Modelling fast pyrolysis of biomass in a fluidized bed reactor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A compartmental one‐dimensional model of a fluidized bed pyrolytic converter of biomass is presented. Reference conditions are those of non‐catalytic fast pyrolysis of biomass in a shallow fluidized bed with external regeneration of the bed material. The fate of biomass and of the resulting char has been modelled by considering elutriation of biomass and char particles, char attrition as well as bed drain/regeneration. The course of primary and secondary pyrolitic reactions is modelled according to a semi‐lumped reaction network using well‐established kinetic parameters taken from the literature. A specific focus of the present study is the role of the heterogeneous volatile–char secondary reactions, whose rate has been modelled by borrowing a kinetic expression from the neighbouring area of tar adsorption/decomposition over char. The results of computations highlight the relevance of heterogeneous volatile–char secondary reactions and of the closely associated control of char loading in the bed. The sensitivity of the reactor performance to char elutriation and attrition, to proper management of bed drain/regeneration, and to control of gas phase backmixing is demonstrated. Model results provide useful guidelines for optimal design and control of fluidized bed pyrolyzers and pinpoint future research priorities.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".