MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2719893824 · doi:10.7464/ksct.2017.23.1.080

Experimental Study of Co-firing and Emission Characteristics Fueled by Sewage Sludge and Wood Pellet in Bubbling Fluidized Bed

2017· article· en· W2719893824 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Young-Jae Lee, Jongmin Kim, Dong Hee Kim, Yongwoon Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueClean Technology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFluidizationCombustibilityPelletCombustionFluidized bedMaterials scienceAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Waste managementChemistryComposite materialEnvironmental chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

하수슬러지 고형연료 및 우드펠렛의 전소 및 혼소 실험을 위해 내경 0.1 m, 높이가 1.2 m인 기포 유동층 반응기를 적용하였으며, 장치는 유동층 반응기, 연료 공급장치, 사이클론, 냉각기, 그리고 가스분석기로 구성되었다. 층 물질의 평균입자크기는 <TEX>$460{\mu}m$</TEX>이며, 최소 유동화 속도는 <TEX>$0.21ms^{-1}$</TEX>이다. 실험에 사용된 연료는 국내산 하수슬러지 고형연료 및 캐나다산 우드펠렛을 적용하였으며, 우드펠렛 기준 혼합율 20, 50, 80%로 고위발열량을 기준으로 산정하였다. 실험 고정변수는 당량비 1.65, 산화제 <TEX>$100Lmin^{-1}$</TEX>, 반응기 온도 <TEX>$800^{\circ}C$</TEX>, 유동화수 4로 설정하였다. TGA 분석 결과, 하수슬러지의 고형 연료의 연소성이 우드펠렛이 비해 상대적으로 좋지 않았다. 연소시 반응기 온도는 <TEX>$800{\sim}900^{\circ}C$</TEX> 사이로 유지되었으며, 유동층 반응기에서 하수 슬러지 고형연료의 낮은 연소성으로 인해 CO가 상대적으로 높게 측정되었다. 뿐만 아니라 <TEX>$NO_X$</TEX>와 <TEX>$SO_X$</TEX>는 하수슬러지 고형연료 내의 질소함량으로 인해 우드펠렛에 비해 높게 측정되었으며, 혼소율이 증가될수록 CO, <TEX>$NO_X$</TEX>, 그리고 <TEX>$SO_X$</TEX>의 배출이 감소하였다. 혼소에 따른 회분의 거동 및 퇴적 경향에서 모든 조건에 대해 슬래깅/파일링의 가능성이 높은 것으로 분석되었다. The bubbling fluidized bed (BFB) reactor with a diameter of 0.1 m and a height of 1.2 m was used for experimental study of co-firing and emission characteristics fueled by sewage sludge (SS) and wood pellet (WP). The facility consists of a fluidized bed reactor, feeding system, cyclone, condenser and gas analyzer, The mean particle diameter and minimum fluidization velocity are <TEX>$460{\mu}m$</TEX> and <TEX>$0.21ms^{-1}$</TEX> respectively. SS produced from Korea and WP from Canada were examined. The various mixing ratios of WP were 20, 50, and 80% based on HHV. The equivalence ratio of 1.65, reactor temperature of <TEX>$800^{\circ}C$</TEX>, air flow rate of <TEX>$100Lmin^{-1}$</TEX>, and fluidization number of 4 were fixed in the BFB experiment. In TGA, the range of combustion temperature of SS was wider than that of WP. It represents that the combustibility of WP is higher than that of SS. The BFB reactor temperature was maintained between 800 and <TEX>$900^{\circ}C$</TEX>. CO emission of SS was high because of lower combustibility. <TEX>$NO_X$</TEX> and <TEX>$SO_X$</TEX> formation of SS were higher than that of WP since high nitrogen and sulfur contents of SS. CO, <TEX>$NO_X$</TEX>, and <TEX>$SO_X$</TEX> formation were suppressed as the mixing ratio of WP was increased. The slagging and fouling tendencies show high in all test conditions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.561

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClean TechnologySame topicThermochemical Biomass Conversion ProcessesFrench-language works237,207