Comparison of Design Concepts for Four Different Entrained-Bed Coal Gasifier Types with CFD Analysis

CFD 해석을 통한 4종의 건식 분류층 석탄가스화기 설계개념 비교

  • Yun, Yongseung (Plant Engineering Center, Institute for Advanced Engineering) ;
  • Ju, Jisun (Power Generation Lab., KEPCO Research Institute) ;
  • Lee, Seung Jong (Plant Engineering Center, Institute for Advanced Engineering)
  • 윤용승 (고등기술연구원 플랜트엔지니어링센터) ;
  • 주지선 (한전 전력연구원 수화력발전연구소) ;
  • 이승종 (고등기술연구원 플랜트엔지니어링센터)
  • Received : 2011.08.21
  • Accepted : 2011.09.27
  • Published : 2011.10.10

Abstract

Coal gasifier is a key component for achieving high efficiency in integrated gasification combined cycle and indirect coal liquefaction. Although there have been several successful coal gasifiers that were commercially proven, many different design configurations are still possible for a simple and reliable gasifier operation. Four different gasifier design concepts of dry-feeding were compared in terms of residence time, exit syngas temperature and syngas composition. First, cold-flow simulation was applied to pre-select the configuration concepts, and the hot-flow simulation including chemical reactions was performed to compare the concepts at more actual gasifier operating conditions. There are many limitations in applying CFD method in gasifier design, particularly in estimating slag behavior and slag-tap design. However, the CFD analysis proved to be useful in comparing the widely different gasifier design concepts as a pre-selection tool.

Keywords

gasifier;design;CFD;entrained-bed;residence time

Acknowledgement

Supported by : 한국에너지기술평가원(KEPTEP)

References

  1. C. Higman and M. Burgt, Gasification, 85, Elsevier, Amsterdam (2003).
  2. Y. Yun, KISTEP Green-tech Research, 4, 89 (2010).
  3. N. Holt, Gasification Users Association Annual Report, EPRI, Palo Alto, USA (2010).
  4. N. Berkowitz, An Introduction to Coal Technology, 253, Academic Press, New York (1979).
  5. K. Aasberg-Petersen, T. Christensen, I. Dybkjoer, J. Sehested, M. Ostberg, R. Coertzen, M. Keyser, and A. Steynberg, Fisher-Tropsch Technology, ed. A. Steynberg and M. Dry, 152, 363, Elsevier, Amsterdam (2004).
  6. Y. Yun and Y. D. Yoo, Korean J. of Chem. Eng., 18, 679 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02706386
  7. Y. Yun and Y. D. Yoo, J. Ind. Eng. Chem., 11, 228 (2005).
  8. Y. Yun and S. W. Chung, Korean J. of Chem. Eng., 24, 628 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11814-007-0015-9
  9. Y. Yun, Y. D. Yoo, and S. W. Chung, Fuel Processing Technology, b, 107 (2007).
  10. Y. Yun, S. J. Lee, and J. P. Hong, Korean J. of Chem. Eng., 28, 1188 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11814-010-0499-6
  11. P. Schoen, Ph.D. Dissertation, Delft University of Technology, Amsterdam, Netherland (1993).
  12. Y. Yun, G. B. Lee, and S. W. Chung, J. Korean Ind. Eng. Chem., 14, 511 (2003).
  13. C. Chen, M. Horio, and T. Kojima, Fuel, 80, 1513 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-2361(01)00013-8