Skip to main content
Log in

Scaling heat and mass flow through porous media during pyrolysis

  • Original
  • Published:
Heat and Mass Transfer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The modelling of heat and mass flow through porous media in the presence of pyrolysis is complex because various physical and chemical phenomena need to be represented. In addition to the transport of heat by conduction and convection, and the change of properties with varying pressure and temperature, these processes involve transport of mass by convection, evaporation, condensation and pyrolysis chemical reactions. Examples of such processes include pyrolysis of wood, thermal decomposition of polymer composite and in situ upgrading of heavy oil and oil shale. The behaviours of these systems are difficult to predict as relatively small changes in the material composition can significantly change the thermophysical properties. Scaling reduces the number of parameters in the problem statement and quantifies the relative importance of the various dimensional parameters such as permeability, thermal conduction and reaction constants. This paper uses inspectional analysis to determine the minimum number of dimensionless scaling groups that describe the decomposition of a solid porous material into a gas in one dimension. Experimental design is then used to rank these scaling groups in terms of their importance in describing the outcome of two example processes: the thermal decomposition of heat shields formed from polymer composites and the in situ upgrading of heavy oils and oil shales. A sensitivity analysis is used to divide these groups into three sets (primary, secondary and insignificant), thus identifying the combinations of solid and fluid properties that have the most impact on the performance of the different processes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

\(A\) :

Frequency factor (\({\text {s}}^{-1}\))

\(E_a\) :

Activation energy (J/mol)

\(F\) :

Fraction of remaining reactant

\(h\) :

Specific enthalpy (J/kg)

\(K\) :

Rock permeability (m\(^2\))

\(L\) :

Domain length (m)

\(M\) :

Molecular weight (kg/kmol)

\(P\) :

Pressure (Pa)

\(q\) :

Energy flow by conduction (W/m\(^2\))

\(R\) :

Universal gas constant (8.314 J/mol/K)

\(T\) :

Temperature (K)

\(t\) :

Time (s)

\(\tau\) :

Time scale of heat conduction in porous media (s)

0:

Initial value

\(v\) :

Velocity (m/s)

\(x\) :

One dimensional coordinate (m)

\(\varDelta h_r\) :

Reaction enthalpy (J/kg)

\(\varDelta T\) :

Temperature scale \(\Delta T=T_i-T_0\) (K)

\(\epsilon\) :

Emissivity

\(\gamma\) :

Specific heat capacity (J/kg K)

\(\kappa\) :

Thermal conductivity (W/m K)

\(\mu\) :

Viscosity (Pa s)

\(\phi\) :

rock porosity (no unit)

\(\rho\) :

Mass density (kg/m\(^3\))

\(\sigma\) :

Stefan–Boltzmann constant (\(5.67\times 10^{-8}\) W/m\(^2\)/K\(^4\))

\(f\) :

Final value

\(g\) :

Gas

\(i\) :

Incident heat value

\(s\) :

Solid

References

  1. Anderson MJ, Whitcomb PJ (2007) DOE simplified: practical tools for effective experimentation, 2nd edn. Productivity Press, New York City

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bai Y, Vallee T, Keller T (2008) Modeling of thermal responses for FRP composites under elevated and high temperatures. Compos Sci Technol 68(1):47–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bennon WD, Incropera FP (1987) A continuum model for momentum, heat and species transport in binary solid–liquid phase cahnge systems—I. Model formulation. Int J Heat Mass Transf 30(10):2161–2170

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Braun RL, Burnham AK (1990) Mathematical model of oil generation, degradation, and expulsion. Energy Fuels 4(2):132–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Fan Y, Durlofsky L, Tchelepi H (2010) Numerical simulation of the in situ upgrading of oil shale. In: SPE reservoir simulation symposium, 2–4 February 2009, The Woodlands, TX, USA

  6. Florio J, Henderson JB, Test FL, Hariharan R (1991) A study of the effects of the assumption of local-equilibrium on the overall thermally-induced response of decomposing, glass-filled polymer composite. Int J Heat Mass Transf 34(4):135–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Fowler T, Vinegar H (2009) Oil shale ICP-Colorado field pilot. In: SPE western regional meeting, 24–26 March 2009, San Jose, CA, USA

  8. Gersten J, Fainberg V, Hetsroni G, Shindler Y (1999) Kinetic study of the thermal decomposition of polypropylene, oil shale, and their mixture. Fuel 79(13):1679–1686

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gharbi RBC (2002) Dimensionally scaled miscible displacements in heterogeneous permeable media. Transp Porous Media 48(3):271–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Henderson JB, Emmerich WD, Hagemann L, Post E (1993) Thermophysical property measurement on a complex high-temperature polymer composite. High Temp High Press 25(6):693–698

    Google Scholar 

  11. Henderson JB, Verma YP, Tant MR, Moore GR (1983) Measurement of the thermal conductivity of polymer composites to high temperatures using the line source technique. Polym Compos 4:219–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Henderson JB, Wiebelt JA, Tant MR (1985) A model for the thermal response of polymer composite materials with experimental verification. J Compos Mater 19:579–595

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Henderson JB, Wiecek TE (1988) A numerical study of the thermally-induced response of decomposing, expanding polymer composites. Wärme und Stoffübertragung 22(5):275–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Hogg RT, McKean JW, Craig AT (2005) Introduction to mathematical statistics, 6th edn. Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  15. Johnson RW (1998) The handbook of fluid dynamics. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Kansa EJ, Perler HE, Chaiken RF (1977) Mathematical model of wood pyrolysis including internal convection force. Combust Flame 29:311–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kelley CT (2003) Solving nonlinear equations with Newton’s method. SIAM, Philadelphia

  18. Kumar J, Fusetti L, Corre B (2011) Modeling in situ upgrading of extraheavy oils/tar sands by subsurface pyrolysis. In: Canadian unconventional resources conference, 15–17 November 2011, AB, Canada

  19. Lenth R (1989) Quick and easy analysis of unreplicated factorials. Technometrics 31:469–473

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Miller RS, Bellan J (1996) Analysis of reaction products and conversion time in the pyrolysis of cellulose and wood particles. Combust Sci Technol 119(1–6):331–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Montgomery DC (2000) Design and analysis of experiments, 5th edn. Wiley, New York City

    Google Scholar 

  22. Myers RH, Montgomery DC, Anderson-Cook CM (2009) Response surface methodology: process and product optimization using design of experiments, 3rd edn. Wiley, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  23. Patankar SV (1980) Numerical heat transfer and fluid flow. Hemisphere, New York

  24. Puiroux N, Prat A, Quintard M (2004) Non-equilibrium theories for macroscale heat transfer: ablative composite layer systems. Int J Therm Sci 43(6):541–554

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ruark AE (1935) Inspectional analysis: a method which supplements dimensional analysis. J Elisha Mitchell 51:127–133

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ruzicka MC (2008) On dimensionless numbers. Chem Eng Res Des 86(8a):835–868

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Shook M, Li D, Lake WL (1992) Scaling immiscible flow through permeable media by inspectional analysis. In Situ 16(4):311–349

    Google Scholar 

  28. Shukla MK, Kastanek FJ, Nielsen DR (2002) Inspectional analysis of convective-dispersive equation and application on measured breakthrough curves. Soil Sci Soc Am J 66(4):1087–1094

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Staggs JEJ (2003) Heat and mass transport in developing chars. Polym Degrad Stab 82(2):297–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Youstos MSK, Mastorakos E, Cant RS (2013) Numerical simulation of thermal and reaction front for oil shale upgrading. Chem Eng Sci 94:200–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Yuen RKK, Yeoh GH, Davis GD, Leonardi E (2007) Modelling the pyrolysis of wet wood—I. Three-dimensional formulation and analysis. Int J Heat Mass Transf 50(21–22):4371–4386

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to Total E&P for funding this work. They would also like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions to improve the quality of the paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julien Maes.

Appendix: Deriving the dimensionless groups by inspectional analysis

Appendix: Deriving the dimensionless groups by inspectional analysis

The general procedure of nondimensionalizing the equations that describe a physical process by inspectional analysis involves the introduction of arbitrary scaling factors. They make a linear transformation from dimensional to dimensionless space. The scaling factors are then grouped into dimensionless scaling groups, and their values are selected to minimize the number of groups.

We define the following linear transformations of every variables from the original dimensional space to a general dimensionless space:

$$\begin{aligned}&x=x^*_1x_D+x^*_2 \quad t=t^*_1t_D+t^*_2 \nonumber \\&\rho _s=\rho ^*_{s1}\rho _{sD}+\rho ^*_{s2} \nonumber \\&T=T^*_1T_D+T^*_2 \quad P=P^*_1P_D+P^*_2\nonumber \\&v_g=v^*_1v_{gD}+v^*_2 \quad q=q^*_1q_D+q^*_2 \end{aligned}$$
(35)

In these transformations, the scale factors are the “*” quantities and the dimensionless variables are those with a subscript “D”. There are 14 scale factors, two for each independent variable (\(x\) and \(t\)) and depend variable (\(\rho _s\), \(T\), \(P\), \(v_g\), \(q\)). The scale factors may be multiplicative (subscript 1) or additive (subscript 2). We substitute (35) into Eqs. (1), (7), (9), (13) and (14) and multiple by selected scale factors to make the equations dimensionless. We obtain:

  • Solid decomposition

    (36)
    (37)
    (38)
  • Mass conservation

    (39)
    (40)
  • Darcy’s law

    (41)
    (42)
  • Energy equation

    (43)
  • Fourier’s law

    (44)
  • Heat flow boundary conditions

    (45)
  • Mass flow boundary conditions

    (46)
  • Initial conditions

    (47)

The scaling groups that appear in these equations are numbered (e.g., ). Each equation is dimensionless, and the 30 scaling groups are dimensionless too. The next task is to reduce the number of groups.

A large number of scaling groups can be set to zero by chosing the additive factors to be zero or to the initial or final value of the variable. Therefore, we choose:

$$\begin{aligned}&x^*_2=0\quad t^*_2=0 \nonumber \\&\rho ^*_{s2}=\rho _{s,f}\nonumber \\&T^*_2=T_0 \quad P^*_2=0\nonumber \\&v^*_2=0 \quad q^*_2=0 \end{aligned}$$
(48)

Then, the groups 3, 9, 12, 15, 22, 23 and 30 are equal to zero. Next, we need to define the multiplicative factors. Setting scaling groups to one usually leaves the final formulation in a compact form that is generally free of constant. Therefore, we choose:

$$\begin{aligned}&x^*_1=L \nonumber \\&\rho ^*_{s1}=\rho _{s,0}-\rho _{s,f} \nonumber \\&T^*_1=\varDelta T = T_1-T_0 \quad P^*_1=P_0\nonumber \\&v^*_1=\frac{K_0P_0}{\mu _{g,0}L} \quad q^*_1=\kappa _s\frac{\varDelta T}{L} \end{aligned}$$
(49)

Thus, the groups 1, 13, 20, 26, 27, 28 and 29 are equal to one. For the multiplicative factor \(t^*_1\), various time scales such as the time scale of the chemical reaction or the time scale of heat conduction could be chosen. Here we chose to normalize our time to the time taken for heat to diffuse at initial conditions. This has the advantage that group 18 in Eq. 45 is set to 1 i.e. the rate of change of heat transfer with distance is 1 at initial time.

$$\begin{aligned} t^*_1=\tau =\frac{\rho _{s,0}\gamma _sL^2}{\kappa _s} \Rightarrow {\text {Group }} 18=1 \end{aligned}$$
(50)

Note that the order of the reaction \(n\) is an additional parameter. Therefore there remain 15 groups that are not yet defined. These remaining dimensionless groups are no longer arbitrary. They are:

$$\begin{aligned}&D_2 = A\tau \quad D_4 = \frac{E_a}{R\varDelta T} \quad D_5 = \frac{T_0}{\varDelta T} \quad D_6 = \frac{\phi _f}{\phi _0}-1 \nonumber \\&D_7= \frac{K_f}{K_0}-1 \quad D_8 = \frac{K_0P_0\tau }{\phi _0\mu _{g0} L^2} \quad D_{10}=\frac{\rho _{s,0}-\rho _{s,f}}{\rho _{s,0}} \quad D_{11}=\frac{\phi _0P_0}{\rho _{s,0}\gamma _sR\varDelta T} \nonumber \\&D_{14} = \frac{\varDelta T}{\mu _{g,0}}\frac{\partial \mu _g}{\partial T} \quad D_{16} = \frac{\rho _{s,f}}{\rho _{s,0}} \quad D_{17} = \frac{\gamma _g}{\gamma _s} \quad D_{19} = \frac{\varDelta h_{r,0}}{\gamma _s\varDelta T} \nonumber \\&D_{21} =\frac{\phi _0\left( \kappa _g-\kappa _s\right) }{\kappa _s} \quad D_{24} = \frac{\epsilon _s\sigma \varDelta T^3 L}{\kappa _s} \quad D_{25} = \frac{T_i^4}{T_1^{*4}} \end{aligned}$$
(51)

The last task is to minimise the number of groups by identifying dependent groups. We observe that:

$$\begin{aligned} D_{16}&= 1-D_{10}\nonumber \\ D_{25}&= (1+D_5)^4 \end{aligned}$$
(52)

Finally we obtain 13 groups. The system depends only on these groups and the order of reaction. The groups are:

$$\begin{aligned}&D_K = A\tau \quad N_a = \frac{E_a}{R\varDelta T} \quad T^*_0 = \frac{T_0}{\varDelta T} \quad \varDelta m^* = \frac{\rho _{s,0}-\rho _{s,f}}{\rho _{s,0}} \nonumber \\&\delta = \frac{\phi _f}{\phi _0} \quad \xi = \frac{K_f}{K_0} \quad L_e = \frac{\phi _0\mu _{g,0} L^2}{K_0P_0\tau } \quad \rho ^*_g = \frac{\phi _0M_gP_0}{\rho _{s,0}R\varDelta T} \nonumber \\&\varDelta \mu ^*_g = \frac{\varDelta T}{\mu _{g,0}}\frac{\partial \mu _g}{\partial T} \quad \varDelta h^*_r = \frac{\varDelta h_{r,0}}{\gamma _s\varDelta T} \quad \gamma ^*_g = \frac{\gamma _g}{\gamma _s} \quad \varDelta \kappa ^*_g =\frac{\phi _0\left( \kappa _g-\kappa _s\right) }{\kappa _s}\nonumber \\&\epsilon ^* = \frac{\epsilon _s\sigma \varDelta T^3 L}{\kappa _s} \end{aligned}$$
(53)

The dimensionless groups satisfy the scaling requirements for the one-dimensional problem. We can demonstrate that they are independent by using the method of elementary row operations descibed in [27]. We obtain the following form of the dimensionless equation:

  • Solid decomposition

    $$\begin{aligned}&\frac{\partial \rho _{sD}}{\partial t_D} = D_K\rho _{sD}^n\exp \left( -\frac{N_a}{T_D+T^*_0}\right) \end{aligned}$$
    (54)
    $$\begin{aligned}&\phi _D = 1+\left( 1-\delta \right) \left( 1-\rho _{sD}\right) \end{aligned}$$
    (55)
    $$\begin{aligned}&K_D = 1+\left( 1-\xi \right) \left( 1-\rho _{sD}\right) \end{aligned}$$
    (56)
  • Mass conservation

    $$\begin{aligned}&\frac{\partial }{\partial t_D}\left( \phi _D\rho _{gD}\right) = -\frac{1}{L_e}\frac{\partial }{\partial x_D}\left( \rho _{gD} v_{gD}\right) -\varDelta m^*\frac{\partial \rho _{sD}}{\partial t_D}\end{aligned}$$
    (57)
    $$\begin{aligned}&\rho _{gD}=\rho ^*_g\left( \frac{P_D}{T_D+T^*_0}\right) \end{aligned}$$
    (58)
  • Darcy’s law

    $$\begin{aligned} v_{gD}&= \frac{K_D}{\mu _{gD}}\frac{\partial P_D}{\partial x_D}\end{aligned}$$
    (59)
    $$\begin{aligned} \mu _{gD}&= 1+\varDelta \mu ^*_g\left( T_D-T^*_0\right) \end{aligned}$$
    (60)
  • Energy equation

    $$\begin{aligned} \left( 1-\varDelta m^* \left( 1-\rho _{sD}\right) +\phi _D\rho _{gD}\gamma ^*_g\right) \quad \frac{\partial T_D}{\partial t_D}&= -\frac{1}{L_e}\rho _{gD}\gamma ^*_g v_{gD}\frac{\partial T_D}{\partial x_D}-\frac{\partial q_D}{\partial x_D}\nonumber \\&\quad -\varDelta m^*\left( \varDelta h^*_r +\left( 1-\gamma ^*_g\right) T_D\right) \frac{\partial \rho _{sD}}{\partial t_D} \end{aligned}$$
    (61)
  • Fourier’s law

    $$\begin{aligned} q_D=-\left( 1+\phi _D\varDelta \kappa _g\right) \frac{\partial T_D}{\partial x_D} \end{aligned}$$
    (62)
  • Heat flow boundary conditions

    $$\begin{aligned}&{\text {at}} \quad x_D=0 \quad \forall t_D \nonumber \\&q_D=Q^*_i - \epsilon ^*\left( T_D+T^*_0\right) ^4 \quad {\text {or}} \quad T_D = 1 \nonumber \\&{\text {at}} \quad x_D=1 \quad \forall t_D \nonumber \\&q_D= - \epsilon ^*\left( T_D+T^*_0\right) ^4 \quad {\text {or}} \quad T_D = 0 \end{aligned}$$
    (63)
  • Mass flow boundary conditions

    $$\begin{aligned}&{\text {at}} \quad x_D= 0 \quad \forall t_D \nonumber \\&P_D=0 \quad {\text {or}} \quad v_{gD} = 0 \nonumber \\&{\text {at}} \quad x_D=L \quad \forall t_D \nonumber \\&P_D=0 \quad {\text {or}} \quad v_{gD} =0 \end{aligned}$$
    (64)
  • Initial conditions

    $$\begin{aligned}&\rho _{sD}=1 \nonumber \\&P_D=1 \quad {\text {at}} \quad t_D=0 \quad \forall x_D\nonumber \\&T_D=0 \end{aligned}$$
    (65)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Maes, J., Muggeridge, A.H., Jackson, M.D. et al. Scaling heat and mass flow through porous media during pyrolysis. Heat Mass Transfer 51, 313–334 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00231-014-1391-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00231-014-1391-4

Keywords

Navigation