Air staging features widely in biomass combustion from small space heaters to industrial-scale moving grate systems. Whilst studies have been conducted into the impact of air staging on emissions and combustion performance, there is little or no insight into the exact flow dynamic and physical mechanisms that are induced by secondary air under such conditions. This paper uses experimental data to validate numerical predictions before investigating the flow field structures and mixing characteristics in a fixed bed air staged combustor. The study utilizes Constant Temperature Anemometry (CTA) experiments to establish boundary conditions for a lab-scale fixed bed combustor. Results from numerical simulations obtained using l-𝜔 model were in good agreement with experimental data. Conditions tested cover five different secondary to total air ratios (Qs/Qt) and two different locations of secondary air injection. Results show that at Qs/Qt = 0.50, 0.25 and 0.18 one strong recirculation zone is induced upstream of the secondary air injection and one downstream. Varying the point of injection of secondary air from h/D = 0.64 to h/D = 0.40 also had an effect on the size of the upstream recirculation zone. Qs/Qt = 0.50 had the highest values of mixing index among all spatially located planes at the upstream of secondary air injection. The overall findings shed light on the possible flow interactions between secondary air and the top layers of fuel bed. They also highlight the significance of secondary air on inducing both upstream and downstream flow structures.
NirmoloAWocheHSpechtE. Temperature homogenization of reactive and non-reactive flows after radial jet injections in confined cross-flow. Eng Appl Comput Fluid Mech2008; 2: 85–94. DOI: 10.1080/19942060.2008.11015213.
2.
AfrozFSharifMA. Numerical study of cross-flow around a circular cylinder with differently shaped span-wise surface grooves at low Reynolds number. Eur J Mech B/Fluids2022; 91: 203–218.
3.
SebastianRSchreyerA-M. Flow fields around spanwise-inclined elliptical jets in supersonic crossflow. Eur J Mech B/Fluids2022; 94: 299–313. DOI: 10.1016/j.euromechflu.2022.03.008.
4.
YouC-HLeeH-YHwangS-S. Low NOX combustion characteristics by hydrogen micro jet flame in cross flow. J Mech Sci Technol2023; 37: 445–455.
5.
KartaevЕEmelkinVKtalkhermanM, et al.Formation of counter flow jet resulting from impingement of multiple jets radially injected in a crossflow. Exp Therm Fluid Sci2015; 68: 310–321. DOI: 10.1016/j.expthermflusci.2015.05.009.
6.
CoxJG. An analytical model for predicting exit temperature profile from gasturbine engine annular combustors. In: 11th propulsion conference, Anaheim, CA, September 1975: 1307.
7.
SamuelsenGBrouwerJVardakasM, et al.Experimental and modeling investigation of the effect of air preheat on the formation of NOx in an RQL combustor. Heat Mass Transfer2013; 49: 219–231. DOI: 10.1007/s00231-012-1080-0.
8.
KartaevЕVHoldemanJ. Steady-state and unsteady Reynolds-averaged Navier-stokes modelling of cold jets-in-hot crossflow in a cylindrical duct for non-impinging, impinging, and strongly impinging jets. Heat Mass Transfer2020; 56: 2285–2302.
9.
JunejoAAl-AbdeliYMPorteiroJ. Role of primary freeboard on staged combustion of hardwood pellets in a fixed bed combustor. Bioenergy Res2022. DOI: 10.1007/s12155-022-10504-3.
10.
KhodaeiHGuzzomiFPatinoD, et al.Air staging strategies in biomass combustion-gaseous and particulate emission reduction potentials. Fuel Process Technol2017; 157: 29–41. DOI: 10.1016/j.fuproc.2016.11.007.
11.
JunejoAAl-AbdeliYMIkhlaqM. Progress variables to resolve the steady state period in a batch-type fixed bed combustor. Combust Sci Technol2022: 1–23. DOI: 10.1080/00102202.2022.2150969.
12.
RiazSOluwoyeIAl-AbdeliYM. Oxidative torrefaction of densified woody biomass: performance, combustion kinetics and thermodynamics. Renew Energ2022; 199: 908–918.
13.
ArchanGARScharlerRBuchmayrM, et al.Minimization of inorganic particulate matter emissions with a novel multi-fuel combustion technology that enhances inorganic retention in a compact updraft fixed-bed. Fuel2022; 318: 123611.
14.
YangYBRyuCKhorA, et al.Effect of fuel properties on biomass combustion. Part II: modelling approach—identification of the controlling factors. Fuel2005; 84: 2116–2130. DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2005.04.023.
15.
RashidianBAl-AbdeliYMPatinoD, et al.Effect of freeboard deflectors in the fixed bed combustion of biomass. Appl Therm Eng2016; 103: 543–552. DOI: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2016.04.140.
16.
CalderónCJossartJGoodwinN, et al.European bioenergy outlook 2013–statistical report. Brussels, Belgium: European Biomass Association AEBIOM, 2013.
17.
NussbaumerT. Primary and secondary measures for the reduction of nitric oxide emissions from biomass combustion. Developments in thermochemical biomass conversion. Berlin, Germany: Springer, 1997, pp. 1447–1461.
18.
ZabettaECHupaMSaviharjuK. Reducing NOx emissions using fuel staging, air staging, and selective noncatalytic reduction in synergy. Ind Eng Chem Res2005; 44: 4552–4561. DOI: 10.1021/ie050051a.
19.
HoushfarELovasTSkreibergO. Detailed chemical kinetics modeling of NOx reduction in combined staged fuel and staged air combustion of biomass. In: 18th European biomass conference and exhibition, Lyon, France, 3–7 May, 2010: 1128–1132.
20.
ColladoRMonederoECasero-AlonsoVM, et al.Almond shells and exhausted olive cake as fuels for biomass domestic boilers: optimization, performance and pollutant emissions. Sustain2022; 14: 7271. DOI: 10.3390/su14127271.
21.
KhodaeiHAl-AbdeliYMGuzzomiF, et al.An overview of processes and considerations in the modelling of fixed-bed biomass combustion. Energ2015; 88: 946–972. DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2015.05.099.
22.
BhuiyanAANaserJ. CFD modelling of co-firing of biomass with coal under oxy-fuel combustion in a large scale power plant. Fuel2015; 159: 150–168. DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2015.06.058.
23.
KarimMRNaserJ. Progress in numerical modelling of packed bed biomass combustion. In: 19th Australasian fluid mechanics conference, Melbourne, VI, 8–11 December, 2014: 14.
24.
BhuiyanAAKarimMRNaserJ. Modeling of solid and bio-fuel combustion technologies. Brisbane, QL: Elsevier, 2016, pp. 259–309.
25.
ShojaeeSHosseiniSHRafatiA, et al.Prediction of the effective area in structured packings by computational fluid dynamics. Ind Eng Chem Res2011; 50: 10833–10842. DOI: 10.1021/ie200088d.
26.
HosseiniSHShojaeeSAhmadiG, et al.Computational fluid dynamics studies of dry and wet pressure drops in structured packings. J Ind Eng Chem2012; 18: 1465–1473. DOI: 10.1016/j.jiec.2012.02.012.
27.
FourcadeEWadleyRHoefslootHCJ, et al.CFD calculation of laminar striation thinning in static mixer reactors. Chem Eng Sci2001; 56: 6729–6741. DOI: 10.1016/S0009-2509(01)00297-4.
28.
HaddadiMMHosseiniSHRashtchianD, et al.Comparative analysis of different static mixers performance by CFD technique: an innovative mixer. Chin J Chem Eng2020; 28: 672–684. DOI: 10.1016/j.cjche.2019.09.004.
29.
ChapelaSPorteiroJMiguezJL, et al.Eulerian CFD fouling model for fixed bed biomass combustion systems. Fuel2020; 278: 118251. DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2020.118251.
30.
PorteiroJCollazoJPatinoD, et al.Numerical modeling of a biomass pellet domestic boiler. Energ Fuels2009; 23: 1067–1075. DOI: 10.1021/ef8008458.
31.
BermudezCAPorteiroJVarelaLG, et al.Three-dimensional CFD simulation of a large-scale grate-fired biomass furnace. Fuel Process Tech2020; 198: 106219. DOI: 10.1016/j.fuproc.2019.106219.
32.
WiinikkaHGebartR. Critical parameters for particle emissions in small-scale fixed-bed combustion of wood pellets. Energ Fuels2004; 18: 897–907. DOI: 10.1021/ef030173k.
33.
AhnJKimJJ. Combustion and heat transfer characteristics inside the combustion chamber of a wood pellet boiler. J Mech Sci Technol2014; 28: 789–795. DOI: 10.1007/s12206-013-1145-0.
34.
KarimMRNaserJ. Numerical study of the ignition front propagation of different pelletised biomass in a packed bed furnace. Appl Therm Eng2018; 128: 772–784. DOI: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2017.09.061.
35.
KirchTBirzerCHMedwellPR, et al.The role of primary and secondary air on wood combustion in cookstoves. Int J Sustain Energy2016; 37: 268–277. DOI: 10.1080/14786451.2016.1166110.
36.
WiinikkaHGebartR. The influence of air distribution rate on particle emissions in fixed bed combustion of biomass. Combust Sci Technol2005; 177: 1747–1766. DOI: 10.1080/00102200590959468.
37.
CaposciuttiGBarontiniFAntonelliM, et al.Experimental investigation on the air excess and air displacement influence on early stage and complete combustion gaseous emissions of a small scale fixed bed biomass boiler. Appl Energ2018; 216: 576–587. DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.02.125.
38.
Al-ShemmeriTTYedlaRWardleD. Thermal characteristics of various biomass fuels in a small-scale biomass combustor. Appl Therm Eng2015; 85: 243–251. DOI: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2015.03.055.
39.
RoyMMCorscaddenKW. An experimental study of combustion and emissions of biomass briquettes in a domestic wood stove. Appl Energ2012; 99: 206–212.
40.
KirchTMedwellPRBirzerCH, et al.Influences of fuel bed depth and air supply on small-scale batch-fed reverse downdraft biomass conversion. Energ Fuels2018; 32: 8507–8518. DOI: 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.8b01699.
41.
MengXXSunRZhouW, et al.Effects of corn ratio with pine on biomass co-combustion characteristics in a fixed bed. Appl Therm Eng2018; 142: 30–42. DOI: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2018.06.068.
42.
MengXXSunRIsmailTM, et al.Parametric studies on corn straw combustion characteristics in a fixed bed: ash and moisture content. Energ2018; 158: 192–203. DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2018.06.060.
43.
BrydenKMRaglandKW. Numerical modeling of a deep, fixed bed combustor. Energ Fuels1996; 10: 269–275. DOI: 10.1021/ef950193p.
44.
RashidianBAl-AbdeliYMYeohGH, et al.Effect of freeboard deflectors on the temperature distribution in packed beds. Appl Therm Eng2015; 89: 134–143. DOI: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2015.05.045.
45.
VarelaLGGómezMGarabatosM, et al.Improving the bed movement physics of inclined grate biomass CFD simulations. Appl Therm Eng2021; 182: 116043.
46.
ChapelaSPorteiroJGarabatosM, et al.CFD study of fouling phenomena in small-scale biomass boilers: experimental validation with two different boilers. Renew Energ2019; 140: 552–562.
47.
Alvarez-BermúdezCAnca-CouceAChapelaS, et al.Detailed simulation of novel biomass combustion technology with a low primary air ratio in the fixed-bed . SSRN Electron J2022: 1–42. Available at SSRN 4107092.
48.
JørgensenFE. How to measure turbulence with hot-wire anemometers: a practical guide. Skovlunde, Denmark: Dantec Dynamics, 2001.
49.
HosseiniZBourgeoisJAMartinuzziRJ. Large-scale structures in dipole and quadrupole wakes of a wall-mounted finite rectangular cylinder. Exp Fluids2013; 54: 1595–1595. DOI: 10.1007/s00348-013-1595-2.
50.
ArmstrongLMGuSLuoKH. Parametric study of gasification processes in a BFB coal gasifier. Ind Eng Chem Res2011; 50: 5959–5974. DOI: 10.1021/ie1023029.
51.
AhmedZU. An experimental and numerical study of surface interactions in turbulent swirling jets. PhD Thesis. Australia: Edith Cowan University, 2016.
52.
RadwanAIbrahimKAHanafyA, et al.On RANS modeling of unconfined swirl flow. CFD Lett2014; 6: 159–174.
53.
FürstJPříhodaJStrakaP. Numerical simulation of transitional flows. Computing2013; 95: 163–182.
54.
IkhlaqMAl-AbdeliYMKhiadaniM. Nozzle exit conditions and the heat transfer in non-swirling and weakly swirling turbulent impinging jets. Heat Mass Transfer2020; 56: 269–290.
55.
FluentA. Ansys fluent theory guide. Canonsburg, PA: ANSYS Inc, 2011, pp. 724–746.
56.
DewanA. Tackling turbulent flows in engineering. Berlin, Germany: Springer Science and Business Media, 2010.
57.
LeeHCChathurangaKLeeJS. Intracellular sensing of viral genomes and viral evasion. Exp Mol Med2019; 51: 1–13.
58.
Brito LopesAEmekwuruNBonelloB, et al.On the highly swirling flow through a confined bluff-body. Phys Fluids2020; 32: 055105.
KouadriADouroumELasbetY, et al.Comparative study of mixing behaviors using non-Newtonian fluid flows in passive micromixers. Int J Mech Sci2021; 201: 106472.
61.
KanarisAGStogiannisIAMouzaAA, et al.Comparing the mixing performance of common types of chaotic micromixers: a numerical study. Heat Transf Eng2015; 36: 1122–1131. DOI: 10.1080/01457632.2015.987623.
62.
BhagatAASPetersonETPapautskyI. A passive planar micromixer with obstructions for mixing at low Reynolds numbers. J Micromech Microeng2007; 17: 1017–1024. DOI: 10.1088/0960-1317/17/5/023.
63.
WangWCaoYOkazeT. Comparison of hexahedral, tetrahedral and polyhedral cells for reproducing the wind field around an isolated building by LES. Build Environ2021; 195: 107717. DOI: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2021.107717.
64.
SosnowskiMKrzywanskiJGnatowskaR. Polyhedral meshing as an innovative approach to computational domain discretization of a cyclone in a fluidized bed CLC unit. E3S Web Conf2017; 14: 01027.
65.
RoachePJ. Perspective: a method for uniform reporting of grid refinement studies. J Fluids Eng, Transaction of the ASME1994; 116(3): 405–413.
66.
CelikIBGhiaURoachePJ, et al.Procedure for estimation and reporting of uncertainty due to discretization in CFD applications. J Fluids Eng-Transact ASME2008: 130: 780011–780014.
67.
KhodaeiHGuzzomiFYeohGH, et al.An experimental study into the effect of air staging distribution and position on emissions in a laboratory scale biomass combustor. Energy2017; 118: 1243–1255. DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2016.11.008.
68.
Al-AbdeliYMMasriAR. Recirculation and flowfield regimes of unconfined non-reacting swirling flows. Exp Therm Fluid Sci2003; 27: 655–665. DOI: 10.1016/S0894-1777(02)00280-7.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
