Intrinsic kinetics study of microwave catalytic pyrolysis of cellulosic biomass using a novel microwave thermogravimetric analyzer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A novel microwave thermogravimetric analyzer (microwave TGA) has been developed and applied to study the intrinsic reaction kinetics of microwave-assisted catalytic pyrolysis of cellulosic biomass particles. Constant heating rate was achieved by exposing the sample directly to the microwave irradiation, monitoring the particle surface temperature by an infrared temperature sensor and controlling the magnetron power output via a feedback PID controller. Compared with a conventional TGA operated with the same sample at identical loading and heating rate, the peak weight loss temperature measured in the microwave TGA was 30–50 °C lower. This systematic offset arises from the distinct temperature measurement strategy and heat transfer pathways in two systems. In the microwave TGA, the IR sensor records the particle surface temperature, which is lower than the particle core because the heat is generated volumetrically and flows outward. By contrast, the conventional TGA the reported temperature reflects the carrier gas (or furnace) temperature, which is generally higher than particle interior with inward conductive/convective heat transfer. Consequently, the same conversion is reached at a lower measured temperature in the microwave TGA than in the conventional TGA. Consistent with this behavior, the activation energy extracted from the constant heating rate data using model-free kinetic models is 50–80 % lower in microwave-assisted pyrolysis than in conventional pyrolysis. Our results generated from a well-designed microwave TGA operated at constant heating rates confirmed those results in the literature showing much lower activation energy of microwave reactors and thus much lower microwave reactor temperature to achieve similar conversions in conventional conductively/convectively heated reactors. • A novel microwave TGA with sensor-feedback controlled constant heating rates • Delivered 1–50 °C /min constant ramp rates and stable isotherms at 700 °C • Revealed 50–80 % lower activation energy for biomass pyrolysis under microwave
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".