Chemical looping with oxygen uncoupling (CLOU) is a carbon capture technology that utilizes a metal oxide as an oxygen carrier to selectively separate oxygen from air and release gaseous O2 into a reactor where fuel, such as coal, is combusted. Previous research has addressed reactor design for CLOU systems, but little direct comparison between different reactor designs has been performed. This study utilizes Barracuda-VR® for comparison of two system configurations, one uses circulating fluidized beds (CFB) for both the air reactor (AR) and fuel reactor (FR) and another uses bubbling fluidized beds for both reactors. Initial validation of experimental and computational fluid dynamic (CFD) simulations was performed to show that basic trends are captured with the CFD code. The CFD simulations were then used to perform comparison of key performance parameters such as solids circulation rate and reactor residence time, pressure profiles in the reactors and loopseals, and particle velocities in different locations of the reactor as functions of total solids inventory and reactor gas flows. Using these simulation results, it was determined that the dual CFB system had larger range for solids circulation rate before choked flow was obtained. Both systems had similar particle velocities for the bottom 80% of particle mass, but the bubbling bed (BB) obtained higher particle velocities as compared to the circulating fluidized-bed FR, due to the transport riser. As a system, the results showed that the dual CFB configuration allowed better control over the range of parameters tested.
Skip Nav Destination
Article navigation
July 2016
Research-Article
Numerical Simulation Comparison of Two Reactor Configurations for Chemical Looping Combustion and Chemical Looping With Oxygen Uncoupling
Matthew A. Hamilton,
Matthew A. Hamilton
The University of Utah,
50 South Central Campus Drive, Room 3290,
Salt Lake City, UT 84112-9203
e-mail: Matthew.a.hamilton@utah.edu
50 South Central Campus Drive, Room 3290,
Salt Lake City, UT 84112-9203
e-mail: Matthew.a.hamilton@utah.edu
Search for other works by this author on:
Kevin J. Whitty,
Kevin J. Whitty
The University of Utah,
50 South Central Campus Drive, Room 3290,
Salt Lake City, UT 84112-9203
e-mail: Kevin.Whitty@utah.edu
50 South Central Campus Drive, Room 3290,
Salt Lake City, UT 84112-9203
e-mail: Kevin.Whitty@utah.edu
Search for other works by this author on:
JoAnn S. Lighty
JoAnn S. Lighty
The University of Utah,
50 South Central Campus Drive, Room 3290,
Salt Lake City, UT 84112-9203
e-mail: jlighty@utah.edu
50 South Central Campus Drive, Room 3290,
Salt Lake City, UT 84112-9203
e-mail: jlighty@utah.edu
Search for other works by this author on:
Matthew A. Hamilton
The University of Utah,
50 South Central Campus Drive, Room 3290,
Salt Lake City, UT 84112-9203
e-mail: Matthew.a.hamilton@utah.edu
50 South Central Campus Drive, Room 3290,
Salt Lake City, UT 84112-9203
e-mail: Matthew.a.hamilton@utah.edu
Kevin J. Whitty
The University of Utah,
50 South Central Campus Drive, Room 3290,
Salt Lake City, UT 84112-9203
e-mail: Kevin.Whitty@utah.edu
50 South Central Campus Drive, Room 3290,
Salt Lake City, UT 84112-9203
e-mail: Kevin.Whitty@utah.edu
JoAnn S. Lighty
The University of Utah,
50 South Central Campus Drive, Room 3290,
Salt Lake City, UT 84112-9203
e-mail: jlighty@utah.edu
50 South Central Campus Drive, Room 3290,
Salt Lake City, UT 84112-9203
e-mail: jlighty@utah.edu
Contributed by the Advanced Energy Systems Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENERGY RESOURCES TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received November 2, 2015; final manuscript received March 17, 2016; published online April 19, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Ashwani K. Gupta.
J. Energy Resour. Technol. Jul 2016, 138(4): 042213 (9 pages)
Published Online: April 19, 2016
Article history
Received:
November 2, 2015
Revised:
March 17, 2016
Citation
Hamilton, M. A., Whitty, K. J., and Lighty, J. S. (April 19, 2016). "Numerical Simulation Comparison of Two Reactor Configurations for Chemical Looping Combustion and Chemical Looping With Oxygen Uncoupling." ASME. J. Energy Resour. Technol. July 2016; 138(4): 042213. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4033108
Download citation file:
Get Email Alerts
Related Articles
Transient Computational Fluid Dynamics/Discrete Element Method Simulation of Gas–Solid Flow in a Spouted Bed and Its Validation by High-Speed Imaging Experiment
J. Energy Resour. Technol (January,2018)
Special Issue Dedicated to the 28th International Conference on Efficiency, Cost, Optimization, Simulation, and Environmental Impact of Energy Systems (ECOS 2015)
J. Energy Resour. Technol (November,2016)
On the Computational Modeling of Unfluidized and Fluidized Bed Dynamics
J. Fluids Eng (October,2014)
Flow Regime Study of a Light Material in an Industrial Scale Cold Flow Circulating Fluidized Bed
J. Energy Resour. Technol (June,2006)
Related Chapters
Introduction
Energy Choices: A Guide to Facts and Perspectives
A Simple Carburetor
Case Studies in Fluid Mechanics with Sensitivities to Governing Variables
Numerical Simulation Research on a Fixed Bed Gasifier
International Conference on Information Technology and Management Engineering (ITME 2011)