Wood Science and Technology

, Volume 53, Issue 1, pp 101–118 | Cite as

Reaction mechanism and evolved gases of larch bark pyrolysis by TG-FTIR analysis

  • Qun Shao
  • Changjian WangEmail author
  • Haoran Liu
  • Yuhao Wang
  • Jin GuoEmail author


The reaction mechanism and evolved gases of larch bark were investigated using thermogravimetry and Fourier transform infrared spectrometry analysis at 10–50 K min−1. Larch bark pyrolysis starts at approximately 450 K. One peak and one shoulder at low heating rate were observed. This shoulder turns into another peak at higher heating rate. The average value of the final residue is approximately 24%. The average activation energy was estimated as 184.72 kJ mol−1 by the Flynn–Wall–Ozawa method and 201.24 kJ mol−1 by the Kissinger–Akahira–Sunose method, and both have a discrepancy of 8.9%. The sixth or seventh reaction model is responsible for larch bark pyrolysis. The pyrolysis of larch bark produces H2O, CO2, CH4, CO, C=O and others, most of which are released in the temperature range of 500–800 K, except that CO2 has an additional peak value at around 1200 K. In addition, cellulose is the main component in larch bark, and its quantity is larger than that of hemicellulose.



Funding was provided by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51276177).


  1. Ba T, Chaala A, Garciaperez M, Denis RA, Roy C (2004) Colloidal properties of bio-oils obtained by vacuum pyrolysis of softwood bark. Characterization of water-soluble and water-insoluble fractions. Energy Fuel 18:704–712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Becidan M, Várhegyi G, Hustad JE, Skreiberg Ø (2007) Thermal decomposition of biomass wastes. A kinetic study. Ind Eng Chem Res 46:2428–2437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blasi CD, Branca C, D’Errico G (2000) Degradation characteristics of straw and washed straw. Thermochim Acta 364:133–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boucher ME, Chaala A, Roy C (2000) Bio-oils obtained by vacuum pyrolysis of softwood bark as a liquid fuel for gas turbines. Part I: properties of bio-oil and its blends with methanol and a pyrolytic aqueous phase. Biomass Bioenergy 19:337–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bridgwater AV (1999) Fast pyrolysis of biomass: a handbook, CPL PressGoogle Scholar
  6. Ceylan S, Topçu Y (2014) Pyrolysis kinetics of hazelnut husk using thermogravimetric analysis. Bioresour Technol 156:182–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen Z, Zhu Q, Wang X, Xiao B, Liu S (2015) Pyrolysis behaviors and kinetic studies on Eucalyptus residues using thermogravimetric analysis. Energy Convers Manag 105:251–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Coats AW, Redfern JP (1964) Kinetic parameters from thermogravimetric data. Nature 201:68–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ding Y, Ezekoye OA, Lu S, Wang C (2016) Thermal degradation of beech wood with thermogravimetry/Fourier transform infrared analysis. Energy Convers Manag 120:370–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ding Y, Ezekoye OA, Lu S, Wang C, Zhou R (2017) Comparative pyrolysis behaviors and reaction mechanisms of hardwood and softwood. Energy Convers Manag 132:102–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Flynn JH, Wall LA (1966) A quick, direct method for the determination of activation energy from thermogravimetric data. J Polym Sci B Polym Lett 4:323–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gao N, Li A, Quan C, Du L, Duan Y (2013) TG–FTIR and Py–GC/MS analysis on pyrolysis and combustion of pine sawdust. J Anal Appl Pyrol 100:26–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Grønli MG, Várhegyi G, Di BC (2002) Thermogravimetric analysis and devolatilization kinetics of wood. Ind Eng Chem Res 41:4201–4208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Güngör A, Önenç S, Uçar S, Yanik J (2012) Comparison between the “one-step” and “two-step” catalytic pyrolysis of pine bark. J Anal Appl Pyrol 97:39–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ingram L, Mohan D, Bricka M, Steele P, Strobel D, Crocker D, Mitchell B, Mohammad J, Cantrell K, Pittman CU Jr (2008) Pyrolysis of wood and bark in an auger reactor: physical properties and chemical analysis of the produced bio-oils. Energy Fuel 22:614–625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Irmak AD, Parthasarathy P, Goldfarb JL, Ceylan S (2017) Pyrolysis reaction models of waste tires: application of Master-Plots method for energy conversion via devolatilization. Waste Manag 68:405–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kissinger HE (1956) Variation of peak temperature with heating rate in differential thermal analysis. J Res Nat Bur Stand 57:217–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kissinger HE (1957) Reaction kinetics in differential thermal analysis. Anal Chem 29:1702–1706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Li D, Berruti F, Briens C (2014a) Autothermal fast pyrolysis of birch bark with partial oxidation in a fluidized bed reactor. Fuel 121:27–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Li KY, Huang X, Fleischmann C, Rein G, Ji J (2014b) Pyrolysis of medium-density fiberboard: optimized search for kinetics scheme and parameters via a genetic algorithm driven by Kissinger’s method. Energy Fuel 28:6130–6139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Liu Q, Wang S, Zheng Y, Luo Z, Cen K (2008) Mechanism study of wood lignin pyrolysis by using TG–FTIR analysis. J Anal Appl Pyrol 82:170–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Liu C, Liu X, Bi XT, Liu Y, Wang C (2011) Influence of inorganic additives on pyrolysis of pine bark. Energy Fuel 25:1996–2003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Liu X, Chen M, Wei Y (2015) Kinetics based on two-stage scheme for co-combustion of herbaceous biomass and bituminous coal. Fuel 143:577–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Liu H, Wang C, Zhao W, Yang S, Hou X (2017) Pyrolysis characteristics and kinetic modeling of Artemisia apiacea by thermogravimetric analysis. J Therm Anal Calorim 131:1–10Google Scholar
  25. Mao G, Huang N, Chen L, Wang H (2018) Research on biomass energy and environment from the past to the future: a bibliometric analysis. Sci Total Environ 635:1081–1090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Martín-Lara MA, Blázquez G, Ronda A, Calero M (2016) Kinetic study of the pyrolysis of pine cone shell through non-isothermal thermogravimetry: effect of heavy metals incorporated by biosorption. Renew Energy 96:613–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Martín-Lara MA, Blázquez G, Zamora MC, Calero M (2017) Kinetic modelling of torrefaction of olive tree pruning. Appl Therm Eng 113:1410–1418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mishra G, Bhaskar T (2014) Non isothermal model free kinetics for pyrolysis of rice straw. Bioresour Technol 169:614–621CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ozawa T (1965) A new method of analyzing thermogravimetric data. Bull Chem Soc Jpn 38:1881–1886CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pandey KK, Pitman AJ (2003) FTIR studies of the changes in wood chemistry following decay by brown-rot and white-rot fungi. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 52:151–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Şensöz S (2003) Slow pyrolysis of wood barks from Pinus brutia Ten. and product compositions. Bioresour Technol 89:307–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Slopiecka K, Bartocci P, Fantozzi F (2012) Thermogravimetric analysis and kinetic study of poplar wood pyrolysis. Appl Energy 97:491–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Tumbalam GA, Li D, Briens C, Berruti F (2014) Fractional condensation of bio-oil vapors produced from birch bark pyrolysis. Sep Purif Technol 124:81–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wei Y, Chen M, Niu S, You X, Xue F (2016) Evaluation on oxy-fuel co-combustion behavior of Chinese lignite and eucalyptus bark. J Therm Anal Calorim 123:1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. White JE, Catallo WJ, Legendre BL (2011) Biomass pyrolysis kinetics: a comparative critical review with relevant agricultural residue case studies. J Anal Appl Pyrol 91:1–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Yang HP, Yan R, Terence C, David TL, Chen HP, Zheng CG (2004) Thermogravimetric analysis—Fourier transform infrared analysis of palm oil waste pyrolysis. Energy Fuels 18:1814–1821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Yang HP, Yan R, Chen H, Lee DH, Zheng C (2007) Characteristics of hemicellulose, cellulose and lignin pyrolysis. Fuel 86:1781–1788CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Yang JL, Chen HX, Zhao WT, Zhou JJ (2016) TG-FTIR-MS study of pyrolysis products evolving from peat. J Anal Appl Pyrol 117:296–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Yao F, Wu Q, Lei Y, Guo W, Xu Y (2008) Thermal decomposition kinetics of natural fibers: activation energy with dynamic thermogravimetric analysis. Polym Degrad Stabil 93:90–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Civil EngineeringHefei University of TechnologyHefeiPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.School of Materials and Chemical EngineeringAnhui Jianzhu UniversityHefeiPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.Beijing Qidian Agricultural Technology LtdBeijingPeople’s Republic of China
  4. 4.College of Environment and ResourcesFuzhou UniversityFuzhouPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations