste and biomass processing. Heat Transf.
Eng. 2007, 28, 383–397. [CrossRef]
26. Tan, X.H.; Zhu, D.S.; Zhou, G.Y.; Zeng, L.D. Experimental and numerical study of convective heat transfer
and fluid flow in twisted oval tubes. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2012, 55, 4701–4710. [CrossRef]
27. Tan, X.H.; Zhu, D.S.; Zhou, G.Y.; Zeng, L.D. Heat transfer and pressure drop performance of twisted oval
tube heat exchanger. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2013, 50, 374–383. [CrossRef]
28. Qian, X.; Lee, S.; Soto, A.-M.; Chen, G. Regression model to predict the higher heating value of poultry waste
from proximate analysis. Resources 2018, 7, 39. [CrossRef]
29. Koppejan, J.; Van Loo, S. The Handbook of Biomass Combustion and Co-Firing. Reprint; Earthscan: London, UK,
2010; pp. 129–132.

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).