| Literature DB >> 30441873 |
Diego Barba1, Mauro Capocelli2, Marcello De Falco3, Giovanni Franchi4, Vincenzo Piemonte5.
Abstract
Hydrogen is a promising energy carrier, and is exploitable to extract energy from fossil fuels, biomasses, and intermittent renewable energy sources and its generation from fossil fuels, with CO₂ separation at the source being one of the most promising pathways for fossil fuels' utilization. This work focuses on a particular configuration called the Reformer and Membrane Module (RMM), which alternates between stages of Steam Reforming (SR) reactions with H₂ separation stages to overcome the thermodynamic limit of the conventional SR. The configuration has numerous advantages with respect to the more widely studied and tested membrane reactors, and has been tested during a pilot-scale research project. Although numerous modelling works appeared in the literature, the design features of the material exchanger (in the so-called RMM architecture) of different geometrical configurations have not been developed, and the mass transfer correlations, capable of providing design tools useful for such membrane modules, are not available. The purpose of this work is therefore to apply a physical-mathematical model of the mass transfer, in three different geometries, considering both concentration polarization and membrane permeation, in order to: (i) simulate the cited experimental results; (ii) estimate the scaling-up correlations for the "material exchange modules"; and (iii) identify the mass transfer limiting regime in relation to the gas mass flow rate.Entities:
Keywords: concentration polarization; experimental data; palladium membranes; physical-mathematical modelling; steam reforming
Year: 2018 PMID: 30441873 PMCID: PMC6315792 DOI: 10.3390/membranes8040109
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Membranes (Basel) ISSN: 2077-0375
Figure 1Overall view of the Pilot Plant [21].
Figure 2Simplified process scheme of the Pilot Plant, including two reactors and two membrane modules.
Characteristics of the experimental apparatus and operative conditions.
| Geometrical Features | Membrane Modules | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| M-01 | M-02 | M-03 | |
| IDS, in | 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Nm | 13 | 5 | 3 |
| ODt, mm | 14 | - | 30 |
| δ, μm | 2.5 | 25 | 2.5 |
| L, cm | 69 | 30 × 2 | 45 |
| AToT, m2 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 0.13 |
| T, °C | 408–438 | 402–424 | 397–455 |
| PR, bar | 11–11.5 | 11.5 | 11 |
| PP, bar | 1.4–1.6 | 1.4 | 1.3 |
| W, kg·h−1 | 29–46.4 | 29–46.4 | 29–46.4 |
| F, kmol·h−1 | 1.9–3.1 | 1.9–3.1 | 1.9–3.1 |
| 20.2 | 17.8 | 17.8 | |
| 1.69 × 10−4 | 2.67 × 10−4 | 2.67 × 10−4 | |
Figure 3Photography of the membrane modules: (a) tubular M-01; (b) Flat Plates M-02; (c) tubular module M-03.
Figure 4Reference scheme of the Material Exchanger for the mathematical model.
Figure 5Schematic of the Film Theory considered for the flux characterization.
Parameters and dimensionless numbers in relation to the module characteristics.
| Variables | Tubular Membrane (M-01, M-02) | Flat Plat Module (M-03) |
|---|---|---|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
Figure 6Complete report of a single set of experiments obtained at a fixed flow rate of natural gas (NG) and a single membrane arrangement (M-01). Averaged results from the other experiments are synthesized in Table 3, Table 4 and Table 5.
Experimental tests: Mean composition and operative conditions of M-01.
| Parameter | Unit | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IN | OUT | IN | OUT | IN | OUT | IN | OUT | IN | OUT | ||
| F | kmol·h−1 | 1.94 | 1.74 | 2.10 | 1.91 | 2.30 | 2.12 | 2.57 | 2.34 | 3.06 | 2.78 |
| H2O | mol % | 56 | 60 | 54 | 58 | 57 | 61 | 57 | 62 | 57 | 62 |
| CO | mol % | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| CO2 | mol % | 6 | 7 | 6 | 7 | 6 | 7 | 6 | 7 | 6 | 7 |
| CH4 | mol % | 8 | 9 | 11 | 13 | 8 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 9 | 10 |
| H2 | mol % | 29 | 22 | 28 | 21 | 28 | 22 | 27 | 20 | 27 | 20 |
| HRF | % | 32 | 32 | 28 | 32 | 33 | |||||
|
| kmol·h−1·m−2 | 0.471 | 0.480 | 0.491 | 0.513 | 0.712 | |||||
|
| kmol·h−1·m−2·bar0.5 | 1.92 | 2.13 | 2.01 | 2.10 | 2.16 | |||||
Experimental tests: Mean composition and operative conditions of M-02.
| Parameter | Unit | 1 | 2 | 3 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IN | OUT | IN | OUT | IN | OUT | ||
| F | kmol·h−1 | 1.94 | 1.81 | 2.31 | 2.15 | 3.06 | 2.89 |
| H2O | mol % | 56 | 58 | 56 | 60 | 57 | 60 |
| CO | mol % | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| CO2 | mol % | 6 | 7 | 6 | 7 | 6 | 6 |
| CH4 | mol % | 8 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 |
| H2 | mol % | 29 | 24 | 28 | 23 | 27 | 23 |
| HRF | % | 23 | 24 | 20 | |||
|
| kmol·h−1·m−2 | 0.209 | 0.218 | 0.239 | |||
|
| kmol·h−1·m−2·bar0.5 | 0.21 | 0.22 | 0.24 | |||
Experimental tests: Mean composition and operative conditions of M-03.
| Parameter | Unit | 1 | 2 | 3 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IN | OUT | IN | OUT | IN | OUT | ||
| F | kmol·h–1 | 1.82 | 1.80 | 2.23 | 2.20 | 2.84 | 2.80 |
| H2O | mol % | 54 | 55 | 55 | 56 | 56 | 57 |
| CO | mol % | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| CO2 | mol % | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 |
| CH4 | mol % | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 |
| H2 | mol % | 29 | 28 | 28 | 27 | 28 | 27 |
| HRF | % | 3 | 4 | 5 | |||
|
| kmol·h−1·m−2 | 0.175 | 0.230 | 0.326 | |||
|
| kmol·h−1·m−2·bar0.5 | 4.97 | 4.93 | 5.47 | |||
Figure 7Mass transfer function of the Reynolds number.
Figure 8JD vs. Re.
Figure 9Parity plot of gas composition (molar fraction) for the whole experimental campaign.
Figure 10Effect of the Reynolds number on the mass transfer resistance in the gas phase and through the membrane.