Modeling of a Single-Tube Steam Methane Reformer: Choice Between Flue Gas Heating and Infrared Burner | Sciact - CRIS-система Института катализа

Modeling of a Single-Tube Steam Methane Reformer: Choice Between Flue Gas Heating and Infrared Burner Научная публикация

Журнал

Petroleum Chemistry
ISSN: 0965-5441 , E-ISSN: 1531-8532

Вых. Данные

Год: 2024, Том: 64, Номер: 11, Страницы: 1286–1299 Страниц : 14 DOI: 10.1134/S0965544124080127

Ключевые слова

steam methane reforming, reformer, heat transfer, infrared burner, mathematical modeling

Авторы

Shigarov A.B. ¹ , Potemkin D.I. ¹

Организации

1	Boreskov Institute of Catalysis, Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, Novosibirsk, 630090 Russia

Информация о финансировании (1)

Российский научный фонд

24-73-10134

The article provides a comparative assessment of two design cases of heat input for a compact single-tube steam methane reformer operating at 10 bar and a feed flow rate of 1–3 Nm3/h, filled with a granulated nickel catalyst, and equipped with a 5–15 kW propane–butane burner. In the first design case, the catalyst-filled tube was heated with a flue gas as it was injected from the flame burner (at an excess air ratio of 2.3) through an annular channel that enclosed the tube. In the second design case, the heat was provided by a cylindrical IR burner panel (at an excess air ratio of 1.05) that enclosed the tube. Using mathematical modeling, the performance of both reformer cases was compared, with all other parameters being equal. The IR-burner-based reformer exceeded its flue-gas-heated counterpart in terms of methane conversion, heat recovery efficiency (about twofold for both parameters), the percentage of radiant heat transfer (by a factor of about 2.3), and fuel enthalpy increase (6–7% higher in the second case). When the operating load was tripled, the reformer integrated with the IR burner exhibited a lesser performance drop (regarding all the parameters mentioned above) than the conventionally heated reformer (in particular, the methane conversion declined by 8% in the second design case and by 18% in the first). The parametric calculations based on the permeable burner panel model showed that a Peclet number greater than five (Pe > 5) was able to prevent the panel inlet surface from heating to an extent that could otherwise cause emergency autoignition of the fuel–air mixture at the panel inlet.

Shigarov A.B. , Potemkin D.I.
Modeling of a Single-Tube Steam Methane Reformer: Choice Between Flue Gas Heating and Infrared Burner
Petroleum Chemistry. 2024. V.64. N11. P.1286–1299. DOI: 10.1134/S0965544124080127 WOS

Поступила в редакцию:	14 сент. 2024 г.
Опубликована в печати:	1 дек. 2024 г.
Принята к публикации:	10 дек. 2024 г.
Опубликована online:	9 февр. 2025 г.

Web of science:

WOS:001416938900001

Пока нет цитирований