Energy 201 (2020) 117624

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Numerical simulation of the wood pyrolysis with homogenous/

heterogeneous moisture using FireFOAM
Haoran Liu a, b, Changjian Wang a, b, *, Aifeng Zhang a, b, **
a
School of Civil Engineering, Hefei University of Technology, Hefei, 230009, China
b
Anhui International Joint Research Center on Hydrogren Safety, Hefei, 230009, China

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

Article history: The effects of homogenous and heterogeneous moisture on wet wood pyrolysis are investigated using
Received 10 June 2019 modified FireFOAM. The wet wood pyrolysis model was used by considering one-step moisture drying
Received in revised form and one-step wood pyrolysis, which simplified the kinetic of intermediate solids. In homogeneous cases,
1 March 2020
the maximum mass fluxes of vapor and pyrolysate increase with the increased initial moisture content
Accepted 13 April 2020
Available online 21 April 2020
and there is only one peak on the mass flux curve of pyrolysate in the cases of wood thickness of 2 mm
and 5 mm, while two peaks appear in the cases of 12 mm and 20 mm. In heterogeneous cases, the
heterogeneous moisture significantly changes the mass fluxes and duration time of pyrolysate and vapor.
Keywords:
Pyrolysis
The detailed comparisons of the duration of vapor and the maximum mass fluxes of vapor and pyrolysate
Wet wood were also presented between homogeneous and heterogeneous moisture. This work provides a more
FireFOAM comprehensive understanding for the wet wood pyrolysis.
Moisture gradient © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction pyrolyzing some particles with different moisture content. The

Wood, as typical lignocellulosic biomass, is regarded as one of
the most important renewable energy sources. The electricity or
thermal energy can be obtained through the direct combustion of
wood. However, this method is not only low in utilization but also
causes environmental pollution. Among the various ways of
biomass utilization, pyrolysis can convert lignocellulosic biomass
into more valuable gas or liquid fuels [1]. It is worth noting that
wood is such a composite material with high content moisture [2].
The moisture content has a significant influence on wood pyrolysis
because moisture evaporation is highly endothermic [3]. Therefore,
in order to have a deeper understanding of wood pyrolysis, this
work studied the effect of moisture on the wood pyrolysis.
Many investigations on the pyrolysis behaviors of wet wood
have been reported in the literature. Hasan et al. [4] studied the
temperature profiles inside a large pyrolyzing particle by the
fluidized-bed reactor. The effect of moisture was studied by
* Corresponding author. School of Civil Engineering, Hefei University of Tech-
nology, Hefei, Anhui, 230009, China.
** Corresponding author. School of Civil Engineering, Hefei University of Tech-
nology, Hefei, Anhui, 230009, China.
E-mail addresses: chjwang@hfut.edu.cn (C. Wang), aifengzhang@hfut.edu.cn
(A. Zhang).
results indicate that the moisture can potentially change the overall
pyrolysis reactions and product distribution. Zeng et al. [5] inves-
tigated the combined effects of feedstock moisture content and
heating parameters on beech wood pyrolysis. The high moisture
content can be upgraded into CO- and H2- rich gas products due to
the high temperatures and heating rates. Burhenne et al. [6]
investigated the influence of initial moisture content and temper-
ature on the spruce wood chips pyrolysis. The results show that
higher moisture content led to a higher yield of condensable
products and a lower amount of char. Darmstadt et al. [7] pyrolyzed
the hardwood and softwood bark with different moisture contents.
The charcoal surface becomes more polyaromatic and graphite-like
with decreasing moisture. Demirbas et al. [8] studied the effects of
initial moisture contents on the yields of total oily products from
spruce wood pyrolysis. The results show that the moisture in wood
affects its pyrolysis behavior, the physical properties and the quality
of the pyrolysis liquid.
Most of these studies of wet wood pyrolysis were developed on
the basis of experimental results obtained by pyrolysis of a few
milligrams of wood in powder [9] and are often not comprehensive
enough. Hence, there is necessary to have a deeper understanding
of the pyrolysis kinetics of wood due to its complex chemical nature
[10]. Modelling methods are used to analyze the systems in the
world in a safe and cost-effective way [11]. In particular, several

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.117624
0360-5442/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
2 H. Liu et al. / Energy 201 (2020) 117624

types of modelling tools are available for pyrolysis analysis from basically exists in a non-uniform state. However, there is no
simple heat and mass balance models to advanced numerical research on this topic. In order to fill the knowledge gap in the
models. Amongst the various modellings, Computational fluid dy- numerical simulation of the wood pyrolysis with heterogeneous
namics (CFD) simulations have been widely used in the study of moisture. In the current study, the effect of the moisture gradient
biomass pyrolysis in the past two decades [12]. Some researchers was first focused on the pyrolysis of wet birch wood (Betula). So, on
have focused on modeling the wood pyrolysis by CFD to further the one hand, the effect of different initial moisture content on the
explore the pyrolysis kinetics of wood. M€ atzing et al. [13] developed pyrolysis of wet wood under the same external radiant heat flux
a 1-D reactor cascade model and found that the results obtained by was analyzed. On the other hand, the effect of different moisture
CFD are in good agreement with the measured data. Zeng et al. [14] gradients on the pyrolysis of wet wood under the same external
developed a 2-D unsteady CFD single-particle model to simulate radiant heat flux was also analyzed to gain a more comprehensive
the solar pyrolysis characteristics of beech wood. Soria et al. [15] understanding of wet wood pyrolysis.
reported a 2-D single particle model based on the CFD platform
ANSYS FLUENT 14.0 to study the solar pyrolysis of beech wood
2. Mathematical model
pallets. Gonza lez et al. [16] investigated the biomass gasification
process in a fixed bed by CFD numerical analysis. The mathematical
The large eddy simulation (LES) based FireFOAM [26] solver is
model is a transient 2-D CFD model, which is extended to simulate
used to simulate the pyrolysis process of wet wood. FireFORM
the gasification process by expanding the chemical kinetic mech-
within the OpenFOAM toolbox is a free, open source CFD software
anism and adapting the stages of pyrolysis, oxidation, and reduc-
for modeling fire and solid pyrolysis, non-premixed combustion,
tion. Kwiatkowski et al. [17] reported a 3-D model of wood
etc [27]. The 1-D diffusion model with the Arrhenius type in Fire-
pyrolysis and gasification using ANSYS Fluent CFD package. The
FOAM is used in the present study, which is a common simplifi-
results show a good agreement with the experimental data.
cation to describe the thermal degradation of pyrolysis that
Wickramaarachchi et al. [18] investigated the drying and pyrolysis
effectively reduces the complexity and computation time [28].
process of a thermally thick single wood particle by an unsteady 3-
The pyrolysis process of wet wood is mainly divided into two
D model which suggests that the gas and solid phases inside the
parts. The one is the moisture drying process while the other one is
particle are not in thermal equilibrium. Go  mez et al. [19] took
wood pyrolysis. The expressions are described as follows:
several sub-models from literature to simulate the combustion of
solid biomass in packed beds. These sub-models in commercial CFD Moisture/Vapor (1)
code involve the thermal conversion of solid fuels and its interac-
tion with the gas phase. Kumar et al. [20] developed a CFD model to
Wood / Char þ Pyrolysate (2)
study the gasification thermochemical processes of rubber wood. Li
et al. [21] assessed the devolatilization of biomass under high- The evaporation rate of moisture (u_ m ) and the mass loss rate of
temperature conditions by a CFD model which is based on a mul- wood (u_ w ) are calculated by nth-order Arrhenius formula:
tiscale EulerianeLagrangian solver previously developed in the

nm  
framework of OpenFOAM. Blondeau et al. [22] reported a CFD rYm Ea;m
u_ m ¼ ðrYm Þ0 Am exp
(3)
model to investigate the pyrolysis of particles in pulverized-fuel ðrYm Þ0 RT
boilers. The model accounts for internal heat conduction, internal
gaseous convection, moisture evaporation and particle shrinkage.
nw  
rYw Ea;w
These developed models have been proven to have good pre- u_ w ¼ ðrYw Þ0 Aw exp
(4)
ðrYw Þ0 RT
dictive ability. However, wood may be exposed to wet surroundings
in an actual industrial scenario. In order to develop a model for
where subscripts m and w denote moisture and wood, respectively.
more effective prediction, the increase in the complexity of wood
r is the averaged density of wood, moisture and char, Y is the mass
pyrolysis model is required to consider the effect of moisture on
fraction of each component, and n is the reaction order. A and Ea are
wood pyrolysis [10]. However, nowadays, relatively little research
the pre-exponential factor and activation energy, respectively. R is
has been carried out. Ding et al. [23] developed a wet wood py-
the universal gas constant (8.314J mol
1 K
1) and T is the absolute
rolysis model to study the mass fluxes of water vapor and pyroly-
temperature. The subscript 0 denotes initial conditions before
sate under various external radiation heat flux. However, the effects
heating. The values of n, A and Ea are listed in Table 1. Then, the heat
of different initial moisture gradients on the pyrolysis behavior
flux is expressed as follows:
were not considered. Shen et al. [24] investigated the pyrolysis and
ignition of wood. The sample of wood was fixed in a horizontal
q’’m ¼ u_ m Hm (5)
orientation and heated by a cone calorimeter which supplying heat
flux from 0 to 80 kW m
2. Then, a 1-D model was proposed to
investigate the effect of heat flux and moisture content on wet q’’w ¼ u_ w Hw (6)
wood pyrolysis. But some deficits were observed between the
calculated and experimental results. Pozzobon et al. [25] studied where Hm and Hw are the heat of moisture evaporation and heat of
the beech wood spheres pyrolysis under high radiative heat flux wood pyrolysis, respectively.
and a 2-D unsteady numerical model was established to predict the The vapor and pyrolysate leave from the solid surface as soon as
temperature variation and char field. The predicted values can be they are produced, and therefore the solid mass loss rate is taken as
consistent with the experimental results to a certain extent, but it is mass fluxes of volatiles. For the boundary conditions of the front
not accurate enough in predicting the char field. Yuen et al. [10]
established a 3-D model for the pyrolysis of wet wood based on a Table 1
single 1st Arrhenius reaction. This work mainly focused on the Kinetic parameters for pyrolysis of wet wood.
transient pyrolysis of beech wood with different initial moisture
Reaction n A (s
1) Ea (J/mol) Ref.
content.
10 4
Overall, these above studies only focused on the effect of Moisture / Vapor 1 5.13  10 8.8  10 [27]
Wood / Char þ Pyrolysate 6.02 5.13  1014 1.63  105 [27]
moisture content on wood pyrolysis. Indeed, moisture in the wood
 H. Liu et al. / Energy 201 (2020) 117624 3

surface, Chaos [29] expressed the heat balance equation as:

  X
v  v vT
rcp T ¼ k þ u_ i Hi þ q’’net
q’’loss (7)
vt vx vx

where cp is the averaged specific heat based on the mass fraction, k

is the averaged thermal conductivity of wood, moisture and char,
subscript i denote the drying and pyrolysis process, q’’net and q’’loss are
the net heat flux to the front surface and the heat loss to the
insulation, respectively. The net heat flux to the front surface can be
written as follows:


q’’net ¼ aeff q’’ext
εeff s Ts4
T∞
4

hc ðTs
T∞ Þ (8)

where aeff is the average effective absorptivity, q’’ext is the externally

imposed heat flux, εeff is the average effective emissivity, s is the
Stefan-Boltzmann constant (5.67  10
8W/m2/K4), hc is the
convective heat transfer coefficient, Ts and T∞ are front surface and
Fig. 2. Mass fluxes of vapor and pyrolysate of 5 mm thickness.
ambient temperatures, respectively.
However, the net heat flux in Chaos’s case [29] was derived in
the nitrogen atmosphere. In the air atmosphere, the radiation effect
 
 
of flame on the surface of the wood should be considered. Then, v  v vT rYm nm
rcp T back ¼ k
ðrYm Þ0 Am exp
Ding and co-workers [23] modified Eq. (8) as: vt vx vx ðrYm Þ0

  Ea;m

Hm
q’’net ¼ aeff q’’ext þ q’’flame
εeff s Ts4
T∞
4

hc ðTs
T∞ Þ (9)
RT   
rYw nw Ea;w

ðrYw Þ0 Aw exp
Hw (11)
ðrYw Þ0 RT
where q’’flame is the radiation flux from the flame to the front surface.
Finally, the heat balance equations of front and back surfaces are
expressed as follows [30]:

   
v  v vT 3. Results and discussion
rcp T front ¼ aeff q’’ext þ q’’flame þ k
εeff s Ts4
T∞
4
vt vx vx
In our previous study [27], the current numerical model has

hc ðTs
T∞ Þ been validated against the experimental data of Shen et al. [24] in

  the cone calorimeter in the air atmosphere. The birch as the wood
rYm nm sample with the size of 10 cm  10 cm  1.5 cm and 15.3% moisture

ðrYm Þ0 Am exp
ðrYm Þ0 content was simulated under the fixed radiation heat flux of

  
Ea;m rYw nw Ea;w 20 kW m
2 from the cone calorimeter and 10 kW m
2 from the

Hm
ðrYw Þ0 Aw exp
Hw (10) flame. The results showed that the predicted surface temperature
RT ðrYw Þ0 RT
and total solid conversion ratio agree well with the experimental
data and the numerical model can simulate the wet wood pyrolysis
relatively accurately.

Fig. 1. Mass fluxes of vapor and pyrolysate of 2 mm thickness. Fig. 3. Mass fluxes of vapor and pyrolysate of 12 mm thickness.
4 H. Liu et al. / Energy 201 (2020) 117624

thicknesses of 2 mm, 5 mm, 12 mm and 20 mm. Moreover, the fixed

radiation heat flux of 40 kW m
2 from the cone calorimeter and
10 kW m
2 from the flame was taken into account. Figs. 1e4 show
that the mass fluxes of pyrolysate and vapor under different initial
moisture contents. Interestingly, there is only one peak on the mass
flux curve of pyrolysate in the cases of 2 mm and 5 mm, while two
peaks appear in the cases of 12 mm and 20 mm. The reason is as
follows: the whole wood can be heated in a short time when the
thickness of wood is relatively thin. However, it takes some time to
form a char layer. Due to the short heating time, the char layer has
little effect on the volatilization and only one peak appears. The
heating time becomes longer with the increase in thickness and the
effect of the carbon layer on the volatilization is more obvious, and
therefore the two peaks appear [27]. Moreover, with the thickness
increasing, the time for heating the whole wood becomes longer, so
the evaporation time for the moisture also becomes longer.
Figs. 5 and 6 present the maximum mass fluxes and duration of
vapor and pyrolysate, respectively. The result shows that the
maximum mass fluxes of vapor and pyrolysate increases with
Fig. 4. Mass fluxes of vapor and pyrolysate of 20 mm thickness.
increasing initial moisture content. The probable reason is as fol-
lows [31]: The moisture in wood-based materials exists in two basic
forms. One is bound or hygroscopic water which is found in the cell
3.1. Effect of initial moisture content
wall bound to the hydroxyl group inside the solid and the other is
free or capillary water which exists as a liquid in the wood voids.
Firstly, the effect of different initial moisture content on the
Then, the concept of the fiber saturation point (FSP) can be intro-
pyrolysis of wet birch wood was studied. The gas mass fluxes
duced which is defined as the saturation of the cell wall at a certain
including vapor and pyrolysate were calculated by the above py-
relative humidity of the surrounding air, since the additional water
rolysis model in the air atmosphere. It should be noted that the
beyond FSP only exists in free form. It first undergoes the moisture
simulated sample has a cross section of 10 cm  10 cm with various

Fig. 5. (a)e(d). Maximum mass fluxes of vapor and pyrolysate under different initial moisture content.
 H. Liu et al. / Energy 201 (2020) 117624 5

Fig. 6. (a)e(d). The duration of vapor and pyrolysate under different initial moisture content.

drying process under the action of external heat flux. The free water yield is, which is in accordance with Zeng’s results [5]. The thermal
portion of the total moisture content is consumed during the dry- degradation of wood into tar and then the escape of the tar and
ing process. Then, once the total moisture content of the surface volatiles from wood occur. The increase of initial moisture content
drops to the level close to FSP, the evaporation front moves into the facilitates the wood pyrolysis into more tar [32]. Therefore, the
solid. The moisture exists in the form of vapor behind the evapo- initial moisture content plays a significant role in the wet wood
ration front and the vapor with volatiles flows out of the solid. pyrolysis.
Therefore, the higher initial moisture content generates more va-
pors to mix with volatiles which results in a larger mass fluxes of
3.2. The effect of different moisture gradients
pyrolysate and vapor. Moreover, the duration of the vapor also in-
creases with the increasing initial moisture content. Additionally, it
Usually, the moisture is not homogeneous, but heterogeneous in
is caused by external radiation. When the moisture content is low,
the wood. In this section, the effects of different moisture gradients
the wet wood is quickly heated by external radiation, and then the
on the pyrolysis of wet wood will be discussed. As shown in Fig. 7,
whole time of wet wood pyrolysis decreases.
the birch wet wood with the size of 10 cm  10 cm  1.2 cm was
As mentioned above, the higher the wood moisture content is,
simulated under the fixed radiation heat flux of 40 kW m
2 from
the higher the maximum mass fluxes of pyrolysate are. Then, the
the cone calorimeter and 10 kW m
2 from the flame. It was
pyrolysates change from the gas phase to the liquid phase. In other
assumed that the moisture was kept in a linear increase or decrease
words, the higher the wood water content is, the higher the liquid
in the current numerical model. The moisture gradient from high to

Fig. 7. The moisture gradient of the wet wood model.

6 H. Liu et al. / Energy 201 (2020) 117624

Fig. 8. (a)e(d). Mass fluxes of vapor and pyrolysate of wet wood with homogenous and heterogeneous moistures.

low was defined as “H-L” while the moisture gradient from low to
high was defined as “L-H”. Four different moisture gradients with
the average moisture content 15% were taken into account.
Fig. 8 (a)-(d) show that the mass fluxes of pyrolysate and vapor
of wet wood with homogenous and heterogeneous moisture. It is
found that the duration of vapor with “H-L” is significantly less than
that with “L-H” and the maximum mass fluxes with “H-L” are
higher than those with “L-H”. This phenomenon becomes more
prominent when the moisture gradient is wider. The reason is as
follows: for the wet wood with “H-L”, the radiation flux first heats
the high moisture area, and then a large amount of water is evap-
orated out, which results in a large mass fluxes. With the heating
proceeding, the evaporation front moves into the low moisture
area, and little water is evaporated out. For the wet wood with “L-
H”, the radiation flux first heats the low moisture area and the mass
fluxes increases slowly. The evaporation moves from the low
moisture area to the high moisture area and the moisture is
continuously evaporated out.
It is also found that the mass fluxes of pyrolysate for “H-L” are
much different from those for “L-H”. For the first peak of mass
fluxes of pyrolysate, when the moisture gradient is “H-L”, a large
amount of vapor is first evaporated under the radiation flux
because there is more moisture on the surface. It affects the pro-
duction of pyrolysate. When the moisture gradient is “L-H”, more
wood is involved in pyrolysis because fewer vapors are released.
Therefore, the first peak value for “H-L” is lower than that for “L-H”.
Note that the second peak value with “H-L” is also lower than that
for “L-H”. As time goes on, the evaporation front for “H-L” moves
from the high moisture area to the low moisture area while the case
for “L-H” is on the contrary. Thus, there are more vapors with
volatiles flowing out of the solid for “L-H”, resulting in a higher
mass fluxes of pyrolysate for “L-H” than those for “H-L”.
In order to better study the effects of different moisture gradi-
ents on the pyrolysis, the data in Table 2 were plotted in Figs. 9e11.

Table 2
Maximum mass fluxes and duration of vapor and pyrolysate under different moisture gradient.

Moisture gradient Maximum fluxes of vapor (g m
2 Duration of vapor Maximum fluxes of pyrolysate of 1st peak (g Maximum fluxes of pyrolysate of 2nd peak (g
(%) s
1) (s) m
2 s
1) m
2 s
1)

0%/30% 3.71 460.44 12.71 28.24

30%/0% 8.05 359.26 9.08 25.92
5%/25% 3.54 444.54 11.99 27.84
25%/5% 7.47 378.65 9.53 26.29
10%/20% 4.76 428.74 11.38 27.44
20%/10% 6.77 396.25 10.17 26.66
12.5%/17.5% 5.24 416.75 11.17 27.21
17.5%/12.5% 6.27 398.75 10.54 26.80
 H. Liu et al. / Energy 201 (2020) 117624
Fig. 9. Maximum fluxes of vapor for “L-H” and “H-L00
Fig. 9 shows that, with the decrease in the moisture gradient, the
maximum fluxes of vapor of “L-H” increase while those for “H-L”
decrease. For the maximum fluxes of pyrolysate, as shown in Fig. 10,
two peak values for “L-H” are higher than those for “H-L”. These
phenomena indicate that the radiation flux first heats the low
moisture area, which leads to more pyrolysate. When the radiation
flux first heats the high moisture area, the moisture vaporization
requires more energy to be consumed, which reduces the effective
Fig. 10. Maximum fluxes of pyrolysate of two peaks for “L-H” and “H-L00
7
Fig. 11. Duration of vapor for “L-H” and “H-L00
pyrolysis temperature [33]. Gray et al. [32] also found that more
moisture content results in char yield increase. Therefore, more
pyrolysate can be obtained by “L-H” and while “H-L” causes more
char. Moreover, Fig. 11 shows that, with the decrease in the mois-
ture gradient, the duration of vapor for “L-H” decreases while the
duration of vapor for “H-L” increases. Therefore, the duration of
vapor and the maximum fluxes of vapor and pyrolysate for “L-H”
and “H-L” tend to be consistent when the moisture gradient
decreases.
4. Conclusions
The effects of homogenous and heterogeneous moisture on wet
wood pyrolysis were first investigated under the same external
radiant heat flux and flame heat flux. A 1-D wet wood pyrolysis
model was developed based on the modified FireFOAM. A one-step
wood pyrolysis reaction was applied instead of multiple parallel
reactions, reducing the difficulties of obtaining kinetic and ther-
mophysical parameters of intermediate solids. As pyrolysis pro-
duced gases are significant for wet feedstock, this paper presents
the effects of the initial moisture content and moisture gradient on
the mass fluxes of vapor and pyrolysate with the help of numerical
simulation.
In homogeneous cases, the maximum mass fluxes of vapor and
pyrolysate increase with increasing initial moisture content. When
the evaporation front moves into the solid, the moisture exists in
the form of vapor behind the evaporation front and the vapor with
volatiles flows out of the solid. Therefore, the higher initial mois-
ture content causes more vapors to mix with volatiles, which re-
sults in a larger mass fluxes of pyrolysate. In addition, there is only
one peak in the cases of 2 mm and 5 mm in the mass fluxes of
pyrolysate, while two peaks appear in the cases of 12 mm and
20 mm. From the perspective of the experiment, the number of
peaks can be probably attributed to the effect of the char layer on
the vapor and pyrolysate volatilization. In addition, the increase of
initial moisture content facilitates the wood pyrolysis into more tar.
8 H. Liu et al. / Energy 201 (2020) 117624
In heterogeneous cases, the moisture gradient changes the mass
fluxes of pyrolysate and vapor. The duration of vapor for “H-L” is
significantly less than that for “L-H” and the maximum mass fluxes
for “H-L” are higher than those for “L-H”. Because the moisture
content of the “H-L” surface is larger than that of the “L-H” surface,
when it is exposed to radiation, the “H-L” produces more vapor
than the “L-H” in unit time. As to pyrolysate, two peak values for
“H-L” are lower than those for “L-H”. It can be attributed to the
movement of the evaporation front. When the evaporation front
moves into the solid, the moisture for “H-L” is lower than that for
“L-H”. Thus, there are more vapors with volatiles flowing out of the
solid for “L-H”, resulting in a higher mass fluxes of pyrolysate for “L-
H” than those for “H-L”. When the radiation flux first heats the high
moisture area, the moisture vaporization requires more energy to
be consumed, which reduces the effective pyrolysis temperature.
More moisture content results in char yield increase. Therefore,
more pyrolysate can be obtained by“L-H” while “H-L” causes more
char.
Some differences can be found between the pyrolysis of wet
wood with homogeneous and heterogeneous moisture. As to vapor,
the duration of homogenous moisture is higher than that for “H-L”
but lower than that for “L-H”. The maximum mass fluxes of ho-
mogenous moisture are lower than those for “H-L” but higher than
those for “L-H”. As to pyrolysate, the first peak value of homoge-
nous moisture is higher than that for “H-L” but lower than that for
“L-H” while the second peak value is on the contrary. The duration
of vapor and the maximum fluxes of vapor and pyrolysate for “L-H”
and “H-L” tend to be consistent when the moisture gradient
decreases.
In this paper, the effects of moisture gradient on the wet wood
pyrolysis were investigated by numerical simulation. In future
work, the experiment will be set up for further validating the model
in the cases of moisture gradient.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing
financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.117624.
References
[1] Ding Y, Zhang W, Yu L, Lu K. The accuracy and efficiency of GA and PSO
optimization schemes on estimating reaction kinetic parameters of biomass
pyrolysis. Energy 2019;176:582e8.
mez-Barea A. Characterization
[2] Neves D, Thunman H, Matos A, Tarelho L, Go
and prediction of biomass pyrolysis products. Prog Energy Combust Sci
2011;37(5):611e30.
[3] Ding Y, Fukumoto K, Ezekoye OA, Lu S, Wang C, Li C. Experimental and nu-
merical simulation of multi-component combustion of typical charring ma-
terial. Combust Flame 2020;211:417e29.
[4] Hasan MDM, Hu X, Gunawan R, Li C-Z. Pyrolysis of large mallee wood parti-
cles: temperature gradients within a pyrolysing particle and effects of mois-
ture content. Fuel Process Technol 2017;158:163e71.
[5] Zeng K, Gauthier D, Li R, Flamant G. Combined effects of initial water content
and heating parameters on solar pyrolysis of beech wood. Energy 2017;125:
552e61.
[6] Burhenne L, Damiani M, Aicher T. Effect of feedstock water content and py-
rolysis temperature on the structure and reactivity of spruce wood char
produced in fixed bed pyrolysis. Fuel 2013;107:836e47.
[7] Darmstadt H, Pantea D, Sümmchen L, Roland U, Kaliaguine S, Roy C. Surface
and bulk chemistry of charcoal obtained by vacuum pyrolysis of bark: influ-
ence of feedstock moisture content. J Anal Appl Pyrol 2000;53(1):1e17.
[8] Demirbas A. Effect of initial moisture content on the yields of oily products
from pyrolysis of biomass. J Anal Appl Pyrol 2004;71(2):803e15.
[9] Grieco E, Baldi G. Analysis and modelling of wood pyrolysis. Chem Eng Sci
2011;66(4):650e60.
[10] Yuen RKK, Yeoh GH, de Vahl Davis G, Leonardi E. Modelling the pyrolysis of
wet wood e I. Three-dimensional formulation and analysis. Int J Heat Mass
Tran 2007;50(21):4371e86.
[11] Jurena T. Numerical modelling of grate combustion. Brno: Brno University of
Technology; 2012.
[12] Xiong Q, Yang Y, Fei X, Pan Y, Wang S. Overview of computational fluid dy-
namics simulation of reactor-scale biomass pyrolysis. ACS Sustainable Chem
Eng 2017;5(4):2783e98.
[13] Ma€tzing H, Gehrmann H-J, Seifert H, Stapf D. Modelling grate combustion of
biomass and low rank fuels with CFD application. Waste Manag 2018;78:
686e97.
[14] Zeng K, Soria J, Gauthier D, Mazza G, Flamant G. Modeling of beech wood
pellet pyrolysis under concentrated solar radiation. Renew Energy 2016;99:
721e9.
[15] Soria J, Zeng K, Asensio D, Gauthier D, Flamant G, Mazza G. Comprehensive
CFD modelling of solar fast pyrolysis of beech wood pellets. Fuel Process
Technol 2017;158:226e37.
[16] Gonz alez WA, Perez JF, Chapela S, Porteiro J. Numerical analysis of wood
biomass packing factor in a fixed-bed gasification process. Renew Energy
2018;121:579e89.
[17] Kwiatkowski K, Bajer K, Celin  ska A, Dudyn  ski M, Korotko J, Sosnowska M.
Pyrolysis and gasification of a thermally thick wood particle e effect of
fragmentation. Fuel 2014;132:125e34.
[18] WAMKP Wickramaarachchi, Narayana M. Pyrolysis of single biomass particle
using three-dimensional Computational Fluid Dynamics modelling. Renew
Energy 2020;146:1153e65.
[19] Gomez M, Porteiro J, Patin
~ o D, Míguez J. CFD modelling of thermal conversion
and packed bed compaction in biomass combustion. Fuel 2014;117:716e32.
[20] Kumar U, Salem AM, Paul MC. Investigating the thermochemical conversion of
biomass in a downdraft gasifier with a volatile break-up approach. Energy
Procedia 2017;142:822e8.
[21] Li T, Ku X, Løvås T. CFD simulation of devolatilization of biomass with
shrinkage effect. Energy Procedia 2017;105:505e10.
[22] Blondeau J, Jeanmart H. Biomass pyrolysis in pulverized-fuel boilers: deriva-
tion of apparent kinetic parameters for inclusion in CFD codes. Proc Combust
Inst 2011;33(2):1787e94.
[23] Ding Y, Wang C, Lu S. Modeling the pyrolysis of wet wood using FireFOAM.
Energy Convers Manag 2015;98:500e6.
[24] Shen DK, Fang MX, Luo ZY, Cen KF. Modeling pyrolysis of wet wood under
external heat flux. Fire Saf J 2007;42(3):210e7.
[25] Pozzobon V, Salvador S, Be zian JJ, El-Hafi M, Le Maoult Y, Flamant G. Radiative
pyrolysis of wet wood under intermediate heat flux: experiments and
modelling. Fuel Process Technol 2014;128:319e30.
[26] Wang Y, Chatterjee P, de Ris JL. Large eddy simulation of fire plumes. Proc
Combust Inst 2011;33(2):2473e80.
[27] Ding Y, Wang C, Lu S. Modeling the pyrolysis of wet wood using FireFOAM.
Energy Convers Manag 2015;98:500e6.
[28] Haberle I, Ø Skreiberg, Łazar J, Haugen NEL. Numerical models for thermo-
chemical degradation of thermally thick woody biomass, and their application
in domestic wood heating appliances and grate furnaces. Prog Energy
Combust Sci 2017;63:204e52.
[29] Chaos M. Spectral aspects of bench-scale flammability testing: application to
hardwood pyrolysis. Fire Saf Sci 2014;11:165e78.
[30] Ding Y, Ezekoye OA, Zhang J, Wang C, Lu S. The effect of chemical reaction
kinetic parameters on the bench-scale pyrolysis of lignocellulosic biomass.
Fuel 2018;232:147e53.
[31] Bryden KM, Ragland KW, Rutland CJ. Modeling thermally thick pyrolysis of
wood. Biomass Bioenergy 2002;22(1):41e53.
[32] Gray MR, Corcoran WH, Gavalas GR. Pyrolysis of a wood-derived material.
Effects of moisture and ash content. Ind Eng Chem Process Des Dev
1985;24(3):646e51.
[33] Kersten SR, Wang X, Prins W, van Swaaij WP. Biomass pyrolysis in a fluidized
bed reactor. Part 1: literature review and model simulations. Ind Eng Chem
Res 2005;44(23):8773e85.