Kernthema der Dissertation ist die Weiterentwicklung von Kohle-Online-Messtechniken zur kontinuierlichen Bestimmung, das Brennstoffverhalten in Kraftwerkskesseln beeinflussender anorganischer Kohleinhaltsstoffe im Rheinischen Braunkohlerevier, die geologisch bedingt, natürlichen Schwankungen unterliegen. Im Rahmen dieses Vorhabens wurden die Gammastrahlenabsorptionsverfahren zur Aschegehaltsbestimmung und die Prompte-Gamma-Neutronen-Aktivierungs-Analyse (PGNAA) zur Multielement-Analyse als innovative Messmethoden zur Analyse des gesamten Kohlestroms auf Förderbandanlagen identifiziert, deren Eignung im Rahmen von Voruntersuchungen bestätigt, betrieblich eingeführt und unter Praxisbedingungen optimiert. Dabei wurde die Wechselwirkung zwischen Gamma- und Neutronenstrahlung unterschiedlicher Energien mit Braunkohlen und Fördergurten unterschiedlicher Eigenschaften sowie Einflüsse variierender homogener und inhomogener Elementzusammensetzungen bei verschiedenen Messsystemanordnungen und Förderleistungen auf die Messergebnisse systematisch erfasst und für die Versuchsanlagen in der betrieblichen Praxis umgesetzt. Die Gamma-Absorptionsmethode ist im betrieblichen Einsatz, die Erprobung der PGNAA-Prototypanlage steht bevor.:1 Hintergrund und Motivation 5 1.1 Belagsbildungen bei der Verbrennung von Braunkohlen in Dampferzeugern 5 1.2 Bildungsbedingungen von Schmelzphasen in Mehrstoffsystemen 6 1.3 Methoden zur Bewertung des Ansatzbildungspotenzials 9 1.4 Geologie des Rheinischen Braunkohlenreviers 9 1.4.1 Tektonische Vorgeschichte der Niederrheinischen Bucht 9 1.4.2 Stratigrafischer und lithologischer Überblick des Rheinischen Braunkohlenreviers 11 1.5 Lagerstätten des Rheinischen Braunkohlenreviers 14 1.5.1 Tagebau Garzweiler 14 1.5.2 Tagebau Hambach 15 1.5.3 Tagebau Inden 16 1.6 Kohlesortenkonzept des Rheinischen Braunkohlenreviers 17 2 Ziel der Arbeit 21 3 Stand von Wissenschaft und Kohle-Online-Messtechnik 22 3.1 Röntgenfluoreszenzanalyse (RFA) 22 3.2 Laser-induzierte-Plasma-Spektroskopie (LIPS) 23 3.3 Gammastrahlenabsorption 24 3.4 Prompte-Gamma-Neutronen-Aktivierungsanalyse 28 3.5 Eingesetzte Messtechniken im Rheinischen Revier 30 4 Anforderungen an Kohle-Online-Messtechniken 31 4.1 Revierweite Anforderungen an Kohle-Online-Messtechniken 31 4.2 Anforderungen an Kohle-Online-Messtechniken zur Aschegehaltsbestimmung 31 4.3 Standortspezifische Anforderungen an Kohle-Online-Messtechniken 32 5 Arbeits- und Versuchsprogramm 33 5.1 Radiometrische Aschegehaltsbestimmung mittels Gammastrahlenabsorption 33 5.2 Prompte Gamma-Neutronen-Aktivierungsanalyse (PGNAA) 36 6 Versuchsergebnisse und Diskussion 41 6.1 Radiometrische Aschegehaltsbestimmung mittels Gammastrahlenabsorption 41 6.1.1 Vorversuche mit einer Americiumquelle (Am-241) am Teilstrom (Firma Berthold) 41 6.1.2 Gammastrahlenabsorption eines stahlarmierten Fördergurts 46 6.1.3 Anlagengeometrie der betrieblichen Versuchsanlagen 57 6.1.4 Vollständige Erfassung der Bandbelegung (Detektorgeometrie) 59 6.1.5 Auswirkungen der Elementverteilungen auf die Gammastrahlenabsorption 60 6.1.6 Fehlerbetrachtungen der Gammastrahlenabsorption und Optimierungsansätze 66 6.1.7 Probennahme-Techniken für Referenzwerte der Kalibrierung 68 6.1.8 Anlagen-Kalibrierung für unterschiedliche Aschegehalte 75 6.1.9 Anlagen-Kalibrierung bei unterschiedlichen Förderleistungen 76 6.1.10 Langzeitversuche zu Lagerstättendaten und weiteren Analysetechniken 77 6.1.11 Zusammenfassung der Ergebnisse 81 6.2 Prompte Gamma-Neutronen-Aktivierungsanalyse (PGNAA) 83 6.2.1 Testmessungen mittels MEDINA-Anlage am Forschungszentrum Jülich (FZJ) 83 6.2.2 Simulationsrechnungen für heterogen verteilte Sandfrachten am FZJ 95 6.2.3 Testmessungen mittels Coalscan-Anlage bei der Firma Scantech (Australien) 99 6.2.4 Zusammenfassung der Ergebnisse 105 7 Schlussfolgerungen und Fazit 106 7.1 Radiometrische Aschegehaltsbestimmung mittels Gammastrahlenabsorption 106 7.2 Prompte Gamma-Neutronen-Aktivierungsanalyse (PGNAA) 107 8 Ausblick 108 8.1 Radiometrische Aschegehaltsbestimmung mittels Gammastrahlenabsorption 108 8.2 Prompte Gamma-Neutronen-Aktivierungsanalyse (PGNAA) 109 9 Abbildungsverzeichnis 111 10 Tabellenverzeichnis 118 11 Abkürzungsverzeichnis 120 12 Literaturverzeichnis 123 13 Anhang 126

The design and optimization of entrained flow gasifiers is conducted more and more via computational fluid dynamics (CFD). A detailed resolution of single coal particles within such simulations is nowadays not possible due to computational limitations. Therefore the coal particle conversion is often represented by simple 0-D models. For an optimization of such 0-D models a precise understanding of the physical processes at the boundary layer and within the particle is necessary. In real gasifiers the particles experience Reynolds numbers up to 10000. However in the literature the conversion of coal particles is mainly regarded under quiescent conditions. Therefore an analysis of the conversion of single particles is needed. Thereto the computational fluid dynamics can be used. For the detailed analysis of single reacting particles under flow conditions a CFD model is presented. Practice-oriented parameters as well as features of the CFD model result from CFD simulations of a Siemens 200MWentrained flow gasifier. The CFD model is validated against an analytical model as well as two experimental data-sets taken from the literature. In all cases good agreement between the CFD and the analytics/experiments is shown. The numerical model is used to study single moving solid particles under combustion conditions. The analyzed parameters are namely the Reynolds number, the ambient temperature, the particle size, the operating pressure, the particle shape, the coal type and the composition of the gas. It is shown that for a wide range of the analyzed parameter range no complete flame exists around moving particles. This is in contrast to observations made by other authors for particles in quiescent atmospheres. For high operating pressures, low Reynolds numbers, large particle diameters and high ambient temperatures a flame exists in the wake of the particle. The impact of such a flame on the conversion of the particle is low. For high steam concentrations in the gas a flame appears, which interacts with the particle and influences its conversion. Furthermore the impact of the Stefan-flow on the boundary layer of the particle is studied. It is demonstrated that the Stefan-flow can reduce the drag coefficient and the Nusselt number for several orders of magnitude. On basis of the CFD results two new correlations are presented for the drag coefficient and the Nusselt number. The comparison between the correlations and the CFD shows a significant improvement of the new correlations in comparison to archived correlations. The CFD-model is further used to study moving single porous particles under gasifying conditions. Therefore a 2-D axis-symmetric system of non-touching tori as well as a complex 3-D geometry based on the an inverted settlement of monodisperse spheres is utilized. With these geometries the influence of the Reynolds number, the ambient temperature, the porosity, the intrinsic surface and the size of the radiating surface is analyzed. The studies show, that the influence of the flow on the particle conversion is moderate. In particular the impact of the flow on the intrinsic transport and conversion processes is mainly negligible. The size of the radiating surface has a similar impact on the conversion as the flow in the regarded parameter range. On basis of the CFD calculations two 0-D models for the combustion and gasification of moving particles are presented. These models can reproduce the results predicted by the CFD sufficiently for a wide parameter range.

Mining operations produce a multiscale network of fractures in the coal seams. Permeability evolution in rocks is important for coal bed methane (CBM) and shale gas exploitation as well as for greenhouse gas storage. Therefore, this work presents laboratory tests and a coupled model using PFC3D and FLAC3D to simulate the stress induced permeability evolution in coal samples. Basic mechanical properties are determined via lab testing. The spatial distributions of different components inside the reconstructed samples produce a significant heterogeneity based on CT technique. A newly developed experimental system is employed to perform 3-dimensional loading and to measure the flow rate simultaneously. The evolution process is described by 5 distinct phases in terms of permeability and deformation. Triaxial tests are simulated with PFC3D using a novel flexible wall boundary method. Gas seepage simulations are performed with FLAC3D. Relations between hydraulic properties and fracture data are established. Permeability and volumetric strain show good nonlinear exponential relation after a newly introduced expansion point. Piecewise relations fit the whole process, the expansion point can be treated as critical point. The structural characteristics of the samples influence this relation before and after the expansion point significantly.

The design and optimization of entrained flow gasifiers is conducted more and more via computational fluid dynamics (CFD). A detailed resolution of single coal particles within such simulations is nowadays not possible due to computational limitations. Therefore the coal particle conversion is often represented by simple 0-D models. For an optimization of such 0-D models a precise understanding of the physical processes at the boundary layer and within the particle is necessary. In real gasifiers the particles experience Reynolds numbers up to 10000. However in the literature the conversion of coal particles is mainly regarded under quiescent conditions. Therefore an analysis of the conversion of single particles is needed. Thereto the computational fluid dynamics can be used. For the detailed analysis of single reacting particles under flow conditions a CFD model is presented. Practice-oriented parameters as well as features of the CFD model result from CFD simulations of a Siemens 200MWentrained flow gasifier. The CFD model is validated against an analytical model as well as two experimental data-sets taken from the literature. In all cases good agreement between the CFD and the analytics/experiments is shown. The numerical model is used to study single moving solid particles under combustion conditions. The analyzed parameters are namely the Reynolds number, the ambient temperature, the particle size, the operating pressure, the particle shape, the coal type and the composition of the gas. It is shown that for a wide range of the analyzed parameter range no complete flame exists around moving particles. This is in contrast to observations made by other authors for particles in quiescent atmospheres. For high operating pressures, low Reynolds numbers, large particle diameters and high ambient temperatures a flame exists in the wake of the particle. The impact of such a flame on the conversion of the particle is low. For high steam concentrations in the gas a flame appears, which interacts with the particle and influences its conversion. Furthermore the impact of the Stefan-flow on the boundary layer of the particle is studied. It is demonstrated that the Stefan-flow can reduce the drag coefficient and the Nusselt number for several orders of magnitude. On basis of the CFD results two new correlations are presented for the drag coefficient and the Nusselt number. The comparison between the correlations and the CFD shows a significant improvement of the new correlations in comparison to archived correlations. The CFD-model is further used to study moving single porous particles under gasifying conditions. Therefore a 2-D axis-symmetric system of non-touching tori as well as a complex 3-D geometry based on the an inverted settlement of monodisperse spheres is utilized. With these geometries the influence of the Reynolds number, the ambient temperature, the porosity, the intrinsic surface and the size of the radiating surface is analyzed. The studies show, that the influence of the flow on the particle conversion is moderate. In particular the impact of the flow on the intrinsic transport and conversion processes is mainly negligible. The size of the radiating surface has a similar impact on the conversion as the flow in the regarded parameter range. On basis of the CFD calculations two 0-D models for the combustion and gasification of moving particles are presented. These models can reproduce the results predicted by the CFD sufficiently for a wide parameter range.:List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IX List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .XIII Nomenclature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XV Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XIX 1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 1.1 State of the Art in Carbon Conversion Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1.1 Combustion of Solid Particles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1.2 Gasification of Porous Particles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1.2 Classification of the Present Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 1.3 Overview of the Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 2 Basic Theory and Model Formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.1 Geometry and Length Scales of Coal Particles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 2.2 Conditions in a Siemens Like 200 MW Entrained Flow Gasifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2.2.1 Velocity Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 2.2.2 Temperature Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 2.2.3 Particle Volume Fraction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19 2.3 Time Scales of the Physical Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 2.4 Basic Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21 2.5 Conservation Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 2.6 Gas Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 2.7 Boundary Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 2.8 Numerics and Solution Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 2.9 Mesh and Domain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31 3 CFD-based Oxidation Modeling of a Non-Porous Carbon Particle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37 3.1 Chemical Reaction System for Combustion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37 3.1.1 Heterogeneous Reactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37 3.1.2 Homogeneous Reactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40 3.1.3 Comparison of the Semi-Global vs. Reduced Reaction Mechanisms for the Gas Phase . .41 3.2 Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43 3.2.1 Validation Against an Analytical Solution of the Two-Film Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43 3.2.2 Validation Against Experiments I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 3.2.3 Validation Against Experiments II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49 3.3 Influence of Ambient Temperature and Reynolds Number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51 3.4 Influence of Heterogeneous Kinetics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 3.5 Influence of Atmosphere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61 3.6 Influence of Operating Pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66 3.7 Influence of Particle Diameter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .70 3.8 The influence of Particle Shape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 3.9 Impact of Stefan Flow on the Boundary Layer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 3.9.1 Impact of Stefan Flow on the Drag Coefficient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .83 3.9.2 Impact of Stefan Flow on the Nusselt and Sherwood Number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .85 3.10 Single-Film Sub-Model vs. CFD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 3.11 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 4 CFD-based Numerical Modeling of Partial Oxidation of a Porous Carbon Particle . . . . . . . . . .99 4.1 Chemical Reaction System for Gasification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 4.1.1 Heterogeneous Chemistry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .100 4.1.2 Homogeneous Chemistry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 4.2 Two-Dimensional Simulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 4.2.1 Geometry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 4.2.2 Influence of Reynolds Number and Ambient Temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .109 4.2.3 Influence of Porosity and Internal Surface . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 4.3 Comparative Three-Dimensional Simulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126 4.3.1 Geometry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .126 4.3.2 Results of the 3-D Calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 4.4 Extended Sub-Model for Gasification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .133 4.5 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .138 5 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .141 5.1 Summary of This Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .141 5.2 Recommendations for Future Works . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .145 6 Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 6.1 Appendix I: Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 6.2 Appendix II: Two-Film Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 6.3 Appendix III: Sub-Model for the Combustion of Solid Particles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 6.4 Appendix IV: Sub-Model for the Gasification of Porous Particles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161