You are on page 1of 6


0263–8762/03/$23.50+0.00 # Institution of Chemical Engineers Trans IChemE, Vol 81, Part A, October 2003


´ ´ ´ ´ Institut de Science et de Genie des Materiaux et Procedes, CNRS-IMP Odeillo-Font-Romeu, France , 2 University of Thessaly, Volos, Greece


he distinct element method (DEM) is used to model combustion of coal particles in a bubbling uidized bed. The gas phase is modeled as a continuum and the particle phase is modeled by DEM. The chemical reactions consist of the heterogeneous reactions of char with O2, CO, CO2, NO and N2O and in the homogeneous reactions involving CO, O2, NO and N2O. The colliding particle–particle heat transfer is based on the analysis of the elastic deformation of the spheres during their contact. The model predicts the particle heterogeneous ow structure, the thermal characteristics of burning coal particles, and the gaseous emissions from a uidized binary mixture. Results show that the instantaneous contribution of the collision heat transfer ranges from 0 to about 1.0% of the total heat transfer during the coal combustion. The mean excess of coal temperature is approximately 140K, and the maximum excess of coal particle temperature is approximately 270 K after 2 s. Keywords: uidized bed; coal combustion; distinct element method; large eddy simulation.

INTRODUCTION Coal combustion in a uidized bed is one of the main research topics in the eld of solid fuel treatment since the combustion itself and the resulting gaseous emissions are in uenced by the fuel properties, but also by the gas– particle hydrodynamics and the bed temperature. Models proposed in the literature to predict the performance of a uidized bed coal combustors have been extensively reviewed (Adanez and Abanades, 1992). Most of them are based on the two-phase theory of uidization, which views the uidized bed as consisting of a bubble phase and an emulsion phase. However, two-phase models are unable to predict the gas back mixing and the recycle peak in solids mixing. Models of computational uid dynamics of uidized bed coal combustion are rather scarce due to the complex mathematical modeling and to the unsteady character of the numerous equations (Peirano and Lekner, 1998; Rong and Horio, 1999; Lathouwers and Bellan, 2001). The distinct element method (DEM) model has been used to simulate gas–particle uidization since the 1990s, and phenomena such as bubbling, slugging and particle transport within the bed can be simulated (Tsuji et al., 1993; Hoomans et al., 1996; Zhou et al., 2002). The DEM model describes accurately not only the particle motion (particle rotation, collision with other particles, etc.) but also the chemical reactions, heat and mass transfer etc. at the individual particle level. This paper presents the DEM model that was developed for analysing the thermal characteristics of burning coal particles and the gaseous emissions from a uidized mixture of sand and coal.

THEORY The gas–particle hydrodynamics model is based on the following assumptions: (1) the uidized bed is twodimensional; both front and back walls are frictionless; (2) gas motion due to the convective interfacial transfer uxes of mass and momentum between the particle and the gas are negligible in front of the total uidizing gas ow rate (Lathouwers and Bellan, 2001); (3) the particle is isothermal; and (4) all reactions are rst order reactions. Gas Phase Hydrodynamics Filtering the two-phase Navier–Stokes equations of continuity and momentum conservations in a two-dimensional uidized bed derives the large eddy simulation equations for the gas ow: ~ @(erf ) @(erf uf ,i ) ‡ ˆ0 @t @xi ~ ~ ~ @(erf uf ,i) @(er f uf ,i uf ,j ) ‡ @t @xj ~ t @(esij ) @(e~ ij ) ¡e@~ p ˆ ‡ ‡ @xi @xj @xj (1)

‡ erf g ‡ C


where the overbar denotes the application of the ltering operation, e is the porosity, rf is the gas density (kg m¡3 ), uf is the gas velocity (m s¡1 ), i, j ˆ 1, 2, and represent the x and y directions, p is the gas pressure (Pa), g is the gravitational acceleration vector (m s¡2 ), t is the time (s), C is the ~ volumetric particle–gas interaction (N m¡3 ). tij is the sub ~ ~ ~ grid scale (SGS) stress, sij ˆ rf nf (Sf,ij ¡ 2=3Sf ,kk dij ), and


and to the energy exchanged during the collision. D is the characteristic length (m). nf ˆ mf =rf is the gas kinematic viscosity (m2 s¡1 ).SIMULATION OF COAL COMBUSTION ~ Sf .ij ¡ 2=3Sf. the collision heat transfer is based on the analysis of the elastic deformation of the spheres during their contact. For sand particle.7.j ks ) @{erf (nf ‡ nt =Pr)@ks =@xj } ‡ ˆ @t @xj @xj 3=2 ~ er C ks 1 ‡ ¡ f e ~ ij Sij ) ~ D 2erf nt (S 0:687 · ¡ 3pdp mf (1 ‡ 0:15Rep ) µ ¶ n~ nt @ n · 2· ks · £ ¡ ¢ ¢ (~ f. Vol 81. Heat and Mass Transfer The colliding particle–particle heat transfer is modeled according to the heat conduction analysis developed for impinging particle by Sun and Chen (1988). 2000): q ~ nt ˆ Ck Lt ks (4) where the overbar denotes the mean value in a computational = cell. the mean velocity generation term Fm and the turbulence generation term Ft . Therefore. o is the angular velocity (s¡1 ). mp Cp Coal Pyrolysis. 36mf aˆ · 2 (1 ‡ 0:15Re0:6807) · (2r ‡ r )d p f p p TL is theptime scale of average sub grid scale vortices ~ 1= …TL ˆ D= 2ks 2 ). Trans IChemE. The SGS kinetic energy is obtained from equation (2). respectively. I is the moment of inertia of the particle (kg m2 ). and the mean particle Reynolds number in the computational cell. and n. In this model. Sc is the turbulent Schmidt number. This model predicts the evolution of different species from coal during its thermal decomposition. 2001). Equations of translation and rotation particle motions are: ~ n Vp d~p F ˆ ¡ ‡g ~ mp mp ¢ H~ p dt ~ ~ do T ˆ I dt (6) (7) (10) where q is the heat source in a unit volume [J (m2 s)¡1 ]. rp and Rep are the mean particle · · · concentration(m¡3 ). The heat source consists of the heat transfer between the particle and the gas. a is the inverse of the particle relaxation time (s ¡1 ). The ‘shrinking core’ model is adopted to describe the evolution of coal particles during combustion. Both the homogeneous and heterogeneous reactions are summarized in Table 1. a dashpot and friction. Fm and Ft are: ~ Fm ˆ ¡ n X F ~f ~ Ff ~ and Ft ˆ ¡ V v · u · ~rel ¢ n0 (~ 0f ¡ v0p ) iˆ1 grid (8) (3) where n0 is the particle number uctuating concentration (m¡3 ). Gas±Particle Interaction Force The source term C is composed of two parts. Energy Balance for Gas Species in a Cell The energy balance is written as the following equation: ~ @(erf Cf Tf ) @(erf Cf uf .i =@xj ‡ @uf . tij is u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ modeled as: tij ˆ rf nt (Sf. Qcomb (J s¡1 ). Terms higher than the third order for the SGS and pressure correlation terms are neglected. The drag force on a suspended particle is given by: 1 2 ~ Ff ˆ pdp Cd e¡np ‡2 rf j~ f ¡ ~p j(~ f ¡ ~p ) u n u n (5) 8 where np is the porosity factor (np ˆ 4:7) and Cd is the drag coef cient. and mp is the particle mass (kg). Qc (J s¡1 ).. Part A. the mean particle diameter (m). F is the sum of forces acting on the particle (N) (F ˆ Fc ‡ Ff ). and Vgrid is the computational cell volume (m3 ). Particle Phase Hydrodynamics Cundall and Strack (1979) opened up new possibilities of using DEM to calculate dense phase ows such as uidized beds. mf is the gas viscosity (Pa s). vt is the SGS gas kinetic viscosity (m2 s).j ¡ vp. D ˆ (Dx ¢ Dy)1 2 . v0p is the particle uctuating velocity (m s¡1 ). to the heat of combustion. particle–particle contact forces are described in terms of a mechanical model involving a spring. plus the heat release of burning CO. Pr ˆ 1:0. Lt is the turbulent length scale (m) (Lt ˆ D). In the DEM model. The rate of change of the particle internal energy is due to the heat exchange with the surrounding gas resulting from convection. Qcomb ˆ 0. dp . Pr is the turbulent Prandtl number. the mean particle density (kg m¡3 ). ~ and ks is the SGS kinetic energy (m2 s¡2 ). Dx and Dy are the mesh spacing in x and y directions (m). Fc is the particle–particle interaction force (N).ij ˆ @~ f . Cf is the heat capacity of gas [J (kg K)¡1 ] and Tf is the local gas temperature (K). October 2003 . Combustion and Other Reactions The coal pyrolysis model of Donskoi and McElwain (1999) is used. Ck ˆ 0:1 and Ce ˆ 0:5 (Yuu et al. vrel is the relative gas– particle velocity (m s¡1 ).j =@xi is the resolvable strain tensor. j ) u (aTL ‡ 1) Sc @xj 1145 where vp is the particle velocity (m s¡1 ). Sc ˆ 0. u0f is the gas uctuating velocity (m s¡1 ). Qcoll (J s¡1 ): dTp ˆ Qcomb ¡ Qc ¡ Qr ¡ Qcoll (9) dt where Cp is the heat capacity at constant pressure (J kg¡1 K ¡1 ). 2000). the SGS kinetic energy equation can be obtained as: ~ ~ ~ ~ @(erf ks ) @(erf uf . dij is the Kronecker delta. Qr (J s¡1 ). to the thermal radiation. Ck and Ce are empirically assigned constants.i Tf ) ‡ @t @xi @{e(lf ‡ rf nt =Pr) ¢ @Tf =@xi } ˆ @xi ‡ q The turbulent viscosity is evaluated from the SGS kinetic energy as (Koutmos. T is the net torque caused by the contact force (N m).kk dij ) ¡ 2=3rf ks dij (Koutmos.

For the gas calculation. Thus the size of the cells was chosen to be big enough to contain enough particles. N (1.avre 0:5 kI ˆ 1:254 £ 1010 F(CO2 =2)0:25 CH2 O exp(¡20130=Tf ) F ˆ 7:93exp(¡2:48CCO =CO2 ) N2 O ‡ C ¡ N2 ‡ CO ! 1 N2 O ¡ N2 ‡ O2 ! 2 kG kF N2 O ‡ CO ¡ N2 ‡ CO2 ! kI 1 CO ‡ O2 ¡ CO2 ! 2 kH (char) Mass Balance for Gas Species in a Cell The mass balance for the gas species i (where i represents CO2. sand and coal can be seen in Flamant et al. 1992). Reactions included in the model (Chen et al. The resulting bed size was 4. (10) and (11). the bed was divided into 9 £ 13 cells (width £ height). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION When coal is fed into a hot uidized bed. The time step for particle motion was 2 £ 10¡5 s. the uidization gas was air at 1123:15K. 1983. To study the effect of the particle heterogeneous ow structure on the coal combustion.6).. respectively. and the gas velocity was 0:6 m s¡1 (1:5umf . depending on the coal diameter. k0 ˆ 3:0 ( 0:159fp exp(¡6255=Tp ) Tp µ 973 K kD ˆ 555:6fp exp(¡14193=Tp ) Tp > 973 K kE ˆ 5:67 £ 103 Tf exp(¡13952=Tf )p kF ˆ 13:36fp exp(¡16677=Tp ) kG ˆ 1:75 £ 108 exp(¡23800=Tf ) kH ˆ 2:51 £ 108 exp(¡23180=Tf )CCO. oxygen concentration. It takes several seconds to burn out the coal. COMPUTATION CONDITIONS The well-known semi-implicit method for pressure-linked equations scheme of Patankar (1980) was used to solve equations (1). However. The coal and sand densities were 1100 and 2600 kg m¡3. S (1.0). each coal particle undergoes heating and combustion.. etc.26 cm in width and height. 1999. For the validity of the simulation of coal combustion in uidized bed. 2001. Hobbs et al. moisture (2.4). but be small enough for allowing averages. approximately 12 particles (mean value). H (5. It is a good compromise since the effects of the bed size and particle number on the coal combustion in uid bed are small. umf is the minimum uidization velocity of 1 mm diameter sand). De Soete et al. and the coal particles must have the opportunity to move in both the bubble phase and the emulsion phase. Generally.84 £ 7.2).. a heterogeneous structure must be possible.2 to 1140:6K. The thermophysical properties of air.. The computation scheme has been detailed previously (Zhou et al. Vol 81. 2002). Trans IChemE. the simulation showed that most coal particles oat and burn at the bed surface after 1:5 s. uidizing velocity. The combustion process is calculated afterwards (the initial coal temperature is set as 1123:15K).1146 ZHOU et al. The temperature range of the coal particles is very narrow after 2 s. (3). a‡2 a‡2 a‡2 2 where: a ˆ 750exp(¡7200=Tp ) b ‡ 1 kB (char) ¡ O2 ¡ bNO ‡ C¡ O ! 2 kC (char) Reaction rate (mol m¡3 s¡1) RA ˆ kA CO2 Kinetic constant (s¡1) kA ˆ KOXDN Tp exp(¡21578=Tp ) fp KOXDN ˆ 35 kB ˆ 2(a ‡ 1) bkA . NO.0).. the heating process was calculated rst (the initial coal temperature is set as 423:15K).3% to avoid any burning of coal particles at the bed surface because of possible segregation. to have signi cant interaction effects. CO. The initial bed temperature was 1123:15K. The ratio number of coal particles over number of sand particles is based on the mass ratio of the coal over the inorganic materials in uidized bed combustors. 1480 particles (1460 sand particles of diameter 1 mm and 20 coal particles of diameter 0:8 mm) were put in the bed at initial stage. in the simulation it is approximately 0. N2O. October 2003 . Table 1. Chan et al. and Di is the molecular diffusion coef cient (m 2 s¡1 ). from 1137.0). Here. Reaction 2 ´ kA a‡1 2a 2 C ‡ O2 ¡ ! CO ‡ CO . O (9. ash (3. The total number of particles N (thus the size of the simulated uidized bed) is limited by the computer power since the CPU time is proportional to N 2 . b ˆ 1 a‡2 Heat release (J mol¡1) ¡4:04 £ 105 £ [2a=(a ‡ 2)] Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible ¡2:82 £ 105 ¡ C¡ N ‡ RB ˆ kB CO2 RC ˆ kC CNO RD ˆ kD CNO RE ˆ kE CNO RF ˆ kF CN2 O RG ˆ kG CN2 O RH ˆ kH CN2 O RI ˆ kI CCO ¡ C¡ N ‡ NO ¡ N2 O ‡ C ! kD (char) 1 NO ‡ C ¡ ! N2 ‡ CO 2 k E (char) 1 NO ‡ CO ¡ ! N2 ‡ CO2 2 kC ˆ bk0 fp exp(¡9000=Tp ). H2O and O2) is derived as: ~ ~ ~ ~ @(erf Yi ) @(erf uf j Yi ) @{erf (Di ‡ nt =s) ¢ @Yi =@xj } ‡ ˆ @t @xj @xj ‡ Gi (11) where Yi is the local mass fraction of species. i ˆ 1–6 corresponds to the gas species in the transport gas. The fuel analysis of coal was (wt% dry): C (83. (1993). and the calculation of the molecular diffusion coef cients Di is in Canu (2001) and Massman (1998). The last term on the right of equation (11) is the average mass source arising from reaction. Part A.4). this ratio is less than 2–4%. (2).

SIMULATION OF COAL COMBUSTION 1147 Figure 1. may vary greatly. respectively. i. Then. whereas the bed temperature remains almost constant (it varies from 1123. convection and collision) for all the coal particles during the combustion process. Figure 4. The temperature of coal particles is always higher than the bed temperature (Figure 2).4 and 19:0 ppm at 1 s. O2 concentration is higher at the bottom (air injection) and it decreases along the bed. Figure 1 shows snapshots of the particle ow structure. and the range increases with time. The mean excess temperatures is 60. contrary to CO2 and NO. Figure 5 shows the non-uniform distributions of the gas species at 1 s in the uidized bed. Contributions of the different heat transfer modes for all the coal particles. The maximum excess temperature is 65:50K at 1 s and it increases up to 273:87K at 2 s. Trans IChemE. The collision heat transfer uctuates with time because of the discontinuous coal–particle collisions. CO concentration uctuates a lot and increases. the simulation shows that the heat transfer due to particle collisions is always weak during coal combustion. Figure 3. and its instantaneous contribution ranges from 0 to 1. Figure 6 plots the gas species concentrations at the outlet of the uidized bed vs. There exists a sharp peak in the rst tenths of Figure 2. and the radiation and the convection contributions are similar. Figure 3 plots the instantaneous contributions of the four heat transfer modes. Part A. where the O2 concentration. a stable succession of bubble formation and disappearance in the uidized bed is established. time. There exists an impulsive start-up process at initial stage (t < 0:25 s). especially in the center where combustion is higher. respectively. The instantaneous break-up of the inter-particle locking leads to a signi cant increase of bed height. The mean excess temperature increases with time. Particle structure at different times. NO concentration is always higher than N2O concentration. October 2003 . whereas particle 1 is not heated and its heating rate even became negative. then particle 2 was heated very quickly. after 2 s). Conversely. CO2 concentration is very low at the bottom and it is always higher in the upper center of the bed. which increase regularly. It is 10:94K at 1 s and 198:10K at 2 s. heat of coal combustion.e. Variations of coal temperatures and heating rates with time. i. CO concentration was high in the regions of coal particles. especially after 1:5 s (870K s¡1 at 2 s). the gas velocity and the in uence of other coal particles etc. The big temperature difference results from the different routes followed by coal particles. The temperature of coal particles and their heating rates varied considerably during the uidization process.10%. all the heat transfer modes depend strongly on the type of coal particles: the absolute values for the same heat transfer mode may vary up to almost 10-fold when the properties of particles changed. Vol 81. This points out that the thermal characteristics of burning coal particles may different strongly. even if the initial conditions are almost the same.29 to 1125:54K. 1240K for particle 1. radiation. Excess temperature of coal particles at different times. The local maximum concentrations of NO and N2O are 77. Both considered particles behave similarly in the rst second. less than 2% variation). O2 concentration decreases regularly with time. The heat of combustion is the largest whereas the collision heat transfer is the smallest. The temperature of coal particles can vary widely. Thus.e.56 and 142:54K at 1 and 2 s. This results in a very large difference in particle temperature (1380K for particle 2. as illustrated by two examples of particles (Figure 4). Moreover.

J s 1 average radius. . J s 1 heat of combustion. s 1 average mass of particle. mol m 3 O2 concentration. cannot yet simulate industrial reactors. GPa s heat transfer coef cient. . Figure 5. . kJ k0 m mp N Qc Qcoll Qcomb Qr r R RA. m ideal gas constant. CONCLUSION Coal combustion was numerically studied at the particle level in a uidized bed. kB. m2 s 1 particle diameter. N2O concentration always remains very small. J (m2 s) 1 rate constant of reactions. mol m 3 NO concentration. and the gaseous emissions from a uidized binary mixture of sand and coal. the thermal characteristics of burning coal particles. in particular coal particles overheating. . J s 1 collision heat transfer.0 s). Part A. .1148 ZHOU et al.314 J mol 1 K 1) reaction rate. Sc 0:7 time. It was planned to validate these results with experimental data. m apparent activation energy. Vol 81. The dynamic simulation predicted the particle heterogeneous ow structure. K Figure 6. time 1. RJ Sc t Tb Tf constants in Equation (2) particle surface area. mol m 3 N2O concentration. due to coal pyrolysis. Gas species at the outlet of the uidized bed. GPa Young’ moduli. later it will be possibly implemented at larger scales. October 2003 . mol m 3 s 1 turbulent Schmidt number. The mathematical model was based on the DEM model with heat transfer and chemical reactions (kinetics). following the increase of calculator power. K gas absolute temperature. 1 second. kg order of reaction in Equation (1) convective heat transfer. RB. m average Young’s moduli. mol m 3 heat capacity of particle. mol m 3 CO concentration. J mol 1 speci c internal surface area of the char. s bed absolute temperature. D Ap Cf CH2 O CNO CN2 O CCO CO2 Cp Di dp EA fp G Gi hp kA. B. J (kg K) 1 diffusion coef cient. . but Trans IChemE. kg mass of particle. C. Instantaneous gas species distributions (mass fraction. . s 1 pre-exponential factor in Equation (1). J (kg K) 1 oxygen concentration. . now developed at small scale. This method. although increasing slightly with time. m2 heat capacity of the gas. (8. J s 1 radiation heat transfer. NOMENCLATURE A.

kg mol 1 local mass fraction of species local mole fraction of species primary CO=CO2 product ratio porosity in uid cell Poisson ratio SGS kinetic gas viscosity.. Rong. J. E. Canu. Flamant. Hoomans. J. Simulation of heavy metal vaporization dynamics in a uidized bed.. Kuipers. O.. 52: 37–44. J. m s 1 normal relative velocity. W. France. kg m 3 Stefan–Boltzmann constant gas conductivity. K x direction mesh spacing. Lu. K heating rate.. H. D. A review of the molecular of diffusivities of H2O.L. New York. Chan. 1998. Institut de Science et de Genie des Materiaux et Procedes. NH3. T. Discrete particle simulation of two-dimensional uidized bed.L. Cundall. Flamant. CH4. ADDRESS Correspondence concerning this paper should be addressed to Dr G.M.. DEM simulation of char combustion in a uidized bed. M. 38: 681–702. E.. Prog Energy Combust Sci. B. 77: 79–87. J.. and Tanaka. 1996.. Radulovic. 66125 Odeillo-Font-Romeu Cedex. BP 5. L. .. 2002. ´ E-mail: amant@imp. Patankar. 1979. The manuscript was received 26 February 2003 and accepted for publication after modi cation 28 August 2003. N2O. 1992. Gauthier. CO2..T. Int J Multiphase Flow. 2000.D. Peirano. Radiative transfer and temperature effects. Numerical Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow (Hemisphere. Powder Technol. T. 2001. B. E. and Agarwal. J. Trans IChemE.. 24: 259–296. T. Flamant. Sun. 48: 2493–2503. and Abanades. A theoretical analysis of heat transfer to particle impact.uidized bed: a hard-sphere approach. Chem Eng Sci. 2nd International Conference on CFD in the Minerals and Process Industries (CSIRO. J (s m K) 1 emissivity of the particle time step..V. J (s m K) 1 particle conductivity. Chem Eng Sci. and Strack. m coal sand initial REFERENCES Adanez. L. H. Int J Heat Mass Transfer. B. Abanades.D. and McElwain.. S... and Van Swaaij. 29: 47–65. Numerical simulation of air and particle motions in group-B particle turbulent uidized bed. and Chen. Kawaguchi. m y direction mesh spacing.. and Bellan. 1999. Hobbs. Yuu. A. C.. Approximate modelling of coal pyrolysis. Catal Today. 2001.K. J. M. 9–11 September 2003. 1980.. Kinetics of NO–carbon reaction at uidized bed combustion conditions. and Variot. Fundamentals of turbulent gas–solid ows applied to circulating uidized bed combustion. 32: 1111–1127. J. and Richard. Discrete particle simulation of bubble and slug formation in a twodimensional gas. Linjewile.F. Combust Flame. Powder Technol. and Beer. D. K s 1 ltered gas phase velocity. W.J. 64: 239–252. m2 s 1 gas density. 4: N2O and NOx emissions from the combustion char.G. 117: 140–154. Acta Astronaut. P. Chen. France. 1. SO2. Ind Eng Chem Res. 1983. 80: 1259–1272. P. and NO2 in air.. 78: 825–835.K. 46: 47– 53. Briels.. Combust Flame.M.S... Modeling of lignite combustion in atmospheric uidized bed combustors. Y. B.J. Modelling xed-bed coal gasi er. and Lu.W. Melbourne.SIMULATION OF COAL COMBUSTION Tp TR u ~f umf vpn Vpyrol Vpyrol Wi Yi Ymi Greek symbols a e gi nt rf rp sS–B lf lp Bp Dt DT Dx Dy Subscripts c s 0 1149 particle absolute The paper was presented at the 9th Congress of the French Society of Chemical Engineering held in Saint-Nazaire. Mathematical modelling of uidized bed combustion. CO. Fuel. 1999. 2001.. Nishikawa. 1993. kg m 3 particle density. s mean excess temperature.P . S. 1993. Heterogeneous formation of nitrous oxide from char bound nitrogen. J. Ignowski.D. G. 1992. Chem Eng Sci...M. Geotechnique. Koutmos. M..B. 118: 32–44. 1999. 51: 99–118. A discrete numerical model for granular assemblies.. USA). Massman. P. S. Kelly.. 31: 969–975.M. Z.. Saro m. Vol 81. M. Tsuji. D. Simulations of localized extincition in turbulent CH4 jet ames using a Lagrangian model for reactedness.cnrs. 27: 2155–2187. Zhou. De Soete. 2001. Selection of submodels and sensitivity analysis. O3. m s 1 mass fraction of volatiles evolved up to time t limit value of Vpyrol as t molecular weight. T. Donskoi. G. 57: 2603–2614. ´ ´ ´ ´ CNRS-IMP.. 31: 2286–2296.L. Fuel. 1998. Lin.. m s 1 minimum uidization velocity. and Leckner. 1988. Croiset.. P. Towards a generalized model for vertical walls to gas–solid uidized beds heat transfer—II.. October 2003 . P. Modeling of dense gas-solid reactive mixtures applied to biomass pyrolysis in a uidized bed. P. D.. Lathouwers. and Umekage. J. Australia). and Horio. AIChE J. NO. Simulation and interpretation of catalytic combustion experimental data.. O2 and N2 NEAR STP Atmos Environ.A. G. Part A. and Smoot.R.