74

A simple process modelling for a

dry-feeding entrained bed coal gasifier
H Lee1∗ , S Choi1 , and M Paek2
1
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Yuseong-Gu,
Republic of Korea
2
Doosan Heavy Industries and Construction Co. Ltd, Republic of Korea

The manuscript was received on 20 April 2010 and was accepted after revision for publication on 9 September 2010.
DOI: 10.1177/2041296710394249

Abstract: A dry-feeding entrained bed coal gasifier was numerically modelled by simultaneously
solving the rate equations for chemical reactions of the solid and gas phases. This model describes
simplified physical and chemical processes in the entrained bed coal gasifier. Chemical reaction
processes for coal gasification and combustion are considered along with the simplified gas flow
passage in the reactor, so that progress of reactions at the designated spatial location is repre-
sented. Gasification phenomena of coal particles were separated into devolatilization, gas-phase,
and solid-phase reactions. Coal gasifier geometry was simplified to a pseudo-two-dimensional
(pseudo-2D) reactor model based on the 1D plug flow concept. The dimension in the pseudo-
2D model was conceptually divided by considering the recirculation effect. As a result, carbon
conversion, cold gas efficiency, and temperature distribution were obtained at variable oxygen
to coal mass ratio, steam to coal mass ratio, and operating pressure. Operating conditions could
be appropriately controlled by knowing the degree of reaction in the reactor.

Keywords: coal gasification, entrained bed coal gasifier, process analysis, chemical kinetics

1 INTRODUCTION projects, information on the commercial coal gasi-

A coal integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC)
is a power cycle based on coal gasification technol-
ogy. It is known that the net efficiency of the IGCC
is higher than that of the conventional pulverized
coal power plant, and white emissions, such as SOx
and NOx , are sufficiently removed. The coal gasifier is
probably the most important unit among IGCC com-
ponents. The gasifier converts coal into combustible
syngas, including CO and H2 , at high-temperature and
high-pressure conditions. Since the performance of
the gasifier directly affects the following units of the
IGCC, such as purifier of pollutant, gas turbine, and
steam turbine, operating the gasifier is an essential
technology. Although entrained bed coal gasifiers have
become available through a number of demonstration
∗ Corresponding author: Department of Mechanical Engineer-
ing, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, 373-1,
Guseong-Dong, Yuseong-Gu, Republic of Korea.
email: hookyung@kaist.ac.kr
fier is restricted. Therefore, an independent attempt
to accumulate technical understanding is required
because of the insufficiency of open information.
Previously, there has been some research on mod-
elling the entrained bed coal gasifier. Govind and
Shah [1] developed a mathematical model to simu-
late a Texaco® down-flow entrained bed pilot plant
gasifier. Ni and Williams [2] suggested a multivariable
model for a Shell® coal gasifier on the basis of equi-
librium, mass, and energy balances. Vamvuka et al.
[3] developed a one-dimensional (1D), steady-state
model based on mass and energy balances, hetero-
geneous reaction rates, and homogeneous gas-phase
equilibrium. Chen et al. [4] developed a comprehen-
sive 3D computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simula-
tion model. Approaches to modelling the entrained
bed coal gasifier are mainly classified into two ways
based on research objectives: one is solving the chem-
ical equilibrium state of reactants at given condi-
tions and the other is CFD analysis. The equilibrium
state of chemical reactants is meaningful because the
reactions move towards the equilibrium state eventu-
ally. Equilibrium calculation can be used if research

Proc. IMechE Vol. 225 Part A: J. Power and Energy

 A simple process modelling for a dry-feeding entrained bed coal gasifier 75

objectives are to obtain the performance of the reac-

tor. The results can be regarded as an indication of the
theoretical limits of gasification. On the other hand,
fluid flow as heat transfer can be interpreted by CFD
analysis. CFD analysis provides results for the predic-
tion of fluid flow in the gasifier with considerations of
reactor geometry and operating conditions.
The purpose of this study is to develop a model that
could analyse chemical reaction processes in the gasi-
fier as a function of oxygen to coal mass ratio, steam
to coal mass ratio, and operating pressure. This article
shows a different approach compared with the previ-
ous equilibrium model or CFD analysis. It is intended
that one develop reaction models in the entrained
flow gasifiers for designing and/or scaling up, as the
available basic experimental data on phenomena in a Fig. 1 Rough sketch of Shell a gasifier and schematic of
high-temperature and pressurized gasifier can be uti- a simplified gasifier model
lized [5]. As chemical reaction processes in terms of
coal gasification and combustion are interpreted along
Table 1 Basic conditions of the model gasifier for 300 MWe
with gasifier height, the degree of reaction is obtained
power generation
at variable operating conditions. For process analy-
sis, simple chemical kinetics in terms of coal reaction Operating condition Value
is considered. As a result, it is possible to investi-
gate the properties distribution along with the reactor. Average temperature 1723–1873 K
Average pressure 4.2 MPa
Visual Basic 6.0 code was used to write in-house Flow direction Circling up flow
codes. Ash extraction Slagging type
Feeding type Coal Dry-feeding
Transport gas Nitrogen
Oxidant (purity 95 vol%) Oxygen blown
2 A DRY-FEEDING ENTRAINED BED COAL Basic feedstock Coal 2450 tonnes/day
GASIFIER flowrate
Oxygen/coal mass ratio 0.75
Steam/coal mass ratio 0.05
An entrained bed coal gasifier is a representative Nitrogen/coal mass ratio 0.112
gasifier type used in coal IGCC plants. There is a Gasifier dimension Volume 50 m3
national project for 300 MWe IGCC demonstration Height 9m
plant construction. Korea selected a Shell-type gasifier,
a dry-feeding entrained bed coal gasifier with up-flow
of feedstock, which can achieve high carbon conver- nitrogen and an oxygen–steam mixture at 423 K tem-
sion within short residence times. The residence time perature. Table 1 shows the basic conditions of the
of coal particles and other gases is about 3–4 s [6]. subject gasifier for 300 MWe power generation. The
The operating condition of the dry-feeding entrained values were suggested by Doosan Heavy Industries
bed coal gasifier is on average 1800 K temperature and and Construction Company.
4.2 MPa pressure, and ashes are extracted as molten
format (slag) from the bottom. In this study, a sim- 3 MODELLING
plified geometry of the gasifier is described, as shown
in Fig. 1.
3.1 Gasifier geometry
In this gasifier, mixed oxygen and steam are intro-
duced simultaneously from four burners at the lower The specific dimension of the gasifier is unknown
wall of the reactor. At the same time, pulverized coal because of a confidential affair. Therefore, the geom-
and nitrogen as transport gas are introduced from etry of the gasifier is inevitably simplified. The real
the same burners in partial oxidation condition. Coal coal gasifier is a 3D reactor including slag bath,
and nitrogen are injected into the gasifier through complex burner geometry, and water membrane. As
the centre hole of the burners, while a mixture of reactive heat is released, the heat is not regularly
oxygen and steam is blown in through surrounding transferred to the wall because of radiation between
holes of the burner. The pulverized coal is mixed heterogeneous coal particles. In addition, swirl flow
with limestone to lower the melting point of the ash makes the phenomena very complex. Therefore, a 3D
in order to improve the slag discharge. Therefore, model should be made for a detailed modelling of
four diametrically opposed burners are fed simulta- the gasifier. However, it is inefficient to make the 3D
neously with a coal–limestone blend transported by model from the point of process analysis because heat

Proc. IMechE Vol. 225 Part A: J. Power and Energy

76 H Lee, S Choi, and M Paek
and mass transferred across the reactor radially are
generally more dominant than that along with the
reactor axially. If the distribution of the feedstocks is
homogeneous over the gasifier, 1D or 2D modelling is
appropriate. This concept is based on the experimen-
tal results in pilot scale [4, 7]. In this study, gasifier
geometry is simplified to a steady-state pseudo-2D
reactor model in stages. Figure 2 shows a simplified
schematic of the pseudo-2D reactor model based on
the CFD analysis result in the Shell gasifier, as shown
in Fig. 3 [8].
From the simulation with the CFD code, FLUENT® ,
information about scale and passage of fluid flow
Fig. 2 Conceptual divisions in the pseudo-2D reactor
model
Fig. 3 Recirculation zone based on CFD analysis [8]
Proc. IMechE Vol. 225 Part A: J. Power and Energy
in the reactor is obtained, including the recircula-
tion pattern [8]. Therefore, the simplified flow pat-
tern is described based on rough assumptions in the
pseudo-2D model. The geometry in the coal gasifier
is conceptually divided into five sections, (A) burner
zone, (B) upper recirculation zone, (C) lower recircu-
lation zone, (D) axial flow zone, and (E) dead zone,
based on flow pattern as shown in Fig. 3. However,
the mixed feedstocks flow as 1D plug flow in sequence
as indicated in Fig. 2 and in each designated section
of the pseudo-2D model through 2D effective cross-
section of each zone. Feedstocks are introduced into
the gasifier through the two burners. It is assumed that
feedstocks are homogeneously and perfectly mixed. If
introduced flow reaches the central axis of the gasifier
through each burner of diameter 12 cm, the flow is sep-
arated into two flows. One is upper flow of 90 per cent
and the other is lower flow of 10 per cent based on gas
volume. They are recirculated in the upper and lower
parts of the gasifier, respectively. Since the path of the
recirculation is known by CFD analysis, recirculation
time can be calculated by using the rate equations for
modelling coal gasification. After the flow is recircu-
lated in the upper and lower parts, they meet together
at the central axis and then the flow goes to the gasi-
fier exit. A uniform heat loss rate of 10 per cent in the
burner zone and 3 per cent to the wall in the other
zones is assumed [9].
3.2 Coal gasification
Understanding coal behaviour is critical in designing
and operating the gasifier. However, modelling coal
gasification and combustion behaviour is not a simple
task in terms of fundamental and theoretical descrip-
tion, and also in terms of a practical and predictive
model of any meaning. It is possible to model coal gasi-
fication and combustion based on rough assumptions
concerning physical and chemical processes. Volatiles
are released from coal in a short period of time (in mil-
lisecond order) at high temperatures around 1800 K;
on the other hand, the reaction rate of solid-phase
reactions is relatively slower (in second order). There-
fore, the complex reactive behaviour of coal can be
divided into three steps by the difference of reac-
tion rate in terms of devolatilization, heterogeneous
reaction at solid particle surfaces, and homogeneous
reaction of various gaseous components. Analysis data
of design coal for this study are given in Table 2, but
Table 2 Analysis data of design coal
Ultimate analysis (wt%, mf ) Proximate analysis (wt%, air dry)
C 70.65 Fixed carbon 49.25
H 4.94 Volatile matter 38.76
O 22.71 Moisture 2.06
N 0.66 Ash 9.93
S 1.04 HHV (cal/g) 6925
 A simple process modelling for a dry-feeding entrained bed coal gasifier
the terminology of volatile matter and fixed carbon is
poorly defined. Interrelation among ultimate analysis,
proximate analysis, and the heating value is not clear.
In this study, however, proximate analysis means that
the quantity of fixed carbon is equal to that of char
and volatiles are evolved as 38.76 per cent of input coal
mass except for an inherent moisture of 2 per cent in
coal.
3.2.1 Devolatilization
The importance of coal devolatilization as the ini-
tial step in coal conversion makes its understanding
essential in the optimization of processes [10]. Volatile
matter is composed of many complex substances.
The composition of volatiles is not arbitrary, as it
depends on the composition of original coal. If the
components are assumed, they will remain on state
of CX HY OZ based on mass balance. It is difficult to
distinguish components of the volatiles easily. There
is some experimental research for devolatilization.
The effects of pressure, temperature, and particle size
on the yield of products were interpreted [10–13].
As a result, the main factors that influence pyrol-
ysis are heating rate and peak temperature in the
reactor. However, there is no general theory to pre-
dict the behaviour expected for the wide variety of
coals and conditions of interest. Complicated struc-
tures and physical and chemical phenomena of the
coal reaction are a part of the reason. In this study,
the components of volatiles were assumed to be CO,
CO2 , CH4 , C2 H6 , H2 , H2 O, and C6 H6 . The mass of liq-
uid hydrocarbons is represented by benzene (C6 H6 )
[14]. The kinetics of individual product formation is
modelled using independent, parallel reactions, and
is first order in the amount of product yet to be
formed. Equation (1) is the first-order rate equation
for modelling devolatilization
 
dVi  Eij
= kij0 exp − (Vij∗ − Vij )
dt i
RT
A first-order kinetics model of devolatilization has
been shown to have limitations. Nevertheless, it has
been found to give an adequate representation of
hydrocarbon yield. A complete devolatilization model
would describe the composition and physical state of
the coal or char particles at all stages of devolatiliza-
tion. However, the microscopic analysis is not impor-
tant in the objectives predicting the process in the
reactor. Therefore, a one-step mechanism was applied.
This means that ‘coal → char + volatiles’ can be written
after pyrolysis finishes.
3.2.2 Homogeneous reaction
There are generally two ways to model gas-phase reac-
tions. One is based on a global reaction and the other is
77
based on a kinetic reaction, including an intermediate
mechanism. It is difficult to consider the kinetics of
all intermediate reactions for one chemical reaction.
In this study, a simple global reaction was consid-
ered. It is appropriate to consider the global reaction
because it has the advantage of simulating the over-
all coal reaction rate by considering many chemical
reactions. Equation (2) is the rate equation for mod-
elling the homogeneous reaction. The reaction rate is
proportional to the concentration of reactants in the
gas-phase reactions
 
d[X ] E
= Ai exp − [X ]a [Y ]b (2)
dt RTg
3.2.3 Heterogeneous reaction
There are two kinds of representative reaction rate
equations: nth-order and Langmuir–Hinshelwood-
type reaction rate equations [15]. In this study, the
nth-order reaction rate was applied to describe the
heterogeneous reaction. It is assumed that the overall
char reaction rate is proportional to the nth power of
partial pressure of the gasifying agent and follows the
Arrhenius equation. Equation (3) is the rate equation
for modelling the heterogeneous reaction
  
dx E
= A0 PA exp −
n
(1 − x) 1 − ψ ln(1 − x)
dt RTs
(3)
In modelling the solid-phase reaction, it is com-
mon to consider the chemical reaction as occurring
on internal surfaces of the solid, but an estimate of the
surface area of the char is very difficult because of a
large amount of micro-pores. The random pore model
was applied to describe the gasification model for arbi-
trary pore size distributions in the reacting solid [16]. It
predicts the reaction surface area at a given conversion
as a function of an initial pore structure parameter.
In this modelling, the pore structure parameters were
(1)
assumed as values in the literature [7, 17]. If the value
of the pore structure parameter is zero, this means that
the char is very porous. A larger value of the pore struc-
ture parameter means that the pore in the char grows
with the progress of char gasification.
Although many chemical reactions occur in the gasi-
fier, dominant chemical reactions were considered as
shown in Table 3. The important reason why these
reactions were selected is that rate constants had
been specified in the open literature [7, 14, 15, 17].
Since kinetics should be considered over homoge-
neous and heterogeneous reactions, it is necessary to
know kinetic data such as pre-exponential factor A
and activation energy E. They are constitutive terms
that represent the rate of each chemical reaction in
the Arrhenius equation. The pre-exponential factor is
the total number of molecular collisions per unit time
and activation energy is a minimum amount of energy
Proc. IMechE Vol. 225 Part A: J. Power and Energy
78 H Lee, S Choi, and M Paek

Table 3 Rate constants [7, 14, 15, 17]

Volatile component kij0 (s−1 ) E (kJ/mol) V †(wt%)

Devolatilization [14]
H2 O 1013 312 16.38
CO 1011 238 6.54
CO2 109 168 3.55
C6 H6 1013 312 12.04
CH4 107 91 0.04
C2 H6 5 × 109 214 0.08
H2 5 × 1010 222 0.13
Chemical reaction Ai (s−1 ) E (kJ/mol) a b c∗

Homogeneous reaction [14]

CH4 + 1.5O2 → CO + 2H2 O (−519.5 kJ/mol) 2.8 × 109 202.64 −0.3 1.3 –
C2 H6 + 2.5O2 → 2CO + 3H2 O (−862.4 kJ/mol) 7.31 × 109 125.6 0.1 1.65 –
C6 H6 + 4.5O2 → 6CO + 3H2 O (−1471.3 kJ/mol) 1.35 × 109 125.6 −0.1 1.85 –
CO + 0.5O2 → CO2 (−283.1 kJ/mol) 2.238 × 1012 167.47 1 0.25 0.5 [H2 O]
H2 + 0.5O2 → H2 O (−242.0 kJ/mol) 8.8 × 1012 168 0.25 0.25 –
CO + H2 O → CO2 + H2 (−41.2 kJ/mol) 2.75 × 1010 83.8 0.5 1 –
Chemical reaction A0 (s−1 ) E (kJ/mol) n 

Heterogeneous reaction [7, 15, 17]

C(s) + 0.5O2 → CO (−110.5 kJ/mol) 1.36 × 106 130 0.68 14
C(s) + H2 O → CO + H2 (+131.3 kJ/mol) 8.55 × 104 140 0.84 3
C(s) + CO2 → 2CO (+172.5 kJ/mol) 6.78 × 104 163 0.73 3
C(s) + 2H2 → CH4 (−74.6 kJ/mol) 1.8 × 10 138 0.5 3
† CO + 0.5O2 → CO2 reaction has an additional exponent constant c ∗ for H2 O concentration.

to be transformed into products. From the viewpoint 1 1

V = ṁmix (5)
of collision theory, it can be seen that either increasing ρmix Aeff
the pre-exponential factor or decreasing the activation
Mass and heat balance equations are obtained along
energy will result in an increase of reactivity. In kinetic
with spatial location in the reactor. The phase is com-
data with respect to the coal reaction, it is ambigu-
pletely mixed after pyrolysis and each compartment
ous to have faith in that accuracy because the data
is treated as a stirred tank reactor in the system.
vary according to experimental conditions and coal
The number of moles of each species changes; how-
type. Nevertheless, available data in different litera-
ever, total mass is conserved. As chemical reactions
tures were applied to coal gasification and combustion
progress, heat is produced and absorbed because
reactions in this study. This may cause uncertainty.
there are both exothermic and endothermic reactions.
Table 3 represents the rate constants applied to the
Figure 4 shows a schematic diagram of the mass and
rate equations. Each of the rate equations is evalu-
heat balances. Equations (6) and (7) show the mass
ated along with the associated kinetic data to model
balance and equation (8) shows the heat balance.
a reactor considering operating condition.
Based on the assumptions, mass and heat balance
By simultaneous calculation of the rate equations
equations are set up for each control volume as shown
after devolatilization occurs, the gas component per
by (refer to Fig. 4)
unit time is calculated and then gas temperature is
calculated based on the gas component at that time. Gas phase
The heat of reaction, produced or absorbed, from each
chemical reaction and the heat capacity of mixed gas (Wg,i )n+1 − (Wg,i )n
 
are used. The initial temperature of feedstocks is 423 K. = (νi,j · rj )prod − (νi,j · rj )react (6)
Heat capacity coefficients are from the literature [18]. j j
It is assumed that the temperature of coal particles is
higher than that of gases [14]. The velocity of the mix- Solid phase
ture is obtained by considering mass flowrate of the 
(Ws )n+1 − (Ws )n = (νs,k · rk ) (7)
mixture, average density of the mixture, and an effec-
k
tive cross-section where reaction occurs. Equations (4)
and (5) indicate the relations. They are based on the (Wg,mix C̄P,mix Tg + Ws CP,s Ts )n+1
ideal gas equation of state − (Wg,mix C̄P,mix Tg + Ws CP,s Ts )n
 
= (−Hj )rj + (±Hk )rk − Hloss,wall ,
 P j k
ρmix = Xi (4)
i
Rg,i · Tg where T0 = 423 K (8)

Proc. IMechE Vol. 225 Part A: J. Power and Energy

 A simple process modelling for a dry-feeding entrained bed coal gasifier 79

uncertainty. Since each time different kinetic data are

measured in experiment, it is impossible to reflect
accurate kinetic characteristics for the coal reaction.
However, if the equilibrium state is not considered,
the rate constants are inevitably required. The quan-
tification of the rate constants should be seriously
debated.

3.3.2 Heat transfer

The heat transfer mechanism is very complex in

the gasifier. The most important thing is the heat
transfer among coal particles. Coal particles emit
strong light during the combustion process. Mod-
elling the interactive heat transfer is very difficult.
Since the gasifier operates at high temperature around
1800 K, radiation is the dominant mechanism. Irreg-
ular heat transfer complexifies the coal gasification
and combustion phenomena. However, simple and
uniform heat loss to the wall was considered in
this study. It is one of the reasons to cause the
uncertainty.

3.3.3 Turbulence and swirl

Tangential firing burners make strong swirl flow in the
gasifier and turbulence complexifies coal gasification
Fig. 4 Schematic diagram of mass and heat balances in and combustion phenomena. However, the turbu-
nth control volume lence was assumed to be neglected in this study. It may
cause the uncertainty. If the turbulence is addition-
The above equations mean a total heat balance on ally modelled, it will affect the mixing of the chemical
both solid and gas phases in each control volume. The species and other phenomena.
specific heat of the gaseous mixture is
3.3.4 Minor species
C̄P,mix (Tg ) = ā + b̄ · Tg + c̄ · Tg2 + d̄ · Tg3
 Syngas at the gasifier exit is introduced into the follow-
ā = CPa,i · Yi ing clean-up system. The first purifier is a desulphur-
i izer, so it is important to predict the quantity of the
 COS and H2 S species for operation of the sequential
b̄ = CPb,i · Yi
i
purifier system. As these are minor species, the con-
 centration is very low. In this study, sulphur was not
c̄ = CPc,i · Yi considered, so the concentration of the minor species
i cannot be predicted. Since nitrogen is assumed as
 inert, the concentration of poisonous gas such as NH3
d̄ = CPd,i · Yi
cannot be predicted.
i
(9)
3.3.5 Volatile yield
3.3 Major uncertainty The yield of volatiles and their composition depend
3.3.1 Rate constant not only on the volatile matter content of raw coal
but also on the operating conditions during pyroly-
The kinetic data were adopted from different refer- sis [13, 19, 20]. A variety of gases have been found
ences [7], [14], [15], and [17]. These are the incoherent in the volatiles with the proportions of different
rate constants incorporated from different experimen- gases dependent on coal chemistry and the con-
tal conditions and coal types. This is a serious problem ditions of devolatilization. Although devolatilization
for application of chemical kinetics because the rate kinetics is being strongly influenced by physical pro-
constants are sensitive to the experimental environ- cesses during coal decomposition, the devolatiliza-
ment. Therefore, it is one of the reasons to cause the tion process is simplified as a one-step mechanism.

Proc. IMechE Vol. 225 Part A: J. Power and Energy

80 H Lee, S Choi, and M Paek

The composition of volatiles was assumed to be 75

constant for seven species. This will cause the
70
uncertainty.

Cold Gas Efficiency (%)

65
60
3.3.6 Coal particle size
55
The shape of all particles is different. Most particles 50 0.3
are generally pulverized to 50–300 μm before they are 45 0.5
introduced into the gasifier. The reactivity is different 40 0.7
because of the difference in particle size. As the chemi- 0.9
35
cal reactions progress, the size of the particles will
become smaller and only ash will remain. In this study, 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
all particles were assumed to a uniform and spherical Gasifier Height (m)
coal particle size of 100 μm.
Fig. 6 Effect of oxygen to coal ratio on cold gas efficiency

4 RESULT 2400 0.3

0.5
2300
As a result of modelling the pseudo-2D model, carbon 0.7
conversion, cold gas efficiency, and gas temperature 2200
0.9
along with the gasifier were calculated
Temperature (K)
2100
2000

Carbon conversion (per cent) 1900

  1800
Carbon in gasification residue
= 1− × 100 1700
Carbon in feedstock
Cold gas effciency (per cent) 1600
⎛ ⎞ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Heating value in
⎜ product gas CO, H2 , CH4 ⎟ Gasifier Height (m)
=⎜ ⎟
⎝ Heating value in feedstock ⎠ × 100
Fig. 7 Effect of oxygen to coal ratio on gas temperature

100
The results shown in Figs 5 to 13 are values at the 95
axial flow zone 6 m in the gasifier. The gasifier height
Carbon Conversion (%)

90
on the abscissa is the height after the coal passed by
85
the burner zone, which explains why a non-zero value
80 0.01
was recorded at zero height.
75 0.05
70 0.1
100 65 0.15
60 0.2
90 55
Carbon Converion (%)

0 1 2 3 4 5 6
80 Gasifier Height (m)

Fig. 8 Effect of steam to coal ratio on carbon conversion

70
0.3
0.5 4.1 Effect of oxygen to coal ratio
60
0.7
0.9 The oxygen to coal mass ratio is one of the most
50 important variables to influence gasifier performance
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
because the oxygen-blown gasifier strongly depends
Gasifier Height (m)
on the concentration of oxygen. The heat required for
Fig. 5 Effect of oxygen to coal ratio on carbon conver- char + CO2 and char + H2 O gasification reactions is
sion supplied by the combustion of volatiles. In this study,

Proc. IMechE Vol. 225 Part A: J. Power and Energy

 A simple process modelling for a dry-feeding entrained bed coal gasifier 81

70 70
65
65
60
Cold Gas Efficiency (%)

Cold Gas Efficiency (%)

60 55
50
55
45
50 0.01 40
0.05 35
45
0.1 30 2MPa
40 25
0.15 3MPa
35 20 4MPa
0.2
15
30
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Gasifier Height (m) Gasifier Height (m)

Fig. 9 Effect of steam to coal ratio on cold gas efficiency Fig. 12 Effect of operating pressure on cold gas effi-
ciency

0.01
0.05 2400 2MPa
2100
0.1 3MPa
2300
2000 0.15 4MPa
Temperature (K)

0.2 2200
Temperature (K)

1900
2100
1800
2000
1700
1900

1600 1800
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Gasifier Height (m)
Gasifier Height (m)
Fig. 10 Effect of steam to coal ratio on gas temperature
Fig. 13 Effect of operating pressure on gas temperature

100
increases, carbon conversion increases rapidly and
90
reaches about 100 per cent at the gasifier exit. As the
Carbon Conversion (%)

80 concentration of oxygen decreases, on the other hand,

the rate of increase of carbon conversion is lower and
70 the value at the gasifier exit is also small. If it oper-
60 ates at an oxygen to coal ratio of 0.9, a length of 5 m
is enough. If it operates at an oxygen to coal ratio
50 2MPa of 0.7, a reactor length of 6 m is appropriate, but all
3MPa carbon components are not converted into gases. If it
40
4MPa operates at an oxygen to coal ratio of 0.3, carbon con-
30 version is very low because there is not enough oxygen
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 to burn carbon. Therefore, as the concentration of oxy-
Gasifier Height (m) gen increases, enough carbon conversion is obtained
and reactor length shorter than 6 m is sufficient to get
Fig. 11 Effect of operating pressure on carbon conver-
the maximum efficiency at a given oxygen to coal ratio.
sion
Figure 6 shows the effect of oxygen to coal ratio
on cold gas efficiency. As the concentration of oxygen
the oxygen to coal ratio varies from 0.3 to 0.9 as a decreases, cold gas efficiency is higher during the early
parameter at 4.2 MPa pressure and with a steam to coal stages of combustion and gasification because incom-
ratio of 0.05. plete combustion takes place. However, the rate of
Figure 5 shows the effect of oxygen to coal ratio on increase does not last because there is not enough heat
carbon conversion. As the concentration of oxygen to make endothermic gasification reactions, such as

Proc. IMechE Vol. 225 Part A: J. Power and Energy

82 H Lee, S Choi, and M Paek
char + CO2 and char + H2 O, active. Maximum cold gas
efficiency is shown in the vicinity of an oxygen to coal
ratio of 0.5. Meanwhile, as the concentration of oxy-
gen increases, cold gas efficiency decreases because of
re-combustion of fuel gas, such as CO, H2 , and CH4 .
Cold gas efficiency is competing with carbon conver-
sion on deciding the oxygen to coal ratio. Therefore,
the criteria for operating objectives are needed.
Figure 7 shows the effect of oxygen to coal ratio on
gas temperature. As the oxygen to coal ratio increases,
the total mass flowrate is higher. Therefore, gases pass
through the burner zone fast before the combustion
of volatiles ends. As a result, the initial temperature in
Fig. 7 is smaller as the oxygen to coal ratio increases,
and combustion of fuel gases lasts by oxidation reac-
tion of excess oxygen. Therefore, peak temperature is
higher as the oxygen to coal ratio increases. In this
case, the maximum cooling point may be high along
with the reactor.
4.2 Effect of steam to coal ratio
The purpose of steam input is to protect the refractory
from rising temperature and to raise hydrogen yield.
In this study, the steam to coal ratio varies from 0.01
to 0.2 as a parameter at 4.2 MPa pressure and with an
oxygen to coal ratio of 0.75. A small amount of steam
is introduced because this is the dry-feeding-type coal
gasifier.
Figure 8 shows the effect of steam to coal ratio
on carbon conversion. As the concentration of steam
increases, carbon conversion efficiency increases
slowly during the early stages of reaction. However, it
eventually reaches about 98 per cent at the gasifier exit
in all cases. As the concentration of steam increases,
the rate of gasification and combustion is low because
the overall temperature is low in the reactor. Rate
equations are Arrhenius type and are a function of
temperature.
Figure 9 shows the effect of steam to coal ratio
on cold gas efficiency. As the concentration of steam
increases, cold gas efficiency decreases. Gasification
reactions are endothermic reactions, so they require
sufficient heat from the combustion of volatiles. As the
steam to coal ratio increases, however, temperature
will be low because steam has a relatively high heat
capacity. Figure 10 shows the situation. As a result, the
concentration of fuel gas produced by the gasification
reaction is low except for hydrogen because the high
concentration of steam results in a high concentration
of hydrogen.
4.3 Effect of pressure
Pressure is an important variable that affects the
gasifier performance. Especially, pressure influences
the reactivity of heterogeneous reactions. As pressure
Proc. IMechE Vol. 225 Part A: J. Power and Energy
increases, the partial pressure of gasifying agents will
increase, so the reactivity of the solid-phase reactions
also increases. In this study, the pressure varies from 2
to 4 MPa as a parameter with oxygen to coal ratio 0.75
and steam to coal ratio 0.05.
Figures 11 and 12 show the effect of pressure on car-
bon conversion and cold gas efficiency, respectively. As
operating pressure increases, both carbon conversion
and cold gas efficiency increase because the reactivity
of char + H2 O and char + CO2 reactions increases. It is
not easy to operate the gasifier in the pressurized con-
dition than in the atmospheric condition. However, it
is clear that high efficiencies can be obtained in the
pressurized gasifier.
Meanwhile, Fig. 13 shows the effect of pressure
on gas temperature. Although the rate of increase of
temperature is higher as pressure increases during
the early stages of gasification and combustion, peak
temperature is lower. This is because the reactivity
of endothermic gasification reactions becomes active
fast after oxygen is consumed because of the combus-
tion of volatiles. Therefore, one can know that peak
temperature is inversely proportional to the operating
pressure.
5 CONCLUSION
A dry-feeding entrained bed coal gasifier was mod-
elled for process analysis in the reactor. By consider-
ing chemical kinetics over gasification processes, the
degree of reaction was obtained at variable operat-
ing conditions. Results from the numerical simula-
tions of the process in the model gasifier are carbon
conversion, cold gas efficiency, and gas temperature
distributions. The main conclusions are as follows.
1. As the concentration of oxygen increases, enough
carbon conversion was obtained and reactor length
shorter than 6 m was sufficient to get maximum
efficiency at a given oxygen to coal ratio.
2. As the oxygen to coal ratio increases, combustion
of fuel gases lasted by oxidation reaction of excess
oxygen. Therefore, peak temperature was higher as
oxygen to coal ratio increases. In this case, the max-
imum cooling point may be high along with the
reactor.
3. Although the rate of increase of temperature is
higher as pressure increases during the early stages
of reaction, peak temperature is lower. This is
because high pressure results in high reactivity
of endothermic gasification reactions. As pres-
sure increases, the partial pressure of the gasifying
agents, CO2 and H2 O, will increase. As a result,
carbon conversion and cold gas efficiency also
increase.
This model has uncertainties as a simplified model.
It relies on rate constants that are difficult to measure
 A simple process modelling for a dry-feeding entrained bed coal gasifier
at high temperature and pressure. There are few data
in the open literature on the process analysis of the
commercial gasifier for benchmarking this model so
that validation of the model is not easy. Therefore,
model prediction may be best used to evaluate trends
in the process of the dry-feeding entrained bed coal
gasifier rather than to provide specific values of these
results.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This work was supported by the Ministry of Knowl-
edge Economy, New and Renewable Energy Center
(2006-N-C012-P-01-0-000), Doosan Heavy Industries
& Construction Company Limited, and Brain Korea
(BK) 21.
© Authors 2011
REFERENCES
1 Govind, R. and Shah, J. Modeling and simulation of
an entrained flow coal gasifier. AIChE J., 1984, 30(1),
79–92.
2 Ni, Q. and Williams, A. A simulation study on the per-
formance of an entrained-flow coal gasifier. Fuel, 1995,
74(1), 102–110.
3 Vamvuka, D., Woodburn, E. T., and Senior, P. R. Mod-
eling of an entrained flow coal gasifier: 1. Development
of the model and general predictions. Fuel, 1995, 74(10),
1452–1460.
4 Chen, C., Horio, M., and Kojima, T. Numerical simu-
lation of entrained flow coal gasifiers. Part I: modeling
of coal gasification in an entrained flow gasifier. Chem.
Engng Sci., 2000, 55, 3861–3874.
5 Kajitani, S., Suzuki, N., Ashizawa, M., and Hara, S. CO2
gasification rate analysis of coal char in entrained flow
coal gasifier. Fuel, 2006, 85, 163–169.
6 Beath, A. C. Mathematical modeling of entrained flow
coal gasification. PhD Thesis, University of Newcastle,
Australia, 1996.
7 Watanabe, H. and Otaka, M. Numerical simulation of
coal gasification in entrained flow coal gasifier. Fuel,
2006, 85, 1935–1943.
8 Song, J., Kang, M., Seo, D., Hwang, J., and Lim, S. CFD
modeling for a one-stage entrained flow coal gasifier:
effects of the operating conditions and swirl injection. In
Proceedings of the 39th Korean Society of Combustion
Symposium, Seoul, Korea, 2009, pp. 259–269.
9 Lee, H., Choi, S., and Paek, M. Influence of coal kinetic
characteristics on IGCC coal gasifier efficiency. In Pro-
ceedings of the 7th International Conference on Power
engineering, Kobe, Japan, 2009, vol. 2, pp. 13–18.
10 Solomon, P. R. and Colket, M. B. Coal devolatilization.
In Proceedings of the 17th International Symposium on
Combustion, Leeds, UK, 1978, pp. 131–143.
11 Solomon, P. R., Hamblen, D. G., Carangelo, R. M., and
Krause, J. L. Coal thermal decomposition in an entrained
flow reactor: experiments and theory. In Proceedings
83
of the 19th International Symposium on Combustion,
Haifa, Israel, 1982, pp. 1139–1149.
12 Kobayashi, H., Howard, J. B., and Sarofim, A. F. Coal
devolatilization at high temperatures. In Proceedings
of the 16th International Symposium on Combustion,
Massachusetts, USA, 1976, pp. 411–424.
13 Suuberg, E. M., Peters, W. A., and Howard, J. B. Product
compositions in rapid hydropyrolysis of coal. Fuel, 1980,
59, 405–412.
14 Tomeczek, J. Coal combustion, 1994 (Krieger Publishing
Company, Florida).
15 Laurendeau, N. M. Heterogeneous kinetics of coal char
gasification and combustion. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci.,
1978, 4, 221–270.
16 Bhatia, S. K. and Perlmutter, D. D. A random pore model
for fluid–solid reactions. I. Isothermal, kinetic control.
AIChE J., 1980, 26(3), 379–386.
17 Kajitani, S., Hara, S., and Matsuda, H. Gasification
rate analysis of coal char with a pressurized drop tube
furnace. Fuel, 2002, 81, 539–546.
18 Cengel, Y. A. and Boles, M. A. Thermodynamics: an engi-
neering approach, 4th edition, 2002 (McGraw-Hill, New
York).
19 Niksa, S. and Lau, C.-W. Global rates of devolatiliza-
tion for various coal types. Combust. Flame, 1993, 94,
293–307.
20 Niksa, S. Predicting the devolatilization behavior of any
coal from its ultimate analysis. Combust. Flame, 1995,
100, 384–394.
APPENDIX
Notation
a global reaction component for species X
Aeff effective cross-section (m2 )
Ai pre-exponential factor for the rate
equation of homogeneous reaction (s−1 )
A0 pre-exponential factor for the rate
equation of heterogeneous reaction (s−1 )
b global reaction component for species Y
CP,mix specific heat of gas mixture (kJ/kmol K)
CP,s specific heat of solid (kJ/kmol K)
E activation energy (kJ/mol)
Eij activation energy of reaction forming
product i (kJ/mol)
Hj heat generated by the jth homogeneous
reaction (kJ/s)
Hk heat generated or absorbed by the kth
heterogeneous reaction (kJ/s)
Hloss,wall heat loss through reactor wall (kJ/s)
ki first-order rate constant of reaction
forming product i (s−1 )
kij0 pre-exponential factor in ki (s−1 )
mmix mass flowrate of mixed gas (kg/s)
n pressure order of nth-order equation
PA partial pressure of gasifying agent (Pa)
R gas constant (kJ/mol K)
rj reaction rate of jth gas-involved reaction
(kmol/s)
Proc. IMechE Vol. 225 Part A: J. Power and Energy
84 H Lee, S Choi, and M Paek

rk reaction rate of kth solid-phase reaction Wg,i flowrate of gas component i (kmol/s)
(kmol/s) Wg,mix flowrate of gas mixture (kmol/s)
t times (s) Ws flowrate of solid (kmol/s)
T absolute temperature (K) x carbon conversion
Tg temperature of gas (K) X reactant X
Ts temperature of solid particle (K) Xi mass fraction of species i
V velocity of mixed gas (m/s) Y reactant Y
Vi mass of volatile species i (kg) Yi mole fraction of species i
Vij amount of product i generated up to
time t, fraction of the original coal νi,j stoichiometric parameter for gas
weight component i in the jth reaction
Vij∗ value of Vi at t = ∞ (ultimate yield), νs,k stoichiometric parameter for the solid in
approximated by measurements at long the kth reaction
reaction times, fraction of the original ρmix density of mixed gas (kg/m3 )
coal weight  particle structure parameter

Proc. IMechE Vol. 225 Part A: J. Power and Energy