Comparison of wood pyrolysis kinetic data derived from thermogravimetric experiments by model-fitting and model-free methods

dc.affiliation.dptoUC3M. Departamento de Ingeniería Térmica y de Fluidoses
dc.affiliation.grupoinvUC3M. Grupo de Investigación: Ingeniería de Sistemas Energéticoses
dc.contributor.authorSoria Verdugo, Antonio
dc.contributor.authorMorgano, Marco Tomasi
dc.contributor.authorMaetzing, Hartmut
dc.contributor.authorGoos, Elke
dc.contributor.authorLeibold, Hans
dc.contributor.authorMerz, Daniela
dc.contributor.authorRiedel, Uwe
dc.contributor.authorStapf, Dieter
dc.description.abstractThe pyrolysis kinetics of beech wood was analyzed using model-free and model-fitting methods. Experimental measurements of the pyrolysis process were conducted in two thermogravimetric analyzers (TGA), a TG 209/2/F from Netzsch and a TGA Q500 from TA Instruments, which were found to have a similar precision in the establishment of the present heating rate. Two experimental procedures were employed: (i) introducing samples which were pre-dried externally before the experiments were executed and (ii) internal (in situ) drying of the samples in the TGA via a special temperature program below 150 degrees C which preceded the pyrolysis process. The kinetic parameters were derived (i) using several model-free methods, namely Kissinger method, iso-conversional methods, a simplified Distributed Activation Energy Model (sDAEM) and, (ii) using a model-fitting method via a five-step reaction model which calculates the differential thermogravimetric (DTG) curves at different heating rates; the calculated DTG curves were further analyzed by Kissinger's method to obtain overall kinetic data. The kinetic parameters were found to be different in the two experimental procedures. Also, they turned out different when the assumed end temperature of the pyrolysis process was varied. This is because the pyrolysis of slowly charring solid residues becomes more important with increasing temperature and finally overruns the release of volatiles from the wood samples. For the same experimental procedure and for sufficiently low end temperatures, corresponding to a degree of conversion less than 85%, model-free and model-fitting methods resulted in similar kinetic parameters.en
dc.description.sponsorshipThe authors express their gratitude to the BIOLAB experimental facility, to the “Programa de movilidad de investigadores en centros de investigación extranjeros (Modalidad A)” from the Carlos III University of Madrid (Spain) and to the Institute of Combustion Technology at DLR for the financial support conceded to Antonio Soria-Verdugo for a research stay at the German Aerospace Center DLR (Stuttgart, Germany) during the summer of 2018. Funding by the Helmholtz Association of German Research Centers in the research fields energy, fuels and gasification, especially in the Program “Energy Efficiency, Materials and Resources“, is acknowledged by the Institute for Technical Chemistry at KIT, Karlsruhe, and by the Institute of Combustion Technology at DLR Stuttgart.en
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationEnergy Conversion and Management, v. 212, 112818, pp.: 1-12.en
dc.identifier.publicationtitleEnergy Conversion and Managementen
dc.rights© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.en
dc.rightsAtribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 España*
dc.rights.accessRightsopen accessen
dc.subject.ecienciaEnergías Renovableses
dc.subject.otherBiomass pyrolysisen
dc.subject.otherPyrolysis kineticsen
dc.subject.otherModel-free methodsen
dc.subject.otherModel-fitting methodsen
dc.titleComparison of wood pyrolysis kinetic data derived from thermogravimetric experiments by model-fitting and model-free methodsen
dc.typeresearch article*
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
931.94 KB
Adobe Portable Document Format