Full Thesis - SM6 2

DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF A BIOMASS GASIFICATION-BASED
OFF-THE-GRID STORAGE AND PROCESSING UNIT FOR PERISHABLES
A Thesis
Presented to
The Academic Faculty
by
Sunil
1921ME01
Under the guidance of
Prof. Rishi Raj
and
Prof. Ajay D. Thakur
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the
Doctorate Degree
Indian Institute of Technology Patna

April 2024
Copyright ©2024 by IIT PATNA WHICH ALSO INCLUDES

SUNIL, RISHI RAJ, AJAY D. THAKUR
i
The page has been left blank intentionally.
ii
DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF A BIOMASS GASIFICATION-
BASED OFF-THE-GRID STORAGE AND PROCESSING UNIT
FOR PERISHABLES
Approved by:
Dr. Rishi Raj Dr. Ajay D. Thakur
Supervisor Supervisor
Department of Mechanical Engineering Department of Physics
Indian Institute of Technology Patna Indian Institute of Technology Patna
Dr. Mayank Tiwari
Doctoral Committee Chairman

Department of Mechanical Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Patna
Dr. Mohd. Kaleem Khan Dr. Anoop Kumar Gupta
Doctoral Committee Member Doctoral Committee Member

Department of Mechanical Engineering Department of Chemical and
Biochemical Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Patna Indian Institute of Technology Patna
Date approved: April 27th, 2024
i
ii
Dedicated to My Family
iii
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I am immensely grateful to my esteemed supervisors and research

companions, Prof. Rishi Raj and Prof. Ajay D Thakur. Their unwavering
dedication, integrity, and passion for tackling research challenges have
shaped me into a diligent researcher.
I extend my sincere appreciation to Prof. Manabendra Pathak, Prof. Mohd.

Kaleem Khan, and Prof. Anoop Kumar Gupta for their invaluable guidance
and insightful suggestions during my tenure at IIT Patna.
I am indebted to the Science and Engineering Research Board (SERB),

Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD) and Department of
Science and Technology (DST), Government of India, for their generous
funding provided under IMPRINT-IIA project (IMP/2018/000321), Uchhatar
Avishkar Yojana (UAY) project and a project under Water Technology
Initiative (WTI) scheme (DST/TMD-EWO/WTI/2K19/EWFH/2019/195). Further
appreciation is extended to the industry partner New Leaf Dynamic
Technologies Pvt Ltd. (Especially Mr. Anurag Agarwal and Mr. R G Sahoo)
whose financial backing and time-to-time guidance contributed in shaping me
into a diligent researcher.
I consider myself fortunate to have shared a common lab with the esteemed
members of the Thermal and Fluid Transport Laboratory (TFTL), including
Qaisar, Durga, Chaitanya, Nirbhay, Madhu, Alok, Nishant, Rahul, Avinash,
Rajnish and Tonmoy, whose camaraderie made my Ph.D. journey delightful
and memorable. I extend special thanks to Rahul, Abhash, Birendra, Anant,
Shreyas, Veer, and Priyanka for their invaluable assistance during setup
fabrication, experimentation, and engaging discussions. I also thank all the
faculty and staff members of the Department of Mechanical Engineering and
Dr. N. Kumutha from the Department of Civil and Environment Engineering for
their support and assistance.
Lastly, I am deeply thankful to my parents, brother, and Dr. JK for their

unwavering love and support throughout my Ph.D. journey.
5
SUNIL
6
INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY PATNA
DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
Bihta, Patna - 801106, Bihar, INDIA
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the thesis entitled “DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF A

BIOMASS GASIFICATION BASED OFF-THE-GRID STORAGE AND
PROCESSING UNIT FOR PERISHABLES”, submitted by SUNIL, to the
Indian Institute of Technology Patna, is a record of bonafide research work
under my supervision and I consider it worthy of consideration for the degree
of Doctor of Philosophy of the Institute.
Dr. Rishi Raj

Supervisor
Associate Professor
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Patna, 801106 Date: _________
Dr. Ajay Thakur

Supervisor
Associate Professor
Department of Physics
Indian Institute of Technology Patna, 801106 Date: _________
7
8
DECLARATION
I certify that,
a) The work contained in this thesis is original and has been done by
myself under the general supervision of my supervisors.
b) The work has not been submitted to any other institute for a degree or
diploma.
c) I have followed the Institute norms and guidelines & abide by the
regulation as given in the ethical code of conduct of the Institute.
d) Whenever I have used materials (data, theory, and text) from other
sources, I have given due credit to them by citing them in the text of the
thesis and giving their details in the reference section.
SUNIL
9
10
LIST OF PUBLICATIONS FROM THE THESIS
Journals:
1. Sunil, Sinha, R., Chaitanya, B., Rajan, B. K., Agarwal, A., Thakur, A.
D., and Raj, R., 2019. “Design, fabrication, and performance evaluation
of a novel biomass-gasification-based hot water generation system,”
Energy, 185, pp.148-157. (related to Chapter 3)
2. Sunil, Agarwal, A., Thakur, A. D., and Raj, R., 2024, “Demonstration of
Long-Term Cyclic Sorption of Ammonia in Modified Expanded
Graphite-Calcium Chloride Composites for Practical Applications,”
International Communications in Heat and mass Transfer, 115,107206.
(related to Chapter 4)
3. Sinha, R.*, Sunil*, Agarwal, A., Thakur, A. D., and Raj, R., 2024, “All-
Season Off-the-grid Storage and Processing Unit for Perishables with
an Independent Temperature and Humidity Control,” Biomass and
Bioenergy, 183, 107161 (*Equal Contribution). (related to Chapter 5)
Patents:
1. Sunil, Raj, R., Thakur, A.D., Ranjan, B.K., Chaitanya, B., Sinha, R.,
Agrawal, A. and Agrawal, A., 2022 “System and method for heat
recovery in gasification process,” Granted with Indian Patent Office,
Patent Number: 390902, Date of Grant – 1 March 2022.
2. Sunil, Sinha, R., Raj, R., Thakur, Shukla A., and Agrawal, A., 2024,
“Apparatus and method for off-the-grid climate control,” Granted with
Indian Patent Office, Patent Number: 519459, Date of Grant – 5 March
2024.
Conferences:
1. Sunil, Agarwal, A., Thakur, A. D., and Raj, R., “High Cycle Sorption
Performance of Calcium Chloride Composite with Ammonia,” 27th
National and 5th International ISHMT-ASTFE Heat and Mass Transfer
Conference, IIT Patna, Patna-801103, India, December 14-17, 2023.
2. Sunil, Singh, V.B., Kumari, P., A., Thakur, A. D., and Raj, R., “Control
and Optimization of Gasification Process with Producer Gas
Recirculation,” 4th International Conference on Recent Advances in
Bioenergy Research (ICRABR23), Sardar Swaran Singh National
Institute of Bio-Energy (SSS-NIBE), Kapurthala, India, October 9-12,
2023.
11
12
3. Sunil, Sinha, R., Thakur, A. D., and Raj, R., “Biomass Gasification-
based Low Temperature Drying of Farm Perishables,” International
Virtual Conference on H 2 & CO 2 2022 (ICH2CO2’22), Indian Institute of
Science Education and Research Pune, India, November 17-19, 2022.
4. Sunil, Agarwal, A., Thakur, A. D., and Raj, R., “Comparison of High
Cycle Performance of Calcium Chloride Composites,” International
Chemical Engineering Conference 2022 (IChEC22), Indian Institute of
Technology Patna, Patna, India, November 12-13, 2022.
5. Sinha, R., Sunil, Thakur, A. D., and Raj, R., 2021, “Development of an
All-Season Off-the-Grid Climate Control Unit for Agricultural
Produce,” 26th National and 4th International ISHMT-ASTFE Heat and
Mass Transfer Conference, December 17-20, 2021.
13
14
Contents
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..................................................................................i
CERTIFICATE................................................................................................. iii
DECLARATION................................................................................................v
LIST OF PUBLICATIONS FROM THE THESIS..............................................vii
LIST OF FIGURES......................................................................................... xv
LIST OF TABLES...........................................................................................xxi
NOMENCLATURE........................................................................................xxv
ABSTRACT..................................................................................................xxix
CHAPTER 1..................................................................................................... 1
INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................1
1.1 Global Warming: An Environmental Threat............................................1
1.2 Biomass: A Carbon-neutral Energy Alternative......................................4
1.3 Biomass in Agricultural Fields: Issues and Opportunities.......................5
1.4 Farm Produce Wastage......................................................................8
1.5 Pathways from Biomass to Energy.........................................................9
1.6 Adsorption Refrigeration System..........................................................12
1.6.1 Types of Adsorption Processes.........................................................13
1.6.2 Basic Principle of Adsorption Refrigeration.......................................14
1.7. Motivation............................................................................................ 16
1.8. Research Objective..............................................................................17
1.9. Organization of the Thesis...................................................................17
CHAPTER 2................................................................................................... 21
LITERATURE SURVEY.................................................................................21
2.1 Introduction to Biomass........................................................................21
2.1.1 Proximate Analysis of Biomass.........................................................24
2.1.2 Ultimate Analysis of Biomass............................................................25
15
2.2 Thermochemical conversion of biomass...............................................26
2.2.1 Biomass Combustion.........................................................................26
2.2.2 Biomass Gasification.........................................................................33
2.3 Off-the-grid cold storage and processing units.....................................41
2.4 Features and Challenges with NH 3−CaCl 2 Adsorption Refrigeration

Systems......................................................................................................42
2.5 Concluding Remarks.............................................................................47
CHAPTER 3................................................................................................... 49
DEVELOPMENT OF A BIOMASS-GASIFICATION-BASED HOT WATER

GENERATION SYSTEM................................................................................49
3.1 Biomass gasifier-based hot water generator (version 1): BGHWG.......50
3.1.1 Biomass pretreatment and characterization......................................50
3.1.2 Gasifier Design..................................................................................53
3.1.3 Water Heater Design.........................................................................58
3.1.4 Performance evaluation.....................................................................59
3.2 Integrated gasifier hot water generator (version 2): IGHWG.................62
3.2.1 Design and Fabrication......................................................................63
3.2.2 Performance Evaluation....................................................................66
CHAPTER 4................................................................................................... 69
ASSESSMENT OF LONG-TERM VIABILITY OF NH 3−CaCl 2 COMPOSITES

....................................................................................................................... 69
4.1 Sample Preparation and Characterization............................................72
4.2 Lab-scale Sorption Test Rig..................................................................75
4.3 Long-term sorption performance and structural integrity......................80
4.4 Morphology and pore structure analysis...............................................84
CHAPTER 5................................................................................................... 89
16
DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF AN OFF-THE-GRID TEMPERATURE-
CONTROLLED UNIT......................................................................................89
5.1 Cooling Module.....................................................................................89
5.1.1 Methodology......................................................................................90
5.1.2 Performance Testing.........................................................................98
5.2 Heating module...................................................................................100
5.2.1 Geometry of off-the-shelf heat exchanger.......................................101
5.2.2 Heat transfer analysis......................................................................103
5.2.3 Integration and performance evaluation of the heating module.......116
5.3 Off-the-grid Temperature Control Unit................................................119
CHAPTER 6................................................................................................. 127
EXTENDING THE TURNDOWN RATIO OF THE DOWNDRAFT GASIFIER

..................................................................................................................... 127
6.1 Downdraft Gasifier with Producer Gas Recirculation..........................129
6.2 Setup for the capacity estimation of the downdraft gasifier.................131
6.3 Results and Discussion.......................................................................137
6.4 Concluding Remarks...........................................................................143
CHAPTER 7................................................................................................. 144
CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE SCOPE.....................................................144
7.1 Intellectual contributions and anticipated benefits...............................144
7.2 Directions for Future Research...........................................................151
ANNEXURE A..............................................................................................157
DIRECT COMBUSTION-BASED HOT WATER GENERATOR...................157
ANNEXURE B..............................................................................................161
DESIGN OF HELICAL COIL HEAT EXCHANGER AND PRODUCER GAS

BURNER...................................................................................................... 161
ANNEXURE C..............................................................................................169
17
SOLIDWORKSTM MODEL OF INTEGRATED GASIFIER HOT WATER
GENERATOR...............................................................................................169
ANNEXURE D..............................................................................................179
DESIGN OF NATURALLY ASPIRATED PRODUCER GAS BURNER AND

FLUE GAS TO WATER HEAT EXCHANGER..............................................179
BIBLIOGRAPHY...........................................................................................190
18
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure # Caption Page #
(a) Global energy consumption (year 2000-2050) by

Figure 1.1. sources of energy. (b) Country-wise energy 1
consumption of the top 10 countries (in 2022).
Error:
(a) Indian primary energy Demand (2000-2020). (b) Referen
Contribution of various energy sources to satisfy the ce
Figure 1.2.
energy demand in India. source
not
found
(a) Global CO 2 emissions with year (1960-2020). (b)

Figure 1.3. Change in global temperature over the years (1800-
2021).
Global renewable energy fraction and its segregation (in

Figure 1.4.
the year 2020).
Annual Biomass Potential (a) Top biomass producer

Figure 1.5.
Countries worldwide. (b) India.
District-wise details of crop residue in India (a) total crop
Figure 1.6. residue biomass generated (MT/year) (b) Bioenergy
potential of surplus crop residue (in PJ).
(a) Leading crop-burning states in India. (b) Emission of

Figure 1.7. different pollutants and GHGs due to field burning of
crop residue.
The schematic representation of biomass to energy
Figure 1.8. conversion pathways and the possible application
sectors.
The schematic representation of the adsorption and

Figure 1.9.
desorption process.
(a) Schematic representation of a double bed

Figure 1.10. adsorption refrigeration system. (b) Clapeyron
adsorption cycle.
The schematic representation of the cycle of biomass
Figure 2.1. energy.
19
Combustion and thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) of
biomass (wood). (a) Schematic representation of
Figure 2.2 biomass combustion processes. (b, c) Mass loss as a
function of time and temperature during the combustion
of wood.
Classification of fixed-bed combustion techniques in
Figure 2.3. biomass boilers. (a) Conventional air-staging, (b)
Advanced air-staging, and (c) Fuel-staging.
Schematic representation of biomass conversion in a
Figure 2.4. gasification reactor.
Classification of fixed bed gasifiers. (a) Updraft, (b)
Figure 2.5. Downdraft, (c) Crossdraft.
The trends of heating value and efficiency of the
Figure 2.6. downdraft gasifiers with equivalence ratio (ϕ ).
The comparison of biomass to thermal energy
Figure 2.7. pathways. (a) Direct combustion (b) Gasification. 40
Schematic of biomass gasification based cold storage

Figure 2.8.
and processing units.
(a) Equilibrium diagram for the sorption reactions of
calcium chloride and ammonia. (b) Issues with
Figure 2.9. NH 3−CaCl2 adsorption pair in adsorption refrigeration
systems.
Schematic of biomass gasification based hot water
Figure 3.1 generator with heating and cooling module.
The type of biomass feedstock and characterization
Figure 3.2 used in this study.
Design of the downdraft gasifier comprising: (a) Hopper,
Figure 3.3 (b) Gasifier core, (c) Biomass shaking mechanism, and
(d) Grate.
Heat transfer path with thermal resistance network in
Figure 3.4 BGHWG with insulation.
Variation of (a) the surface heat loss, (b) carbon steel
temperature, (c) the weight of the refractory, and (d) the
Figure 3.5 outer surface temperature of BGHWG plotted as a
function of refractory thickness and rockwool insulation
thickness.
Biomass gasification based HWG (BGHWG) with
physically separated gasifier and water heater units. (a)
Figure 3.6 Downdraft gasifier, (b) Traditional heat exchanger, and
(c) Physical set-up of BGHWG.
Comparison of different biomass gasification based hot
water generator. (a) Biomass gasification based hot
Figure 3.7 water generator (BGHWG), (b) Integrated gasifier hot
water generator concept (IGHWG).
20
Gasification based HWG with integrated gasifier and
Figure 3.8 water heater units. (a) Front view, (b) top view, and (c)
perspective view.
(a) Solidworks model of Integrated gasifier hot water
generator. (b) Working setup of IGHWG in the
Figure 3.9 Department of Mechanical Engineering at the Indian
Institute of Technology Patna, Bihar, India.
(a) Schematic of IGHWG (b) Temperatures at various
Figure 3.10 locations (reactor, burner, flue gas and water shell) of
IGHWG.
Comparison of biomass based hot water generator
(HWG). (a) Conventional direct combustion HWG, (b)
Figure 3.11 Biomass gasification based HWG (gasifier and heat
exchanger are separate entities) (c) Biomass gasifier
integrated HWG (IGHWG).
Schematic of proposed temperature control unit (TCU)
with heating and cooling module and the integrated
Figure 4.1
gasifier hot water generator as the central energy
provider.
SEM images of (a) Expandable graphite EnG flakes. (b)
Figure 4.2 Expanded graphite EG (worm-like structure)
(a) Steps for preparation of CaCl2−EG composite
Figure 4.3
sample. (b) Fin-tube geometry.
Heat-treated samples (A, B1−B3 ¿ with initial moisture
Figure 4.4 content (% by mass).
(a) Experimental set-up of customized constant volume
Figure 4.5 single fin-tube adsorption/desorption bed. (b) Top flange
assembly with fin-tube. (c) Test chamber.
(a) Arduino-UNO-based temperature measurement, i.e.,
test chamber (T bed), fin-tube water inlet (T w ,∈¿¿) and
Figure 4.6 water outlet (T w ,out ), and control system for hot and cold
circuit actuation. (b) Boiler temperature (T boiler) control
system.
Assessment of the long-term performance of sample A.
(a) Cyclic heating and cooling of composite material. (b)
Transient pressure Pbed , temperature T bed variation of the
chamber at the 2nd cycle (N≈ 2) and the 300th cycle (N≈
Figure 4.7 300). (c) Transient ammonia sorption quantity (∆ χ ) at
the 2nd cycle (N≈ 2) and 300th cycle (N≈ 300). (d)
Decrement of ammonia sorption quantity (∆ χ ) with the
number of cycles.
In-situ visualization of adsorbent material degradation of
Figure 4.8 sample A after various cycles.
In-situ visuals demonstrate the material degradation of
Figure 4.9 expanded graphite - CaCl2 composite samples
B1 , B2∧B3.
21
(a) Transient behavior of ammonia sorption quantity (∆ 𝜒
inkg NH 3 /kg of CaCl 2) at the 2nd cycle (start) and 300th
cycle for all samples (A, B1−B3). (b) The ammonia
Figure 4.10 sorption quantity (∆ χ inkg NH 3 /kg of CaCl 2) attenuation
trend with the number of cycles for all samples (A
, B1−B3).
Pore size distribution of initial material along with initial
and final composite samples A, B2 and B3. (a) Raw
Figure 4.11 materials, i.e. CaCl2, AC and EG (b) Sample A (c)
Sample B2 (d) Sample B3.
FESEM images of the initial and the final composite
samples A, B2 and B3. (a) Sample A after 0 cycles, (b)
Figure 4.12 Sample A after 307 cycles, (c) Sample B2 after 0
cycles, (d) Sample B2 after 450 cycles, (e) Sample B3
after 0 cycles, (f) Sample B3 after 803 cycles.
Schematic diagram of biomass gasification based
Figure 5.1 cooling module.
Off-the-shelf adsorption refrigeration system used to
Figure 5.2: test the composite sample. (a) Schematic Diagram. (b)
Photo of the adsorption beds.
Integration of Off-the-shelf adsorption refrigeration
Figure 5.3 system with hot and cold-water circuits.
Figure 5.4 Integration of cooling module with IGHWG.
The schematic of the hot bed along with the condenser

at the start and the end of the hot half-cycle (a) At the
start (0 min) and (b) end (15 min) of the hot half-cycle.
Figure 5.5 (c) The schematic of the full-scale refrigeration system
showing no change in liquid ammonia level inside the
condenser.
Pressure ( Pbed 1 ) and temperatures (T w ) of adsorber bed
Figure 5.6 1 for five consecutive cycles: (a) Initial cycles: 2-3rd
cycles; (b) Final cycles: 844-845th cycles.
Figure 5.7 Schematic of heating module with IGHWG.

Schematic of a typical fin and tube coil with coil
Figure 5.8 parameters
The air-to-water Fin-tube heat exchanger with blower
unit considered in this study. (a) Isometric view of the
Figure 5.9 coil. (b) Coil geometry. (c) The flow path circuit of air
(through fins) and water (in tube) inside the unit cell.
Algorithm of estimating the performance of the heat
Figure 5.10 exchanger of a specific geometry.
(a) Air flow over a bank of tube arranged in staggered
Figure 5.11
configuration. (b) Heat-transfer correlation for smooth
22
plate-fine-tube coils with four columns of tubes
Figure 5.12 Hexagonal fin with staggered tube array

Dissected view of the unit cell and the temperatures of
Figure 5.13 air and water in each pass of the unit cell.
Figure 5.14 Integration of heating module with IGHWG.
Figure 5.15 Experiments on heating coil.
Schematic of the biomass gasification powered

temperature control unit comprising: a) Biomass
Figure 5.16 gasification based hot water generator, b) Heating
module, c) Cooling module, d) Control unit and e)
Auxiliary power unit.
Physical setup of the off-the-grid temperature control
Figure 5.17
unit developed at IIT Patna.
Experiment with independent actuation of heating and

Figure 5.18
cooling module.
High temperature demonstration of temperature control

unit for the drying and processing of perishables (a)
Figure 5.19
Temperature variation in the chamber and ambient (b)
Relative humidity (RH) inside the chamber and ambient.
Low temperature demonstration of temperature control

unit for the drying and processing of perishables (a)
Figure 5.20
Temperature variation in the chamber and ambient (b)
Relative humidity (RH) inside the chamber and ambient.
(a) Convention downdraft gasifier. (b) Modified
Figure 6.1 downdraft gasifier with producer gas recirculation (PGR)
in combustion zone.
(a) CAD model (detail drawings listed in Annexure D)
Figure 6.2
and (b) Working model of the gasifier.
(a) CAD model of the naturally aspirated producer gas
burner in literature. (b) Design for better air mixing and
Figure 6.3 (c) CAD model of the modified burner. (d) Physical
image of burner.
(a) CAD model designed shell and tube heat
Figure 6.4
exchanger. (b) Picture of fabricated heat exchanger.
Figure 6.5 Experimental set up for capacity estimation of downdraft

gasifier. (a) Schematic. (b) CAD Model.
Figure 6.6 Image of the full experimental set up for the capacity
estimation of downdraft gasifier.
Figure 6.7 Transient plot of the experimental run at low
equivalence ratio ϕ ≈0.15 without (run 4) and with PGR
(run 5). (a,d) The gasifier reactor temperatures and
producer gas exit temperature. (b,e) The flame
temperature of burner and the flue gas exit temperature
from the heat exchanger. (c, f) Temperature of water in
23
and out of the heat exchanger.
Transient plot of the experimental run at very low
equivalence ratio ϕ ≈0.1 without (run 6) and with PGR
(run 7). (a,d) The gasifier reactor temperatures and
Figure 6.8 producer gas exit temperature. (b,e) The flame
temperature of burner and the flue gas exit temperature
from the heat exchanger. (c, f) Temperature of water in
and out of the heat exchanger.
Transient plot of the experimental run at equivalence
ratio ϕ ≈ 0.28 without PGR (run 1). (a) The gasifier
reactor temperatures and producer gas exit
Figure 6.8 temperature. (b) The flame temperature of burner and
the flue gas exit temperature from the heat exchanger.
(c) Temperature of water in and out of the heat
exchanger. (d) Comparison of minimum and maximum
output thermal capacity of the experimental runs.
The variation of output thermal capacity and efficiency
Figure 6.9 of the gasification based heating system with
equivalence ratio.
Comparison of biomass based hot water generator
(HWG). (a) Conventional direct combustion HWG, (b)
Figure 7.1 Biomass gasification based HWG (gasifier and heat
exchanger are separate entities) (c) Biomass gasifier
integrated HWG (IGHWG).
Figure 7.2 Hot water requirements for process industries.
Long-term sorption testing of calcium chloride

Figure 7.3 composites used in this thesis.
Off-the-grid temperature control unit (TCU) for the
Figure 7.4 storage and processing of perishables.
Benefits of gasification with producer gas recirculation
Figure 7.5 (PGR) over conventional gasification in a downdraft
gasifier.
The favorable storage conditions of various perishable
Figure 7.6
items on the psychrometric chart.
Schematic of the biomass gasification powered climate
control unit comprising: a) Biomass gasification based
Figure 7.7 hot water generator, b) Heating module, c) Cooling
module, d) Dehumidification module, e) Humidification
module, f) Control unit and g) Auxiliary power unit.
Figure 7.8 Actual picture of climate control unit.
24
LIST OF TABLES
Table # Caption Page #

Global warming potential (GWP) of HCFC and
Table 1.1. HFC refrigerants used in the Refrigeration and
cold-chain industry.
Cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin content range
Table 2.1. for different biomass sources (wt%).
A general comparison of biochemical and
Table 2.2. thermochemical processes.
Proximate analysis of some biomass feedstocks

Table 2.3.
(wt%).
Ultimate analyses for typical biomass materials
Table 2.4. (wt%).
Performance of various air-staging-based

Table 2.5.
biomass combustion boilers.
Particulate emissions from biomass direct

Table 2.6.
combustion boiler.
Table 2.7. Different chemical reactions occur within various

zones in a gasifier
Table 2.8. Composition of producer gas from commercial

wood gasifiers.
Performance of various capacity fixed bed
Table 2.9. biomass gasifiers.
Table 2.10. Gaseous and particulate emissions from biomass

gasification-based burners.
Performance of various renewable energy-based

Table 2.11.
off-the-grid cold storage units.
Ammonia Sorption reactions: equilibrium
Table 2.12. conditions and enthalpy of reactions.
Studies on various additives X and binders Y
Table 2.13. used with CaCl2−NH 3 adsorption pair.
List of instruments used in the preparation and
Table 3.1 characterization of biomass.
The proximate and ultimate analysis of the
Table 3.2 biomass feedstock used in this study.
25
Table 3.3 Adsorption-refrigeration system specifications and
requirements.
Design specifications and requirements of helical

Table 3.4
coil heat exchanger.
Table 3.5 Design values of Helical coil and burner.
Performance comparison between DCHWG,

Table 3.6
BGHWG and IGHWG.
Composite samples prepared using binder (white
Table 4.1 cement WC) and additives (Activated carbon AC
and Expanded graphite EG).
Adsorption characteristics of sample A during the
Table 4.2 2nd cycle ( N ≈ 2) and the 300th cycle ( N ≈ 300).
Sorption performance of samples ( A , B1−B3) for

Table 4.3 2nd cycle ( N ≈ 2) and the 300th cycle ( N ≈ 300).
Predicted stable sorption quantity ( χ 0 ) and

Table 4.4
constants (a, b) of all samples ( A , B1−B3).
BET analysis of the raw material and initial and
Table 4.5 final samples A , B 2∧B 3.
Technical specifications and requirements of off-

Table 5.1 the-shelf adsorption refrigerator
List of equipments/instruments used in the
Table 5.2 fabrication and instrumentation of the cooling
module.
Sorption performance of sorption bed initially (2 nd
Table 5.3 cycle) and after final cycle (at 845th cycle).
The performance comparison of the sample B3 in
Table 5.4 Adsorption Refrigeration System.
Dimensions of various off-the-shelf fin-tube
Table 5.5 heating fan coil units.
Common geometrical parameters of the unit cell
Table 5.6 of all the heat exchangers coils.
Table 5.7 Comparison of all coil for suitability for heating

module as per heating constraints.
Table 5.8 Specifications for Fin and Tube heating coil.
Table 5.9 Performance of fin and tube heating coil.

Components and technical specifications of the
Table 5.10 temperature controlled unit (TCU).
Technical specifications of 5 kW throat-less type
Table 6.1 downdraft gasifier with producer gas recirculation.
26
Specifications of Producer Gas Burner.
Table 6.2
Table 6.3 Specifications of Heat exchanger.
Details of the performance and emission

characteristics of the experimental runs at various
Table 6.4 air flow rate with and without producer gas
recirculation (PGR).
List of perishables with their favorable storage
Table 7.1 condition and corresponding shelf life at that
condition
27
28
NOMENCLATURE
Symbols
A Area [m2]
Bs Hearth load capacity [kg / ( h−cm2 )]
COP Co-efficient of performance
cd Co-efficient of discharge
cp Specific heat [kJ / ( kg−K ) ]
cr Heat capacity ratio
D Diameter [m or mm]
Ė Energy flow rate [kW]
F Friction co-efficient
FCR Fuel consumption rate [kg /s ]
G Second virial coefficient
h Heat transfer co-efficient [W / ( m2 −K )]
h fg Latent heat of vaporization, [kJ /kg ]
K Thermal conductivity [W / ( m−K )]
L Length [m or mm]
m or M Mass [kg]
ṁ Mass flow rate [kg /s ]
N Number of cycles
P Pressure [Pa]
Q̇ Heat transfer rate [kW]
R Characteristic gas constant [ J / ( kg−K ) ]
RPF Random packing fraction
SCP Specific cooling power [W /kg of CaCl2]
T Temperature [℃ or K]
V Volume of the test chamber [m3]
V̇ Volume flow rate [m3 /s ]
29
Z Compressibility factor
Greek
ε Emissivity
∆χ Sorption quantity [kg of NH 3 /kg of CaCl 2]
ρ Density [kg /m3]
τ Cycle time [minutes or hour]
λ Excess air ratio
ϕ Equivalence ratio
η Efficiency [%]
σ Stefan Boltzmann constant [5.67 ×10−8 W / ( m2 −K 4 )]
Subscripts
amb Ambient
bed Sorption bed
bm Biomass
cond Condenser
C Critical
cc Cooling coil
Daf Dry ash free
fg Flue gas
hc Heating coil
HCT Half cycle time
h-ex Heat exchanger
NH 3 , sorp Ammonia Sorption
oxi. Oxidation
pg Producer gas
prim Primary
pyro Pyrolysis
ref refractory
30
rp Refrigerating power
rs Refrigeration system
sec Secondary
sorp Sorption
sys System
th Thermal
w ,∈¿ Water inlet
w , out Water outlet
X Additive
Y Binder
Abbreviations
AC Activated carbon
BGHWG Biomass gasifier-based hot water generator
DCHWG Direct combustion hot water generator
EG Expanded graphite
FC Fixed carbon
GWP Global warming potential
HCT Half cycle time
HCFC Hydrochlorofluorocarbons
HFC Hydrofluorocarbon
IGHWG Integrated gasifier hot water generator
MT Million Ton
NRV Non-return valve
NTU Number of transfer units
PAH Ploy aromatic hydrocarbon
PPM Parts per million
SV Solenoid valve
TR Turndown ratio
VM Volatile matter
31
32
ABSTRACT
Rapid industrialization and population growth induced upsurge in global
energy and food demand, resulting in extensive use of readily available fossil
fuels and environmentally harmful refrigerants such as
Hydrochlorofluorocarbon (HCFC) and Hydrofluorocarbon (HFC). Such
emergencies necessitate the use of carbon-neutral sources of energy such as
biomass and nature-friendly refrigerants. However, the current biomass
utilization techniques are underdeveloped and release harmful emissions
such as CO , NO x , volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and particulate matter
(PM). In addition, more than 40% of the produced farm perishables are
wasted due to the absence of post-harvest facilities1. Hence, the sustainable
and environmentally friendly utilization of biomass for the refrigeration and
processing of agricultural produce presents a viable alternative.
Biomass is converted into thermal energy through direct combustion or
the gasification processes2. While direct combustion offers high efficiency and
good turndown ratio, i.e., maximum to minimum thermal capacity (TR ≈ 3-4),
but generates significant VOCs and PM 3–8. Gasification in an air-deficient
environment yields combustible gases (H₂, CO, CH₄), which, although
environmentally cleaner for heating, are hampered by low efficiency and a
modest turndown ratio (TR<2)9. Further, devising off-the-grid cold storage
requires integrating adsorption refrigerators with biomass to thermal energy
systems. Accordingly, CaCl2−NH 3 seems a suitable adsorption pair, but loss
of structural integrity of adsorption beds questions their long-term viability in
practical systems10–12. Hence, engineering interventions are necessary to
improve the efficiency of biomass gasification-based thermal energy systems.
Moreover, the problem of long-term degradation of adsorption beds needs to
be addressed.
This thesis primarily focuses on designing and developing a biomass
gasification-based temperature control unit comprising a central thermal
energy generation unit, a heating module, and a cooling module. We first
develop a central thermal energy generation unit as a novel biomass
gasification-based integrated hot water generator ≈ 22 kW th (IGHWG)
comprising a core-annulus geometry of the gasifier (core) and water shell with
a helical tube heat exchanger (annulus). Such arrangement led to a complete
recovery of thermal energy typically lost from the outer surface and flue gases
of a conventional gasification-based heating system, leading to a doubling of
the overall efficiency (≈ 48 %) compared to a standard system with physically
separated gasifier and heat exchanger unit (≈ 24 %). Next, we address the
practical issues of agglomeration and expansion of the CaCl2 on NH 3 sorption.
We conduct a long-term viability check of different CaCl2 composites (using
activated carbon AC and expanded graphite EG as fillers). AC−CaCl 2
33
composite experiences a significant deterioration, but the EG−CaCl2
composites demonstrate remarkable long-term stability with three times
higher ammonia sorption capacity. We further design and develop the cooling
and heating module. As a cooling module, we implement the EG−CaCl2 in an
adsorption refrigerator that uses biomass as fuel and demonstrates prolonged
operation over 800 cycles in practical scenarios. As a heating module, we
design and develop a ≈ 20 kW th (a fin-tube heat exchanger). Finally, we
integrate the cooling and heating module with the developed water-heating
unit (IGHWG) and demonstrate the biomass gasification-based temperature-
controlled unit. The entire unit consumes nominal auxiliary power ( ≈ 1.7 kWe),
sufficed using solar photovoltaic panels, and provides ≈ 3 tons of refrigeration
of cooling and ≈ 20 kW th of heating with a temperature range of 5-55 ℃ . The
system's temperature range enables suitability for cold storage and food
processing in off-the-grid areas, while its hot water generation unit addresses
domestic and industrial water heating needs, presenting an environmentally
friendly agro waste-to-value concept. The thesis closes with a demonstration
of producer gas recirculation in downdraft gasifier as an effective technique
for improving the turndown ratios (TR) of gasification systems (from 2.4 to
4.3), which in turn can be used to expand the range of variable load
operations of the resulting off-the-grid storage and processing units.
34
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Global Warming: An Environmental Threat
A safe environment to breathe, clean water to drink, and nutritious food to eat
are the primary needs of humankind. Drastic industrialization and increased
human population in recent decades, especially in developing countries, have
drastically increased global energy and food demand. As a result, easily
accessible fossil fuels are used extensively to satisfy this energy and food
demand. As per the IEA Energy Statistics 2018, the global annual energy
demand has increased from 230 EJ to 600 EJ in the last five decades and is
expected to grow to 760 EJ by 2050 13, as shown in Figure 1.1a. In addition,
the country-wise primary energy consumption in 2022 is shown in Figure
1.1b14. It is clear that over 80 % of global energy demand is sufficed using
non-renewable energy sources, i.e., coal, oil, and natural gas, with a minimal
increase in renewable (from 10 % to 14 % in the last 20 years). Moreover, the
industrial sector alone is responsible for ≈ 37 % of this global energy
demand15. Among the countries, China is the most energy-consuming nation
(159 EJ) in the year 2022, followed by the USA (96 EJ) and India (36 EJ),
clearly reflecting the urbanization and rapid industrialization that occurred in
recent decades in the Asian continent (Figure 1.1b).
Figure 1.1: (a) Global energy consumption (year 2000-2050) by sources of energy. (b)
Country-wise energy consumption of the top 10 countries (in 2022)13.
Chapter 1
India, the third largest energy consumer in the world (Figure 1.1b), met ≈ 75 %
of its primary energy needs, majorly through coal, oil, and solid biomass 14. In
addition, India's total primary energy demand has doubled in the last two
decades (Figure 1.2a). It is interesting to note that biomass, primarily
traditional solid biomass, contributes significantly to sufficing the energy
needs in India (See Figure 1.2b). Despite recent success in expanding liquid
petroleum gas (LPG) coverage in rural areas, over 600 million people in India
have not entirely switched to modern, clean cooking fuels or technologies 16.
Instead, biomass (a carbon-neutral fuel) is still widely used as cooking fuel.
Figure 1.2: (a) Indian primary energy Demand (2000-2020) [5]. (b) Contribution of various
energy sources to suffice the energy demand in India16.
In addition, the surge in the global population, from about 4 to more than 8
billion people in the last five decades, has led to a proportional increase in the
food demand17, which . For simplicity of estimation, the food demand iis
generally measured in terms of cereal equivalent food (CE). The world CE
food demand increased from ≈ 3 billion tons in 1980 to ≈ 6 million tons in 2009
and is expected to grow to ≈ 15 billion tons in 205018. The distribution, storage,
and consumption of food rely on cold storage coupled with cold chain
logistics, which primarily works on grid-based vapor compression refrigeration
and operates with Hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFC) and Hydrofluorocarbon
(HFC) refrigerants. These synthetic refrigerants are associated with high
global warming potential, drastically increasing the temperature of the
earthescalating global warming19. The global warming potential of various
HCFC and HFC synthetic refrigerants is tabulated in Table 1.1.
2
Chapter 1
Table 1.1: Global warming potential (GWP) of HCFC and HFC refrigerants used in the
refrigeration and cold chain industry19.
Code Chemical Formula Category GWP

R-22 CHClF 2 HCFC 1780
R-142b CH 3 CF 2 Cl HCFC 2220
R-134a CH 2 FCF 3 HFC 1430
R-32 CH 2 F 2 HFC 704
R-125 C 2 H F5 HFC 3500
R-410a Blend of R-32, R-125 HFC 2100
R-407c Blend of R-32, R-125, and R-134a HFC 1600
R-404a Blend of R-125, R-143a and R-134a HFC 3920
Such large-scale consumption of fossil fuels and HFC and HCFC refrigerants
contributes to ≈ 79 % of the total carbon dioxide CO 2 emissions (global
warming potential GWP=1), which eventually ended up raising the global
average temperature by 1.2 ℃ since the late 1800s (Figure 1.3)20,21. Such
temperature increases have led to drastic changes in the climate of planet
Earth. Extreme weather conditions such as floods, droughts, high winds,
erosion, wildfires, and mudslides are increasingly prevalent, often
exacerbated by deforestation and coastal erosion, leading to rising sea
levels22. One consequence of climate change is the migration of insects and
animals to more hospitable climates. A more frightening involuntary mass
migration of humans from lands unable to support crops growing and from
areas where rising sea levels are beginning to threaten livelihood has already
begun.
Figure 1.3: (a) Global CO 2 emissions with year (1960-2020) 23

. (b) Change in global
temperature over the years (1800-2021)24.
Considering global warming to be a global emergency, the historic Paris

Agreement was signed at the 21 st United Nations Climate Change Conference
3
Chapter 1
(November 2016) to substantially reduce global GHG emissions and limit the
global average temperature below 1.5 ℃ 25. In addition, there is a commitment
to reduce GHG emissions by 45 % by 2030 and reach net zero by 2050 25. At
the 26th session of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change in November 2021, India announced its target to achieve net zero by
2070 26. Accordingly, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change
(Government of India) has established an Ozone Cell for the timely phase-out
of the high GWP HCFC and HFC refrigerants.
These commitments necessitate the development of infrastructure that

promotes the use of renewable energy sources such as biomass, solar, and
wind, as well as environmentally friendly refrigerants for food preservation in a
sustainable and environmentally friendly manner.
1.2 Biomass: A Carbon-neutral Energy Alternative
The global total energy demand is ≈ 600 EJ, ≈ 14 % of which ≈ 84 EJ is

satisfied using renewable energy resources. The contribution of various
renewable energy sources is shown in Figure 1.4.
Figure 1.4: Global renewable energy fraction and its segregation (in the year 2020)27.
4
Chapter 1
Bioenergy significantly contributes ≈ 56 EJ to the current energy demand,

wherein the major portion is solid biomass, primarily used as cooking fuel and
other heating applications28. Despite the enormous potential of solar energy
on planet Earth (≈ 2.5 ×106 EJ), much less total solar energy is being used as
useful energy29.
Bioenergy primarily includes solid biomass (wood chips, pellets,

agricultural fields, crop residue, and traditional biomass resources), municipal
and industrial waste, and biogas27. Countries with large geographical areas,
such as Russia, the USA, China, Brazil, Australia, India, and Argentina,
promise a total biomass potential of ≈ 32 EJ. The top seven countries with
their biomass potential are shown in Figure 1.5a. India alone has a total
biomass potential as high as 10 EJ/year (Figure 1.5b) and promises to fulfill
77% of its energy demand from the industrial sectors 27. In addition, biomass in
the form of agricultural residue has vast untapped potential, out of which a
significant portion is openly burned in the fields.
Figure 1.5: Annual Biomass Potential (a) Top biomass producer Countries worldwide. (b)
India30.
1.3 Biomass in Agricultural Fields: Issues and

Opportunities
Approximately 10 % of the global biomass in agricultural residue is produced

in the agricultural fields (≈ 5 EJ)27. As per the grain-to-residue conversion
factor and grain production data (FAO, 2021), the production of crop residue
is ≈ 5.3 Billion Ton in 2020–21, which is approximated as 79 EJ (considering
5
Chapter 1
the average heating value of crop residue as 15 MJ/kg) 31,32. Despite using the
crop residue as fodder, mulching, and fuel for domestic and industrial
purposes, a substantial portion remains surplus and eventually unutilized.
Handling the surplus crop residue is challenging in many developing

nations due to the low economic value of biomass and high collection and
transportation costs. Consequently, farmers often resort to field-burning crop
residue (FBCR) in developing counties. While FBCR may be a quick and
convenient solution for farmers, it causes severe environmental and health
hazards. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC), nearly 25 % of total crop residue produced is subjected to field burn
worldwide, amounting to nearly ≈ 36 EJ of energy being wasted28,33. In addition
to the wastage of energy potential, FBCR, a major source of greenhouse gas
emissions and aerosols (PM2.5), poses severe air pollution. Based on a
recent WHO report, air pollution due to crop residue burning results in ≈ 7
million causalities every year around the globe34.
India, primarily an agrarian nation that heavily depends on agriculture,

is no different in the field burning of crop residue. Around half of India’s
population inhabits rural areas and depends more or less on agriculture for
survival. In the latest study by Lan et al. (2022), it was estimated that nearly
500 million tons (MT) of agricultural residues are produced in India 32. The
district-wise total crop residue generated and the surplus crop residue in India
are shown in Figure 1.6a and Figure 1.6b, respectively 35. The surplus residue
generated is nearly 1500 Petajoules (1.5 EJ) of annual energy potential, i.e.,
6 % of India’s total primary energy consumption.
This surplus of ≈ 100 Million Tons (1.5 EJ) of crop residues is subjected
to field burning32. The leading crop-burning states in India are Uttar Pradesh,
Punjab, and Haryana, as shown in Figure 1.7a. Such burning practices
contribute to generating harmful emissions such as carbon monoxide CO ,
methane CH 4, nitrous oxide NO x , ammonia NH 3, sulfur dioxide SO 2, volatile
organic compounds (VOC), and particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10) in the
environment33. The emission of different pollutants on field burning is shown in
Figure 1.7b.
6
Chapter 1
Figure 1.6: District-wise details of crop residue in India (a) total crop residue biomass
generated (MT/year) (b) Bioenergy potential of surplus crop residue (in PJ)35.
These emissions pose severe risks such as air pollution, poor visibility from
resulting smog, chronic diseases, premature mortality, and loss of nutrients in
the soil33. These emissions pose lung ailments and chronic heart and
respiratory diseases36. The dense smog causes poor visibility, increases in
journey time, and leads to road accidents 37. In addition, the heat from the
burning of residue results in the death of useful bacteria and fungi38.
Figure 1.7: (a) Leading crop-burning states in India. (b) Emission of different pollutants and
GHGs due to field burning of crop residue.
However, the field residue has a considerable heating value (40-50 % of coal)
and can be used as an energy source. Accordingly, biomass should be used
as a thermal energy source in a sustainable and environmentally friendly
manner.
Apart from the underutilization of current biomass potential, the surge

in the global population, from about 4 to more than 8 billion people in the last
five decades, has led to a proportional increase in the food demand 17.
Accordingly, a fundamental challenge arises from the need to satisfy the food
demands of such a growing population. This challenge extends beyond mere
7
Chapter 1
crop cultivation and harvest; it encompasses the entire supply chain, from
production to distribution and storage. However, the current wastage of farm
perishables (especially fruits and vegetables) is a big challenge.
1.4 Farm Produce Wastage
The issue of farm produce wastage is a global challenge that impacts the
economy, the environment, and society, particularly in developing countries.
As per the United Nations report, around 931 million tons of food were wasted
in 201939. Moreover, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations (FAO) estimated that 690 million people across the globe suffered
from hunger in 201940. From the Indian perspective, fifteen major fruits and
vegetables were wasted, nearly 40-50 % of the total perishables produced
(INR31,000 crores annually)41,42. Large-scale wastage is associated with 8-10
% of global greenhouse gas emissions39. This problem is grim in rural and off-
the-grid locations. These losses are attributed to the limited access to and
uncertainties associated with post-harvest facilities such as storage,
transportation, and processing units at the farm level. As per the Ministry of
Agriculture and Farm Welfare 2020 report, India has a total of 8186 cold
storage units with a capacity of ≈ 37 Million Metric Tons available in the
country for storing perishable horticultural produce like fruits and vegetables43.
On the other hand, the total production of perishables in India exceeds 400
Million Metric Tons, suggesting that more than 80 % of the perishables in
India don’t find long-term storage 44.
In addition, the cost and uncertainty associated with grid supply at the
farm level make vapor-compression-based cold storage solutions unreliable
and insufficient. Moreover, whatever grid-based vapor-compression-based
systems use HCFC and HFC refrigerants have significantly high global
warming potential (as high as ≈ 4000 times CO 2) as shown in Table 1.119.
Hence, identifying new low GWP refrigerants and using natural refrigerants
such as propane (R290) and ammonia (R717) should be encouraged, at least
in commercial refrigeration and food processing industries. Currently, most
commercial cold storages rely mainly on fossil fuels such as coal-based
electricity, diesel, and natural gas. Hence, farmers are forced to sell their
8
Chapter 1
produce at significantly lower prices during the peak harvest season, resulting
in low income.
Accordingly, the need of the hour is holistic and sustainable solutions
for the concomitant addressal of fruit and vegetable wastage and crop residue
direct burning. In this regard, biomass-based decentralized cold storage and
processing units are viable options. Using biomass as an energy source, it is
possible to develop cold storage and off-the-grid solutions that meet the
specific needs of farmers in rural areas. In this regard, it is imperative to
discuss the biomass-to-energy pathways for the cold storage and processing
facilities for perishables without causing harmful impacts on the environment.
1.5 Pathways from Biomass to Energy
Current utilization options for biomass are insufficient and economically

unattractive to discourage burning. Accordingly, controlling biomass burning
through regulations or developing technologies to create economic value for
the crop residue is necessary. Biomass can be converted to useful energy by
two main routes: biochemical and thermochemical, as shown in Figure 1.8.
In biochemical, the techniques adopted can be aerobic or anaerobic,

depending on the nature of bacteria, fungi, or algae involved in the
28
degradation . Anaerobic digesters can turn biomass into biogas, a
renewable energy source containing approximately 50% methane, and a final
solid residue usable as a nutrient-rich fertilizer. Next, the thermochemical
conversion of biomass to energy conversion is undertaken via various
processes such as direct combustion, pyrolysis, and gasification. In direct
combustion, biomass is burnt in a single step in a stoichiometric or excess
amount of air to produce thermal energy (Figure 1.8). However, gasification
converts solid biomass fuel into a combustible producer gas (PG) through a
sequence of thermo-chemical reactions under an oxygen-deficient
environment (fuel-air equivalence ratio ϕ ≈ 0.2−0.4 )45–47. This gas
predominantly comprises CO (10-15%), CO 2 (10-15%), CH 4 (2-5%), H 2 (15-
20%), and N 2 (40-50%) (if air is used as the gasification agent). The
combustible gas components CO, CH 4, and H 2 can be further burned in a
burner to produce thermal energy (Figure 1.8). This two-stage burning
9
Chapter 1
facilitates the mixing of gaseous fuel (PG) with air and emits fewer
pollutants28.
Figure 1.8: The schematic representation of biomass to energy conversion pathways and the
possible application sectors2.
Traditional boilers often use biomass, which has emissions equivalent to field
burning due to uncontrolled combustion, resulting in low efficiencies and high
emissions4. In response, advanced combustion boilers are introduced to meet
emission norms, which use techniques such as forced excess air (excess air
ratio λ ≈ 1−2.5, ratio of actual air supplied to the stoichiometric air needed for
the complete combustion)3,6. The detailed concept of biomass burning with the
excess air is discussed in the literature review section. Despite their high
thermal efficiency (above 70 %) and good turndown ratios TR ≈ 2-4, i.e.,
maximum to minimum thermal capacity with efficient operation, direct
combustion generates high particulate matter and unburnt hydrocarbon
emissions, especially under reduced load conditions6,48.
10
Chapter 1
Conversely, biomass gasification is a clean technique that

systematically processes biomass to produce combustible gases for power
generation or thermal applications. A conventional gasifier, in its efficient
operation, generates the PG with a total combustible gas percentage ranging
from 20% to 35% and a heating value (HV) approximating 4-6 MJ / Nm349. The
detailed concept of biomass gasification is discussed in the literature section.
The quality of producer gas depends upon the suitability of the zone
temperatures in the gasification reactor, which suggests a sub-stoichiometric
air with an equivalence ratio of 0.2−0.4 for efficient gas production9. Even in
the efficient scenarios, the heating value of PG is very low ( 4−6 MJ /N m3),
which is primarily due to the dilution of PG with a high fraction of non-
combustible gases (≈ 50−65 %), primarily N 2 with gasification air50. Moreover,
lowering the gasification air disturbs the gasification zone’s temperature,
further hindering the efficient gasifier operation in low-capacity zones (narrow
TR<2). Hence, techniques to decrease the gasification air with concomitant
maintenance of zone temperature are needed in an hour. In addition, the
usage of biomass gasification for various high and low-temperature thermal
applications is relatively less explored51–55. However, its use is limited due to
lower thermal efficiency caused by heat losses (≈ 5-10 % of energy input) from
the reactor surface and burner, leading to lower overall system efficiencies.
Hence, operating gasifiers at a wide range of thermal capacities is

challenging, i.e., low turndown ratios (TR<2). Therefore, engineering
interventions are needed to widen the operational range of gasifiers and
recover heat from gasification-based heating systems.
The thermal energy produced from biomass gasification can be

directly used for various applications such as domestic and community
cooking, space heating, and perishable processing/drying (Figure 1.8).
However, low-temperature applications such as space cooling and cold
storage require an additional step in the refrigeration system. In this regard,
vapor-compression refrigeration-based cold storage solutions are unreliable
and inadequate due to costs and uncertainties with grid supply at the farm
level56. These systems also use HCFCs and HFCs as refrigerants, with a high
Global Warming Potential19. Therefore, it’s crucial to identify low GWP
11
Chapter 1
refrigerants or encourage using natural refrigerants such as Ammonia (R717),

especially in commercial refrigeration and food processing industries.
Considerable research efforts have been directed to address these
environmental concerns by developing eco-friendly refrigerants and energy-
efficient cooling technologies. Sorption cooling systems represent an
environmentally friendly alternative to traditional vapor compression cooling.
While adsorption processes have historically been employed for gas
separation and purification, only recently have they been harnessed to
generate cooling.
Adsorption refrigeration systems offer several advantages, including

the ability to operate using low-grade or waste heat sources, reduced
environmental impact compared to traditional vapor compression systems,
and the absence of moving parts, which can result in lower maintenance
requirements and longer system lifetimes. Additionally, adsorption
refrigeration systems can utilize environmentally friendly refrigerants, making
them a promising option for sustainable cooling solutions.
1.6 Adsorption Refrigeration System
Adsorption refrigeration systems are thermally driven systems that utilize low-
grade energy (especially solar or biomass) with a wide temperature range
(50-400 ℃ )56. Unlike a mechanical compressor in the vapor compression
refrigeration system, adsorption systems rely on thermal compression using
an adsorption pair. The adsorption pair is typically a solid-gas combination,
where the solid is the adsorbent and the gas the adsorbate or refrigerant, as
shown in Figure 1.9. When the sorbent is heated, it desorbs the refrigerant
vapour at high temperatures and pressures (Figure 1.9a). On the other hand,
cooling allows the adsorbent to recapture the gas molecules from a
surrounding adsorbate vapors, typically at low pressure and temperature
(Figure 1.9b). This combination of high and low pressure maintained using the
adsorption/desorption processes, along with a high-pressure condensation
and isenthalpic expansion, creates a cooling effect.
12
Chapter 1
Figure 1.9: The schematic representation of the adsorption and desorption process.
1.6.1 Types of Adsorption Processes
Adsorption is divided into two broad categories: Physical and Chemical.

Physical adsorption (physisorption) generally occurs on the surface of the
adsorbent and is primarily driven by the van der Waals force among the
molecules. A multi-layer adsorption is possible in physical adsorption, making
it a non-selective phenomenon. Physical adsorption of adsorbate on the
adsorbent is generally equivalent to the condensation process of the gas
refrigerant, which is confirmed by observing that the heat of adsorption in
physical adsorption is more or less equal to the latent heat of vaporization of
the adsorbate56. Physical adsorption mainly depends upon the adsorbents'
heat and mass transfer performance. Some examples of physisorption
adsorption pairs are zeolite-water, silica gel-water, zeolite–ammonia,
activated carbon-methanol or ethanol, activated carbon-ammonia, expanded
graphite-ammonia and carbon nanotubes-hydrocarbons and among others.
Conversely, in chemical adsorption (also termed chemisorption), a

chemical reaction occurs between adsorbent and adsorbate to form a new
molecule during the adsorption process56. Despite being selective and only
forming a monolayer of adsorbate over the adsorbent surface, the adsorption
quantity of adsorbate is significantly higher in chemisorption compared to
13
Chapter 1
physisorption. For example, one molecule of calcium chloride adsorbs eight

molecules of ammonia at a specific temperature condition in a three-step
reaction, as shown in Equations 1.1 to 1.457.
CaCl2 + NH 3 ⇋CaCl2 . NH 3 +∆ H 3 @T 1 (1.1)

CaCl2 . NH 3 + NH 3 ⇋ CaCl2 .2 NH 3+ ∆ H 3 @T 1 (1.2)
CaCl2 .2 NH 3 +2 NH 3 ⇋ CaCl 2 .4 NH 3 +∆ H 2 @T 2 (1.3)
CaCl2 .4 NH 3+ 4 NH 3 ⇋ CaCl2 .8 NH 3 +∆ H 1@T 3 (1.4)
The newly formed molecule decomposed during the desorption and ideally
rereleased the same amount of adsorbate. The heat of adsorption is,
however, significantly higher in chemisorption than in physisorption. In
addition to the heat and mass transfer performance, the chemisorption
depends on the chemical reaction kinetics. Some examples of physisorption
adsorption pairs are Metal chloride (CaCl2, MnCl 2, SnCl2)-water, Metal chloride
(CaCl2, MnCl 2, SnCl2)-ammonia, Metal hydride- hydrogen, CaCl2-methanol
and, among others56.
1.6.2 Basic Principle of Adsorption Refrigeration
The basic principle of the adsorption refrigeration system (ADRS) is

demonstrated using a double bed adsorption refrigeration system shown in
Figure 1.10a, and the thermodynamic cycle (termed Clayperon adsorption
cycle) is shown in Figure 1.10b. ADRS comprises two sorption beds,
condensers, evaporators, and expansion valves. In contrast to the vapor
compression technology, the grid-based compressor is replaced with the
thermal compression-based adsorption beds (Figure 1.9a). The adsorption
beds contain the adsorption-pair (adsorbent and adsorbate), wherein the
adsorbent is a porous solid adsorbent material with an affinity to adsorb and
desorb the adsorbate (refrigerant). The desorption or adsorption of the
refrigerant from the adsorbent material generates high and low pressure,
leading to thermal compression, which drives the refrigeration cycle. The
desorption and adsorption of the adsorbate in the beds are endothermic and
exothermic. As an illustration, we show a double bed ADRS wherein one bed
(bed1) is in desorption mode, and the other (bed2) is in adsorption mode.
14
Chapter 1
Heat supply to bed1 increases the temperature and pressure of the bed
without initially desorbing any refrigerant from the adsorbent (termed as
isosteric heating, process 1→2 in Figure 1.10b). As the pressure of bed1
reaches the condenser pressure (generally the saturation pressure of the
refrigerant at outdoor temperature), the valve V 1 opens, and the refrigerant (in
the superheated state) starts releasing from bed1 at constant pressure
(isobaric heating, process 2→3’). At the same time, the superheated
refrigerant enters the condenser, rejects sensible, and latent heat eventually
turns to liquid refrigerant (condensation process 2→3). Concomitantly, the
heat rejection from bed2 occurs without adsorbing any refrigerant (isosteric
cooling, process 3’→4).
Further, the liquid refrigerant flows through the expansion valve with an
isenthalpic drop in pressure up to the evaporator pressure (saturation
pressure corresponding to the indoor temperature), which decreases the
refrigerant temperature significantly (expansion process 3→4). The low-
temperature and low-pressure two-phase refrigerant passes through the
evaporator and generates the desired refrigeration effect (evaporation
process 4→1). As the bed2 pressure becomes equal to the evaporator
pressure, the valve V 3 opens, and low-pressure superheated refrigerant starts
flowing into bed 2 for adsorption (process 4’→1).
Figure 1.10: (a) Schematic representation of a double bed adsorption refrigeration system. (b)
Clapeyron adsorption cycle.
Such adsorption refrigeration systems are straightforward to operate, reliable,

and do not have any moving parts. They are less prone to corrosion and
15
Chapter 1
crystallization challenges than absorption refrigeration systems. They can

work with a relatively low-temperature heat source compared to the ABR
cycle and integrate easily with waste heat resources.
Studies show that chemical adsorption pairs, such as Metal chloride-
ammonia56, outperform physical adsorption pairs in sorption capacities and
rates11. However, achieving stable long-term performance of NH 3−CaCl2
based systems is challenging due to the loss of CaCl2 (expansion-induced
cracks) from the bed, affecting heat and mass transfer performance.
1.7. Motivation
In view of the above discussion, it is evident that there is a pressing need to

devise and showcase solutions based on biomass gasification for off-grid cold
storage and processing of farm perishables. Developing technologies that
utilize biomass, often discarded through open burning, as an energy source is
crucial. This will not only reduces harmful emissions, but also adds economic
value to farm residue.
The current advancements in biomass gasification technology
highlight the necessity to devise methods that extend the turndown ratio of
gasification-based thermal systems and tackle parasitic heat losses in
gasification, thereby enhancing thermal efficiencies. Moreover, exploring
adsorption refrigeration systems, which are dependent on thermal energy, as
a feasible alternative for off-grid cold storage is warranted. For example, a
comprehensive investigation of chemisorption-based adsorption pairs, such
as CaCl2−NH 3, should be conducted. This involves preparing CaCl2
composites with additives such as expanded graphite (EG) to address the
long-term reliability issues in the adsorption beds. Such research may
contribute significantly to the development of sustainable and efficient off-grid
storage and processing units for perishables. Overall, the primary purpose of
the work in this thesis is to contribute, however little, to provide solutions to
the fundamental problems across the globe: clean air to breathe and nutritious
food to all.
16
Chapter 1
1.8. Research Objective
The primary aim of this research is to design, develop, and demonstrate

innovative heating and cooling solutions for preserving farm perishables,
utilizing biomass as the principal energy source. The specific objectives to
accomplish this overarching goal are:
i. To design and construct a biomass gasification-based hot water

generation unit with enhanced energy conversion efficiency.
ii. To investigate and address the issue of adsorption bed degradation in
an ammonia-calcium chloride-based refrigeration system, i.e., the
cooling module.
iii. To modify the ammonia-calcium chloride composites and investigate
long-term performance and degradation in a lab-scale cyclic test unit.
iv. To design, develop, and test the cooling module with the modified
adsorbent composite powered by the hot water generation unit.
v. To design, develop, and test a heating module, specifically a hot water-
to-air heat exchanger, with the hot water generation unit.
vi. To develop a temperature-controlled unit for long-term storage and
processing of perishables, integrating the heating and cooling modules
with the hot water generation unit.
vii. To explore the producer gas recirculation technique to enable low load
operation, thereby extending the turndown ratio of biomass gasifiers.
In essence, this research aims to contribute solutions to global challenges,
striving to provide clean air and nutritious food for all.
1.9. Organization of the Thesis
Below is a brief description of the seven chapters in the present Ph.D.

dissertation.
Chapter 1 summarizes the research background, major scientific

challenges, motivation, the scope of the work, problem identification, and
research objectives. This chapter concludes with the dissertation's
organization.
17
Chapter 1
Chapter 2 contains a detailed review of the pertinent literature. Further,

we categorize the literature review into different sections, such as
(i) Introduction to biomass and characterization methods followed by the

discussion of methods to produce energy from biomass: biochemical
and thermochemical.
(ii) Discuss the state of the art of the thermochemical conversion of

biomass into thermal energy pathways: direct combustion and biomass
gasification.
(iii) Compare the thermal performance, emissions, and turndown ratios of

the direct combustion and gasification-based biomass thermal energy
systems.
(iv) Discuss the problem of low efficiency and turndown ratios associated
with the biomass gasification technique.
(v) Discuss the state of the art of off-the-grid heating and cooling solutions
for storing and processing various perishables.
(vi) Discuss the basics of adsorption pairs used in the adsorption

refrigeration system and the issues in the chemisorption-based
adsorption pairs (CaCl2−NH 3).
(vii) Literature regarding the modifications done in the adsorption pairs to

address the issues of swelling and agglomeration in chemisorption-
based adsorption pairs (especially CaCl2−NH 3).
In Chapter 3, we present the detailed design, fabrication, and

performance assessment of a (≈ 22 kW th ) novel biomass gasification-powered
hot water generator. The full system comprises a flue gas-to-water helical
pipe heat exchanger innovatively integrated at the annulus of an indigenously
designed downdraft gasifier. We further compare the performance of the
design system with conventional direct combustion-based biomass boilers
and traditional biomass gasification-based water heaters. This chapter
concludes that simple heat recovery techniques can significantly enhance the
thermal system’s efficiency. In addition, we designed, developed, and tested
the heating module. We further integrate the heating module with a biomass
18
Chapter 1
gasification-based hot water generator and perform the capacity estimation

experiments of the heating module.
In Chapter 4, we address the practical issues of agglomeration and

expansion of the CaCl2 on NH 3 sorption in the adsorption beds of the
commercial adsorption refrigeration systems (cooling module). We conduct a
long-term viability check of different CaCl2 composites (using activated carbon
AC and expanded graphite EG as fillers).
In Chapter 5, we integrate the developed biomass gasification-based

water-heating unit with the heating and cooling module and demonstrate the
biomass gasification-based temperature-controlled unit. In the cooling
module, we implement the best-performing composite in a ≈ 3 ton refrigeration
adsorption refrigerator that uses biomass to demonstrate the prolonged
operation and mimic the practical scenarios. Next, we will assess various
commercially available off-the-shelf heating coil units (multipass fin-tube heat
exchangers) using the matrix method. A suitable heating coil was selected,
and experiments were performed on the capacity estimation. We further
integrate the developed IGHWG (biomass to heat energy generation unit), the
heating module, the cooling module, a suitable control unit, and an auxiliary
power unit to develop a completely off-the-grid temperature control unit. We
perform multiple experiments to demonstrate the operation of the
temperature-controlled unit.
In Chapter 6, we present a demonstration of producer gas recirculation

in a downdraft gasifier as an effective technique for improving the turndown
ratios of gasification systems, which in turn can be used to expand the range
of variable load operations of the resulting off-the-grid storage and processing
units. We perform experiments on an indigenously designed downdraft
gasifier (≈ 5 kW th) and investigate the performance and emissions
characteristics at various equivalence ratios under steady-state conditions.
In Chapter 7, we present a summary of the intellectual contributions,

anticipated benefits, and future directions based on the outcomes of this
dissertation.
19
Chapter 1
20
Chapter 2
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE SURVEY
In this chapter, we present a thorough literature review on various topics, from
biomass to thermal energy systems (especially direct combustion and
gasification), to integrating those energy systems with heating and
refrigeration modules. Further, we perform an extensive literature review
related to the current issues in the adsorption refrigeration systems and the
relevant rectification techniques used by the researchers.
2.1 Introduction to Biomass
Biomass refers to plant material formed through the reaction of carbon

dioxide, water, and sunlight via photosynthesis, yielding carbohydrates as its
foundational components. Despite photosynthesis converting less than 1% of
available sunlight into chemical energy, the solar energy captured is stored
within biomass's chemical bonds. Through efficient chemical or biological
processing, the energy stored in these bonds can be again extracted,
releasing carbon dioxide and water upon oxidation with oxygen. This cyclic
process ensures that the carbon dioxide released is then utilized to produce
new biomass, rendering biomass energy a carbon-neutral energy source
(Figure 2.1)58.
Figure 2.1: The schematic representation of the biomass energy cycle59.
21
Chapter 2
Biomass, a lignocellulosic material, comprises cellulose, hemicellulose, and

lignin. Cellulose is a polysaccharide found in the cell walls of plants, providing
structural strength. Hemicellulose is another polysaccharide in plant cell walls,
contributing to the rigidity and strength of the cell walls. In addition, lignin is a
complex organic polymer that binds cellulose and hemicellulose fibers
together, providing structural support to plants60. The chemical composition of
different biomass is tabulated in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1: Cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin content range of different biomass (wt%)60.
Biomass Lignin (%) Cellulose (%) Hemicellulose (%)

Softwood 27-30 35-40 25-30
Hardwood 20-25 45-50 20-25
Nut Shells 30-40 25-30 25-30
Bamboo 23 49-50 18-20
Bagasse 15-25 25-45 28-32
Biomass energy, as a renewable energy source derived from organic

materials such as plants, agricultural residues, forestry residues, and organic
waste, is used for various applications, including heat generation, electricity
production, and biofuel production.
The biomass-to-energy conversion depends upon several factors

influencing the selection of a conversion method. These factors include the
type and volume of biomass feedstock, the desired energy form corresponding
to end-use needs, adherence to environmental regulations, prevailing
economic conditions, and project-specific variables61. Often, the specific
energy requirements dictate the chosen process route, with consideration
given to the available types and quantities of biomass. Biomass-to-energy
conversion employs primarily two main process technologies: thermochemical
and biochemical/biological2.
Thermochemical conversion of biomass can be achieved via pyrolysis,

gasification, and direct combustion to produce energy and other products.
Conversely, the biochemical route uses microorganisms with suitable catalysts
to convert biomass into biofuels and bioproducts. Mainly, anaerobic digestion
and fermentation processes are adopted to transfer the biomass into biofuels
22
Chapter 2
in this pathway2,61. The significant difference between the above two

processes is discussed in Table 2.2.
Table 2.2: A general comparison of biochemical and thermochemical processes61.
Thermochemical Biochemical
Effectively applied to almost any biomass Involves the use of microbes, enzymes,
feedstock with moisture <60% and/or chemicals
No pretreatment Pretreatment is essential
Productivity is limited due to biological

Relatively higher productivity;
conversion
Syngas production: 1 – 2.1 Nm3 /kg
Biogas production: 0.34 – 0.38 Nm3 /kg
Limited to one or few products and would

Multiple high-value products can be made
require additional microbes and enzymes for
using fractional separation.
more products.
Primarily susceptible to ambient
Independent of climatic conditions
temperature, anaerobic digester
Production of secondary wastes such as
Complete utilization of waste/biomass
biomass sludge
Less reaction time and hydraulic retention High reaction time and hydraulic retention
time time
Variable capacity (small, medium, and
Mainly higher capacity of the plant
high) of plants are possible
Required a relatively small area Required large area
The major gas composition includes: The major gas composition includes:
CO (30-40 %), H 2 (5-15 %) CH 4 (40-60 %), CO 2 (60-40 %)
It is observed from the above discussion that the main limitation of the
biochemical conversion technique is its inability to process biomass feedstock
62
with higher lignin content and the emission of GHGs during the process .
Meanwhile, the need for pre-treatment of biomass feedstock before it
undergoes biochemical conversion adds to the system's complexity. The
conversion of lignocellulosic biomass (such as wood and grasses) is further
more complex due to the presence of longer-chain polysaccharide molecules
and requires acid or enzymatic hydrolysis before the resulting sugars can be
fermented to ethanol. Such hydrolysis techniques are currently at the pre-pilot
stage2.
23
Chapter 2
Hence, opting for the thermochemical route is suitable for producing

energy from such high lignin biomass. Apart from cellulose, hemicellulose, and
lignin, thermochemical energy conversion also depends upon the elemental
composition and characteristics of biomass. In this regard, proper
characterization and analysis are crucial for determining the suitability of
biomass for energy production and optimizing combustion processes. The
estimation of properties and elemental analysis of biomass are performed
using proximate and ultimate analysis60.
2.1.1 Proximate Analysis of Biomass
When examining the combustion characteristics of a biomass feedstock, the

proportions of "moisture content (MC), volatile matter (VM), fixed carbon (FC),
and ash content" are assessed via proximate analysis 60.
Biomass with high moisture content may require additional heat or

energy to ignite, making it better suited for biofuel production. Usually,
biomass with a moisture content lower than 50 % is suitable for
thermochemical conversion.
The ash content of biomass impacts handling and processing costs

within the overall biomass energy conversion process. Biomass ash typically
includes a significant amount of silica, carbonates, chlorides, and sulfates of
calcium, magnesium, and potassium63. The presence of ash content
diminishes the available energy of the fuel proportionally. Moreover, the low
melting point of dissolved ash in biomass fuels can lead to fouling and
slagging issues in boilers, potentially causing significant combustion problems
and deterioration of boiler equipment over time, necessitating costly
maintenance.
The chemical energy of biomass is stored in two forms: volatile matter

and fixed carbon. A solid fuel's volatile matter (VM) is the portion that is driven
off as a gas by heating (to ≈ 900 ℃ for 7 min). The fixed carbon content (FC),
is the mass remaining after the release of volatiles, excluding the ash and
moisture content64. The high volatility of biomass materials presents numerous
24
Chapter 2
advantages, including low ignition temperature and sustained ignition over a

longer period.
Additionally, the proportions of fixed carbon and volatile matter

influence the calorific value (CV) of the biomass material. The CV of a
substance signifies its energy content or heat release upon combustion in air
and is typically quantified as energy per unit mass or volume: MJ /kg for solids,
MJ /l for liquids or MJ / Nm3 for gases. CV exists in two forms: the gross CV
(GCV) or higher heating value (HHV), accounting for the total energy released
upon combustion, including latent heat from water vapor, and the net CV
(NCV) or lower heating value (LHV), representing the energy available for
practical use after discounting the latent heat in water vapor. While HHV
indicates the maximum recoverable energy from biomass, actual energy
recovery varies depending on the conversion technology. The proximate
analysis of a range of biomass materials is listed in Table 2.3.
Table 2.3: Proximate analysis of some biomass feedstocks (wt%)63.
Biomass HHV (
Moisture (%) VM (%) FC (%) Ash (%)
MJ /kg )
Sawdust 13.8 72.9 12.7 0.6 16.9
Coconut Husk 13.4 56.7 27.5 2.4 15.9
Rice Husk 7.2 61.8 14.6 16.4 15.6
Bagasse 4.5 77.1 16 2.4 19.0
Groundnut Shell 10.1 68 19.1 2.8 16.8
Jatropha Cake 7.3 65.1 19.3 8.3 19.8
2.1.2 Ultimate Analysis of Biomass
When assessing the properties of biomass fuel, the ultimate analysis emerges
as a crucial factor, enabling the determination of the percentage composition
of elements such as carbon (C), hydrogen (H), oxygen (O), nitrogen (N),
chlorine (Cl), and sulfur (S) in each biomass sample. This analysis aids in
understanding how these components affect combustion and environmental
emissions in the thermal systems. Additionally, it facilitates the calculation of
heating value estimates for biomass samples based on their carbon, oxygen,
and hydrogen content (Equation 2.1).
25
Chapter 2
HHV ( kJ /g )=1.1783 H +0.3491 C−0.0211 A−0.0151 N −0.1034 O+0.1005 S (2.1)

The biomass fuel with higher carbon and hydrogen percentages exhibit
a higher heating value. Conversely, biomass with elevated nitrogen (N) and
sulfur (S) content can lead to the generation of toxic gases such as nitrogen
oxides (NOx) and sulfur oxides (SOx) during combustion, contributing
significantly to acid rain formation and the release of particulate matter (PM).
While most biomass materials contain sulfur levels below 0.2%, certain
biomass fuels may have sulfur content ranging from 0.5% to 0.7%. The
ultimate analysis of a range of biomass materials is listed in Table 2.4.
Table 2.4: Ultimate analyses for typical biomass materials (wt%) Material60.
Biomass C (%) H (%) O (%) N (%) S (%) Ash

Wood 47.5 35.8 5.4 0.1 0.1 0.9
Bagasse 43.8 47.1 5.8 0.4 - 2.4
Rice Husk 38.9 32 5.1 0.6 <0.1 16.5
Rice Straw 36.9 37.9 5.0 0.4 0.1 19.8
Coconut Shells 50.2 43.4 5.7 0.0 - 3.8
2.2 Thermochemical conversion of biomass
Thermochemical conversion of biomass can be achieved via direct

combustion and gasification to produce energy.
2.2.1 Biomass Combustion
Combustion represents the direct thermochemical process wherein a fuel

reacts with oxygen to ideally produce CO 2, water vapor, heat, alkaline ash
particles, and smoke as by-products, as depicted in Equation 2.2.
C X OY H Z N W S V + aO2 → bH 2 O+cCO 2 +dSOr + eN m O p + Energy (2.2)
Biomass combustion is a complex process that consists of consecutive

heterogeneous and homogeneous reactions. The main process steps are
drying, devolatilization, volatile combustion, and char combustion (Figure
2.2a). The key to understanding biomass combustion is recognizing that only
tar gases burn with oxidizer and release heat (exothermic reactions). Liquids
and solids do not burn themselves but consume heat in the drying and
26
Chapter 2
volatilization processes (endothermic reactions)64. The main fuel intermediates

are the volatile hydrocarbons and energy-rich organic molecules, carbon
monoxide (CO), hydrogen ( H 2) and char with entrapped ash. Further, these
volatiles burn with oxygen (mostly in air) in flame and release CO 2 and H 2 O,
along with a high-temperature environment around the remaining solid char.
The char with the entrapped ash further consumes oxygen to burn its fixed
carbon at high temperatures and release CO 2.
Figure 2.2: Combustion and thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) of biomass (wood). (a)
Schematic representation of biomass combustion processes. (b, c) Mass loss as a function of
time and temperature during the combustion of wood64.
The main requirement for the complete combustion is three T’s, i.e., time,
temperature, and turbulence, which further depends upon the fuel size,
amount of oxidizer, and the combustion chamber’s design. The batch
combustion of a small particle (≈ 100 mg of beech wood) shows the mass loss
of biomass with a distinct drying, volatilization, and char oxidation phase with
time (Figure 2.2b), ensuring a complete combustion64. As the temperature of
the biomass rises, moisture gets driven off at a temperature less than 150 ℃ ,
followed by the release of volatile gases up to 600 ℃ , and eventually, the
fixed carbon (char) with the entrapped ash is left as a remainder (Figure
27
Chapter 2
2.2c)64. Further, the remaining carbon in char also gets oxidized in the
presence of oxygen at high temperatures. However, for large particles, the
various processes overlap to a certain extent, which disturbs the rate of
exothermic and endothermic reactions occurring in different processes,
resulting in incomplete combustion and producing high CO emissions. In
addition, the nitrogen and sulfur present in the fuel lead to nitrogen oxides NO x
and sulfur oxides SO x emissions. Hence, the distinction of the different
processes is imperative to optimize the pollutants and the combustion
efficiency of the boiler.
In this regard, the main operating variables that influence the

performance and emissions of boilers include the amount of air (excess air
ratio denoted as λ ), air distribution within the boiler (air-staging), and load
input (combustion chamber design). The excess air ratio ( λ ) or fuel-air
equivalence ratio (ϕ ) is the amount of air used in biomass combustion to the
amount of stoichiometric air required to burn the biomass completely. An
excess air ratio greater than 1 ( λ> 1) is necessary to ensure adequate mixing
and complete combustion64. The optimal value for excess air ratio typically
falls between 1.2 and 1.5; excessively high excess air levels are not
recommended for optimized thermal efficiency and emissions3,6,65.
In addition, air-staging is widespread in domestic and industrial boilers

wherein the two-stage combustion involves primary air injection into the fuel
bed and subsequent secondary air injection into the combustion chamber
(Figure 2.3a)65. This facilitates the effective mixing of combustion air with
combustible gases generated by devolatilization and gasification in the fuel
bed. Adequate mixing promotes high efficiency and elevated temperatures for
complete burnout and reduction in unburnt pollutant concentration. However,
precise process control is necessary to maintain optimal excess air levels.
Literature suggests that the ratio of primary to secondary air ( λ prim / λ sec) is also
the pivotal variable influencing emissions in small-scale combustion. The
primary air must be under stoichiometric conditions ( λ prim < 1). Additionally,
sufficient residence time and an enlarged furnace volume are necessary for
the fuel bed and the secondary air inlet (Figure 2.3b). In this case, an excess
of primary air around 0.7, with a temperature of 1150 °C in the reduction zone,
28
Chapter 2
is produced, which requires a residence time of at least 0.5 seconds in the

secondary burning zone64. However, the relatively high temperature may pose
challenges in practical applications due to undesired ash softening and
deposit formation.
Discussing the application of air-staging techniques in practical

systems, traditional biomass boilers with natural air circulation within the
combustion chamber have low efficiencies and high emissions 4. In response
to that, the air-staged boilers with access air (Figure 2.3a,b), introduced to
meet emission norms, use techniques such as forced excess air ( λ ≈ 1−2.5)3,6.
Boilers based on air-staging have high thermal efficiency (above 70 %) and
good turndown ratios (1<TR<4). However, the incomplete combustion of
biomass constitutes a notable origin of various potential pollutants, including
CO, methane, polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), and fine particulate matter
6,48
(PM) . While many pellet boilers in the market claim the optimized
combustion with minimal emissions under the designed nominal operational
load, emissions of these pollutants differ significantly when the boiler operates
at a lower modulated or reduced load6.
Verma et al. (2011) observed that carbon monoxide (CO) emissions

from the combustion of reed canary grass pellets and straw pellets were
negligible at nominal load (35-40 kW th). However, under reduced load
conditions (10-15 kW th), these same pellets emitted 1.9, 4.0, and 7.4 times
more CO than wood pellets, respectively 6. However, the NO x emissions do not
change significantly with the load. It is understood that the NO x emission from
the biomass boiler primarily depends upon the nitrogen content in the
biomass/pellets. Pellets with higher nitrogen content are more likely to emit
high NO x emissions6. Carvahlo et al. (2013) implied that a biomass boiler’s
design is not optimum for all types of fuel input. In addition, provided the
variety of fuels and thermal loads, the excess air control inside the combustion
chamber is a big challenge. The difficulty in maintaining suitable excess air
leads to incomplete combustion and CO and PAH emissions 66. Hence, based
on the characteristics of the solid biofuel, it is essential to adjust the
29
Chapter 2
combustion conditions precisely to attain maximum efficiency and comply with

minimal emissions65.
Figure 2.3: Classification of fixed-bed combustion techniques in biomass boilers. (a)

Conventional air-staging, (b) Advanced air-staging, (c) Fuel-staging64.
Different commercially available direct combustion-based biomass boilers (13-

50 kW th capacity) in use are listed in Tables 2.4 and 2.5.
Apart from the gaseous emissions, various researchers have also

explored particle emissions from biomass boilers 7,8,67–69. Particle emission is
mainly of two types: particles from incomplete combustion (soot, condensable
organic particles, and char) and inorganic material in fuel ash. Particulate
matter (PM) with a diameter smaller than 2.5 μm is considered a significant
indicator of the health implications of ambient air pollution. Indeed, the link
between PM and adverse health impacts, particularly respiratory and
cardiovascular diseases, has been acknowledged for some time, especially
among the elderly and individuals with pre-existing respiratory and cardiac
conditions70.
Fernandes et al. (2012) tested a commercial biomass air-staged boiler

20 kW th using pine wood pellets and characterizing the PM emissions.
Different types of particulate matter including ultrafine particulates (<100 nm)
sub-micrometer and micrometer-sized particles/ agglomerates, mainly
composed of oxygen (O), potassium (K), chlorine (Cl), sodium (Na), and sulfur
(S) were present in sub-micrometer (and micrometer) sized
30
Chapter 2
particles/agglomerates formed from soot, primarily composed of carbon,

oxygen, calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), potassium (K), and phosphorus (P).
Table 2.5: Performance of various air-staging-based biomass combustion boilers.
Researcher Boiler Turndown Fuel Input ηth (%) Emissions

Capacity ratio (TR)
Juszczak et 20 kW th ≈ 3.5 Wood pellet 83 Considerable dust
al. (2008)66 (soot and
particulates) are
found at the filter.
Dust (mg/ Nm3 ) 86
Dias et al. 13 kW th ≈4 Low ash 77 CO (ppm) < 1216

(2004)3 pellet NO x (ppm) 296
Cardozo et 20 kW th - Sunflower 91.7 CO (ppm) 2000-3000
5
al. (2016) husk pellet NO (mg/ Nm3 ) 500
SO 2 (mg/ Nm3) 80-

90
Clara et al. 50 kW th - Pine pellets 91 CO (ppm) 157
(2013) 65
NO x (ppm) 40
Verma et al. 35 kW th ≈4 Sunflower 89-92 CO (ppm) 1500
(2011) 6
husk, apple NO x (ppm) 110-
pellets 150
Dust (mg/ Nm3 ) 500
Carvalho et 15 kW th ≈2 Wheat straw, 79-89 CO (ppm) 341

al. (2013) 66
Mischantus NO x (ppm) 271
grass, Maize SO 2 (ppm) 10-
81
Dust (mg/ Nm3 ) 140
Rabacal et 22 kW th ≈2 Pine pellets 75-86 CO (ppm) 400-600

al. (2013) 48
NO x (ppm) 400
≈ 1.5 Spent coffee CO (ppm) 350-1785

Limousy et ground NO x (ppm) 200
7
8-12 kW th 64-84
al. (2013) (SCG) and
Pine Pellet
31
Chapter 2
Particulate emissions are the function of fuel type, thermal input capacity, and
excess air ratio. Higher particle concentrations occur at higher excess air
ratios (high loads). Moreover, the high ash content in biomass fuels results in
a high concentration of particle emission. Conversely, lower excess air leads
to unsatisfactory low-temperature combustion, yielding soot (unburnt carbon
particle) and condensed organic particles67. The particle emissions from
different commercially available biomass boilers have thermal capacity in the
range of 4-25 kW th is tabulated in Table 2.6.
Table 2.6: Particulate emissions from biomass direct combustion boiler.
Researcher Boiler Fuel input Turndown Particle emissions

capacity Ratio (TR) ¿¿
Fernandes et al.
22 kW th Wood pellet ≈2 PM ≈ 160 – 490
(2012)8
Johansson et al. Wood pellet and
6-22 kW th ≈ 2.5 PM ≈ 34 – 240
(2003)67 briquettes
Spent coffee
Limousy et al. PM ≈ 310 – 1071
8-12 kW th ground (SCG) ≈ 1.5
(2013) 7 VOC≈ 200-550
and Pine Pellet
Sawdust,
Boman et al.
10-15 kW th Logging Residue - PM ≈ 64 – 300
(2004)68
and Bark Pellets
Benzene (C 6 H 6 ),
Olsson et al.
4-25 kW th Softwood Pellets ≈ 6.0 Naphthalene
(2004)69
emissions
Some preliminary investigations into air-staged combustion of biomass in

grate-fired and fluidized-bed systems have also documented a significant
decrease in NO x emissions (up to 70%)71. However, due to the higher
temperatures observed in the primary combustion zone, the air staging
method presents certain constraints, primarily linked to the fusibility of
biomass ash.
In this regard, the fuel-staging technique is introduced wherein fuel is

introduced into the furnace at two distinct levels, where the primary fuel
undergoes combustion with λ> 1 (Figure 2.3c)64. Subsequently, a successive
32
Chapter 2
reduction zone is established by introducing secondary fuel along with a

delayed inlet of final combustion air for the secondary fuel. The secondary fuel
is generally the unburnt fuel from the first stage and is collected on a second
grate for burnout (Figure 2.3c). The insertion of the secondary fuel bed lead to
the conversion of NO x to N 2 eventually, reduce the NO x emissions
significantly. The fuel-staging technique results in similar performance and
emissions at a relatively lower temperature (below 850 ℃ ) than air-staging,
which also rectifies the ash fusing and deposition 64. Despite being one of the
best biomass combustion techniques, the fuel-staged technique has not been
explored much71. However, it is interesting to note that the insertion of the
reduction zone by introducing a secondary fuel bed (remainder char from
primary bed) leads to high carbon conversion. The fuel-staging technique
closely resembles biomass gasification, wherein a clear distinction between all
the combustion zones is achieved.
2.2.2 Biomass Gasification
Biomass gasification is a thermochemical self-sustained process that converts

solid biomass materials into combustible gases. Biomass gasification involves
the combustion of biomass under a nascent oxygen environment (fuel
equivalence ratio ϕ ≈ 0.2-0.4), resulting in the production of combustible
gases, primarily carbon monoxide (CO), hydrogen ( H 2 ¿, and trace amounts of
methane (CH 4 , collectively known as producer gas (PG). The fuel equivalence
ratio (ϕ ) is the ratio of the air supplied for the gasification to the stoichiometric
air required for the complete combustion of the biomass. The producer gas
quality from the gasification varies per the gasifying agent, i.e., air, oxygen, or
steam. While the main gasifying agent is usually air, steam, and oxygen are
also used as gasifying agents. The different types of gasifying agents produce
the producer gas of different quality, i.e., 4-6 MJ / Nm3 for air, and 12-18
3
MJ / Nm for oxygen or steam. The overall reactants and products of
gasification (with air as a gasification agent) are shown in Equation 2.3.
C H x O y N z+ mw H 2 O+ x g ( O2+3.76 N 2) → x 1 CO+ x2 H 2 + x 3 C O2 + x 4 CH 4 + x 5 H 2 O+( z

)
(2.3) + 3.76 x g N 2
2
33
Chapter 2
The conversion of solid biomass (C H x O y N z+ mw H 2 O) into gaseous products

occurs through a series of thermochemical reactions. The biomass processing
in each gasifier is broadly divided into four distinct zones: drying, pyrolysis,
oxidation, and reduction (Figure 2.4).
Figure 2.4: Schematic representation of biomass conversion in a gasification reactor72.
In the drying zone, the biomass releases moisture at 100-150 ℃ , resulting in

dry biomass and water vapor73. Subsequently, on further rising the
temperature, the release of volatile compounds starts, which is a temperature-
dependent process: up to 200°C, water evaporates, followed by carbon
dioxide, acetic acid, and water release between 200 to 280°C. In the main
pyrolysis phase (280 to 500°C), tar, carbon dioxide-containing gases, light
tars, and some methyl alcohol are produced. Above 500°C to 700°C, gas
production primarily yields hydrogen.
In the combustion zone (700 to 1100°C), biomass undergoes oxidation,

primarily involving the complete combustion reactions 73. In partial combustion
or reduction zone, products pass through a hot reactive charcoal bed,
34
Chapter 2
undergoing endothermic reactions that alter gas composition and temperature.

Reduction zone temperatures typically range from 650-900°C, yielding lower
gas calorific values. The reactions that occur in the combustion and reduction
zone are shown in Table 2.773:
Table 2.7: Different chemical reactions occur within various zones in a gasifier73.
Combustion Zone Reduction Zone

C+ O2 ↔ 2CO−394 kJ /mol Boudouard reaction:
C+ CO2 ↔2 CO+ 172 kJ /mol
2 H 2+ O2 ↔ 2 H 2 O−242 kJ /mol
Water gas reaction:
CH 4 +2 O2 ↔ CO 2+2 H 2 O−803 kJ /mol C+ H 2 O ↔CO + H 2 +131 kJ /mol
Water gas shift reaction:
2 CO+O2 ↔2 CO 2−284 kJ /mol
CO+ H 2 O ↔CO 2 + H 2−41 kJ /mol
Hydrogasification reaction:
C+ 2 H 2 ↔C H 4−73 kJ /mol
and
C+ 1/2O2 ↔CO−111 kJ /mol
The typical composition of various gases in the exit producer gas is shown in
Table 2.8.
Table 2.8: Composition of producer gas from commercial wood gasifiers74.
Lower Heating Value

Component Percentage (Vol %)
( MJ / Nm3)
Carbon monoxide (CO) 17-22 ≈ 12

Hydrogen ( H 2) 12-20 ≈ 10
Methane (CH 4 ) 2-3 ≈ 36
Nitrogen ( N 2) 50-54 -
Carbon dioxide (CO 2) 9-15 -
Producer gas Lower Heating Value 5-6
The reactor in which the gasification is performed is termed as gasifier. There

are several types of gasifiers used in biomass gasification, including fixed-bed
gasifiers75,76, fluidized-bed gasifiers77–79, and entrained-flow gasifiers80–82.
Fixed bed gasifiers are more prominent than other gasifiers, i.e.,
fluidized bed and entrained flow gasifiers, due to their simple design, easy
operation, and low power requirements83. Fixed bed gasifiers are categorized
35
Chapter 2
based on how the air/oxygen or steam is introduced into them, resulting in

three primary types: downdraft, updraft, and crossdraft gasifiers, as illustrated
in Figure 2.5. In the updraft gasifier, air is introduced from the bottom, passing
through the biomass, and the resulting combustible gases exit from the top of
the gasifier (Figure 2.5a). Conversely, in a downdraft gasifier, air is supplied
downward (Figure 2.5b). In addition, crossdraft gasifiers are rarely used, and
they have air inlets from one side and the exit of producer gas from the other
side (Figure 2.5c).
Figure 2.5: Classification of fixed bed gasifiers. (a) Updraft, (b) Downdraft, (c) Crossdraft 84.
The choice of gasifier type depends on several factors, including the type of
fuel used, its ultimate form, size, moisture content, and ash content. The
downdraft and updraft gasifiers are more prominent due to their simple design
and easy operation.
In the updraft gasifier, the biomass is introduced from the top and air
from the bottom of the reactor (Figure 2.5a). Immediately above the grate, the
solid char combusted with air and generates a high temperature of about 1000
℃ 9. Further, the completely combusted gases pass through the reduction and
pyrolysis zones, wherein the endothermic reactions drop the temperature of
the gases significantly. Moreover, the volatile compounds released in the
pyrolysis zone generate considerable quantities of tar, which leaves the
gasifier with the producer gas. Due to the low temperature of the producer gas
(≈ 250 ℃ ) leaving the gasifier, the overall energy efficiency of the process is
high, but the tar content of the gas is also significantly high9.
Conversely, the downdraft gasifier allows the tar produced in the

pyrolysis zone to pass through a high-temperature combustion zone ( ≈ 1100
36
Chapter 2
℃ ) (Figure 2.5b). Such high temperatures lead to thermal cracking of the

heavy tar compounds, resulting in minimal tar content in the exit producer gas.
However, the exit producer gas temperature is significantly higher (≈ 450 ℃ )
in downdraft gasifiers compared to updraft gasifiers. Many researchers
performed experimental investigations on downdraft and updraft gasifiers of
various thermal capacities (10-400 kW th) and fuel types using air as a
gasification agent, shown in Table 2.9.
Table 2.9: Performance of various capacity fixed bed biomass gasifiers.
Researcher Gasifier Turndown Fuel ηth (%) Tar and PM

Capacity/Type ratio (TR) Input in Producer
gas (PG)
Wood
TR ≈ 1.6
Zanial et al. 40-65 kW th chips, 67-87
(2002)76
ϕ ≈ 0.26- furniture (Cold Gas)
-
(Downdraft)
0.46 wood
≈2
Guo et al. 11-22 kW th 35-67 Tar 0.5-2.5
(2014)85
ϕ ≈ 0.18- Cornstalk
(Cold gas) 3
(Downdraft) g/ Nm
0.37
Wood
chips,
≈ 2.3
Striugas et al. 100-230 kW th poultry 75-83 Tar 0.4-3.3
(2014)86
ϕ ≈ 0.2- litter, (Cold gas) 3
(Downdraft) g/ Nm
0.41 sewage
sludge
≈ 3.5
Ma et al. 8-28 kW th 27-50 Tar 1.3-2.1
(2015)87
ϕ ≈ 0.17- Rice husk
(Cold gas) 3
(Downdraft) g/ Nm
0.3
45-62
Kirsanovs et 225-366 kW th Wood (Cold gas)
≈ 1.4 -
al. (2017)88 (Downdraft) chips 52-69
(Hot gas)
≈2
Municipal
Khosasaeng ≈ 30 kW th ϕ ≈ 0.15- 35-70
Solid -
et al. (2017)89 (Downdraft) 0.50 (Cold gas)
Waste
Tar 3.5-3.8
Lignite- 3
Upadhyay et ≈ 30 kW th ϕ ≈ 0.24- 50-80 g/ Nm
sawdust
al. (2019)89 (Downdraft) 0.39 (Cold gas) PM 0.05
briquettes 3
g/ Nm
40-75
TR≈ 1.5 Tar 2–6
Awais et al. 8-12 kW th Coconut (Cold gas)
(2021)90
ϕ ≈ 0.17- shells 45-90
(mol %)
(Downdraft)
0.29 (Hot gas)
Mena et al. ≈ 400 kW th ϕ ≈ 0.24- Olive 76-93 Tar 2–6
(2016)91
37
Chapter 2
(mol %)
(Updraft) 0.38 leaves (Cold gas)
Tar 5 (mol %)
Saravankumar ≈ 10 kW th 86 PM0.05
TR≈ 2 Wood
et al. (2007)92 (Updraft) (Cold gas) 3
g/ Nm
Wood
TR≈ 2
Plis et al. ≈ 20-30 kW th pellet, 50-60
(2011)
ϕ ≈ 0.25- Oak husk (Cold gas)
-
(Updraft)
0.33 pellet
In some cases, the cold gas and hot gas efficiencies of the gasification
systems are observed in the range of as low as 35 % to as high as 90 %. The
cold and hot gas efficiencies are defined as Equations 2.4 and 2.5,
respectively.
Cold gas efficiency (η cold):
V̇ pg × LHV pg (2.4)
η cold = ×100
ṁfuel × LHV fuel
and Hot gas efficiency (ηhot ):
ηhot =
[ {V̇ pg × LHV pg } + {V̇ pg × ρ pg × C p × ( T pg−T amb ) } ] ×100 (2.5)
ṁ fuel × LHV fuel
where V̇ pg is the volume flow rate of producer gas from the gasifier (in Nm3 /h ),
LHV pg is the lower heating value of the producer gas (in MJ / Nm3), ṁfuel mass
consumption rat of the input biomass fuel (in kg /h). In hot gas efficiency, the
sensible heat of the hot producer gas [V̇ pg × ρ pg ×C p × ( T pg−T amb ) ¿ is also taken
into consideration.
The thermal efficiency of updraft gasifiers is higher than that of

downdraft gasifiers. However, the tar produced in the exit producer gas is
significantly high in the updraft gasifiers. The high efficiencies of the updraft
gasifiers are due to relatively low reactor temperatures and low produce gas
outlet temperatures. On the other hand, downdraft gasifiers with significantly
high-temperature reactors are associated with high surface heat loss from the
reactor and the producer gas. Hence, the heat recovery strategy to improve
the gasification efficiency of the systems is the need of the hour.
38
Chapter 2
In addition, the thermal efficiency of the gasifier is a direct function of

the air-fuel equivalence ratio (ϕ ). Most studies have considered the range of
equivalence ratio (ϕ ) as 0.15-0.50. The efficiency of the gasifier increases with
ϕ reaches the maximum and then decreases, as shown in Figure 2.6.
Figure 2.6: The trends of heating value and efficiency of the downdraft gasifiers with
equivalence ratio (ϕ )76,89.
The narrow equivalence ratio range in the gasification systems also leads to a
low turndown ratio (TR≈ 2) of the systems. Provided this drawback, it is
challenging to implement the gasification systems in thermal applications with
high variations in load demands. Hence, there is a need to extend the
turndown ratio of the gasifiers. Operating the designed gasifiers at lower loads
demands low equivalence ratio operations (ϕ <0.2 ), i.e., running the gasifiers
with less gasification air. However, lowering the amount of gasification air
disturbs the gasification zone’s temperature, which affects the rate of reactions
occurring in different zones, further degrading the heating value of PG. Hence,
techniques to decrease the gasification air with concomitant maintenance of
zone temperature are needed in an hour.
Gasification systems have been used in the engine for electricity

generation and thermal applications. Regarding thermal applications, many
studies in the literature show that gasification systems have fever emissions
and an environmentally clean technique compared to direct combustion
boilers93–95. Emissions from some of the producer gas combustors are shown
in Table 2.10.
Table 2.10: Gaseous and particulate emissions from biomass gasification-based burners.
Burner
Researcher Fuel input Emissions
capacity
Dattrajan et al.
Coconut shells 38 kW th PM < 100
(2014)93
39
Chapter 2
Kanokkran et al. CO (ppm) <160

Eucalyptus wood 12 kW th
(2021)94 NO x (ppm) <160
CO (ppm) < 200
NO x (ppm) <300
Deore et al. (2023)95 Garden Waste 10-15 kW th 3
PM (mg/ Nm )
<0.0025
Overall, biomass gasification with the downdraft gasifier seems to be one of

the most environmentally friendly ways to generate the thermal energy from
biomass compared to direct combustion boilers. However, the low turndown
ratio and the lower efficiencies should be addressed using engineering
interventions (Figure 2.7).
Figure 2.7: The comparison of biomass to thermal energy pathways. (a) Direct combustion (b)
Gasification.
Thermal energy from biomass can be directly used in heating and processing
applications. However, powering cold storage for perishables requires
integrating low-grade energy-based refrigeration systems (Figure 2.8). Vapor-
compression-based cold storage solutions are unreliable and inadequate due
to costs and uncertainties with grid supply at the farm level. They also use
HCFCs and HFCs as refrigerants, with a high GWP19,56.
40
Chapter 2
Figure 2.8: Schematic of biomass gasification-based cold storage and processing units.
Hence, it is imperative to develop renewable energy-based cold storage and

processing units capable of operating off-the-grid and using environmentally
friendly refrigerants. In this regard, a literature survey of the developed off-the-
grid cold storage and processing units is discussed in the next section.
2.3 Off-the-grid cold storage and processing units
The issue of food wastage is a global challenge that impacts the economy, the
environment, and society, particularly in developing countries. Nearly 40-50 %
of perishables are specifically wasted annually in India. These losses are
attributed to the limited access to and uncertainties associated with post-
harvest facilities such as cold storage, transportation, and processing units.
Certain studies have been performed to develop off-the-grid cold storages and
processing units shown in Table 2.11.
Table 2.11: Performance of various renewable energy based off-the-grid cold storage units.
Cooling
Energy Refrigeration
Researcher Capacity COP Application
Source Process
(kW)
Luo et al. Adsorption Grain cold
3.2-4.4 0.1-0.3
(2006)96 Solar- (Silica gel-water) storage
Sadi et al. thermal Absorption
17.6 0.6-0.7 Cold storage
(2020)97 (Li-Br –water)
Adsorption
(Zeolite-13X-
Dawoud et Solar- Vaccine
water) 0.070 0.28
al. (2006)98 Natural gas cooling
And
(SWS-2L – water)
41
Chapter 2
Vapour
Rosiek et al.
compression - - -
(2019)99
(R-134)
Vapor Cold storage
Aziz et al. Solar
compression 14 4.1 for fruits and
(2024)100 photovoltai
(R404A) vegetables
c with PCM
Vapor
Munir et al. compression Cold storage
7 4.6
(2021)101 refrigeration cycle for potato
(R404A)
Jatropha
Adsorption
Hossain et and 4
(Active carbon- - Ice plant
al. (2013)102 pongamia
ammonia)
oil
8 Metric Ton
Gundu et al. Solar- Absorption 0.58- Cold storage of
17.6
(2018)103 biogas (LiBr –water) 0.7 fruits and
vegetables
15 Metric tons
Anbazhagha
Biomass Absorption of Cold storage
n et al. 11.5 0.2-0.7
gasifier (Ammonia –water) of fruits and
(2005)104
vegetables
These units comprising the solar photovoltaic systems powered vapor

compression cycle based cold storage units are also explored by the
researchers but use high GWP refrigerant (R134, R404a), which are a threat
to the environment99–101. In addition to that, some units use environmentally
friendly refrigerants (such as ammonia, water, and ethanol) in the
adsorption/absorption refrigeration systems, powered using solar-thermal with
thermal energy storage, hybrid thermal (solar-natural gas) based energy
sources96–98. However, relatively high investment costs, large installation area
requirements, and associated intermittency discourage their practical
implementation. Moreover, the low adsorption capacities of the physisorption-
based adsorbents silica gel, active carbon, and zeolite lead to big sizes of the
refrigeration systems and low coefficient of performances (COP≈ 0.1−0.3).
However, there are limited studies on biomass gasification-based cold storage
systems, which are also based on absorption based refrigeration systems with
many rectifying equipment, are prone to crystallization, and are not feasible
under severe vibrations104.
42
Chapter 2
2.4 Features and Challenges with NH 3−CaCl2 Adsorption

Refrigeration Systems
Adsorption refrigeration systems employ an adsorption pair, typically a solid-

gas combination, where the solid is the adsorbent and the gas the adsorbate
or refrigerant. Studies show that chemical adsorption pairs, such as Metal
Chloride CaCl2 / MgCl 2 – Ammonia, Metal Hydride - Ammonia 56
, outperform
physical adsorption pairs (Activated Carbon – Methanol or Ammonia, Silica
Gel - Water, Zeolite – Water, Expanded Graphite - Ammonia) in sorption
capacities and rates11,105–113.
Calcium chloride – ammonia (CaCl2−NH 3) adsorption pair is known for

its higher adsorption capacities, can handle severe vibrations, and doesn't
need any rectifying equipment12,114. In addition, ammonia is a great candidate
for refrigerant due to its high latent heat ( ≈ 1370 kJ /kg @ 1 bar absolute), very
low boiling point (−34 ℃ @ 1 bar absolute), zero ozone depletion potential,
and zero global warming potential56. One mole of calcium chloride can adsorb
up to 8 moles of ammonia and form octa-ammoniate, denoted as CaCl2 .8 NH 3
(the sorption capacity∆ χ ≈ 1.227 kg NH 3 /kg of CaCl 2). At higher temperatures,
calcium chloride octa-ammoniate generates 8 moles of ammonia in four
endothermic reactions, as elaborated below in Eq. 2.6-2.957.
CaCl2 .8 NH 3 + ∆ H 1 ⇋ CaCl 2 .4 NH 3 +4 NH 3 @T 1 (2.6)

CaCl2 .4 NH 3+ ∆ H 2 ⇋ CaCl2 .2 NH 3 +2 NH 3 @T 2 (2.7)
CaCl2 .2 NH 3 +∆ H 3 ⇋ CaCl 2+ NH 3 @T 3 (2.8)
CaCl2 . NH 3 +∆ H 3 ⇋ CaCl 2+ NH 3 @T 4 (2.9)
where T 1, T 2, T 3 and T 4 are the equilibrium reaction temperatures and ∆ H 1,

∆ H 2, ∆ H 3 and ∆ H 4 are the heat consumed by the reactions, respectively. The
aforementioned equilibrium reactions are mono-variant in nature, wherein the
pressure and temperature of the reaction are interdependent and modeled as
Eq. 2.1057.
1 A i−ln( Pi)
= 2
… … … i=1 ,2 , 3 , 4 (2.10)
Ti Bi ×10
43
Chapter 2
where Pi is the pressure of ammonia in Pascal (Pa), T i is the temperature in

kelvin (K). The constants Ai , Bi and enthalpy of reactions ∆ H i are tabulated in
Table 2.12.
Table 2.12: Ammonia Sorption reactions: equilibrium conditions and enthalpy of reactions57.
i Reaction Ai Bi ∆ H (kJ /mol) @

temp
e1 CaCl2 .8 NH 3 to 28.22 ± 0.12 50.6 ± 0.4 42.1 ± 0.3 @ 314 K
CaCl2 .4 NH 3
e2 CaCl2 .4 NH 3 to 27.6 ± 0.13 50.5 ± 0.4 42.0 ± 0.3 @ 325 K
CaCl2 .2 NH 3
e3 CaCl2 .2 NH 3 to 30.2 ± 0.26 81.4 ± 1.0 67.8 ± 0.8 @ 395 K
CaCl2 . NH 3
e4 CaCl2 . NH 3 to CaCl2 30.94 ± 0.30 94.0 ± 1.2 78.2 ±0.8 @ 412 K
As stated above, in a complete adsorption reaction, one mole of CaCl2 adsorb

8 moles of NH 3 ( 1.23 kg NH 3 /kg of CaCl 2) . However, at normal operating
conditions in an adsorption refrigerator (≈ 11 bar absolute), the temperature
required for the reactions mentioned above (i=1 ¿ 4 ) is 354 K (81℃ ), 369 K
(96℃ ), 500 K (227℃ ), 552 K (279℃ ) respectively. This suggests that
reactions 3 and 4 require very high temperatures, i.e., high energy input.
Moreover, the dissociation of ammonia at such elevated temperatures is also
a possibility11. Hence, for a typical adsorption refrigerator (desorption pressure
¯ , and condenser pressure Pcond ≈ 3 absolute
Pdes ≈ 13 absolute ¯ ), after the initial
adsorption of 8moles of NH 3 /mole of CaCl 2, only six moles (0.92 kg NH 3 /kg CaCl2)
are available for further adsorption/desorption cycles. The regeneration and
the condensation temperature of ammonia are ≈ 100 ℃ and ≈ 50 ℃ ,
respectively (Figure 2.9a). Hence, the adsorption/desorption of six moles of
NH 3 per mole of CaCl2 ( 0.92 kg NH 3 /kg of CaCl 2) is considered a complete
reaction (Figure 2.9).
Despite such high adsorption capacities, gradual agglomeration and

swelling issues have been a roadblock towards long-term performance. For
example, anhydrous CaCl2 agglomerates and swell upon ammonia adsorption
44
Chapter 2
and further disintegrate with repetitive adsorption/desorption cycles [5].

Similarly, very low thermal conductivity (k) [ 0.1−0.4 W / ( m−k ) ] and porosity of
anhydrous CaCl2 result in poor heat and mass transfer performance 12,115
.
However, achieving stable long-term performance of NH 3−CaCl2 based
systems is challenging due to the loss of CaCl2 (expansion-induced cracks)
from the bed, affecting heat and mass transfer performance.
Figure 2.9: (a) Equilibrium diagram for the sorption reactions of calcium chloride and ammonia
116
. (b) Issues with NH 3−CaCl2 adsorption pair in adsorption refrigeration systems117.
Accordingly, many researchers explored the possibility of mixing chemical

adsorbents (such as CaCl2) with the physical adsorbents as additives X (such
as activated carbon AC, expanded graphite EG, and carbon nanotubes CNT)
and binders Y (such as Portland cement PC and calcium sulfate CaSO 4),
termed as composite adsorbents12,110,118–121. The physical adsorbent (generally
a porous material with a high surface area) acts as a host matrix to the
chemical adsorbent, which provides structural support and allows high
adsorbent-adsorbate interaction sites122. Conversely, the purpose of a binder
is to restrict the swelling by holding the material tightly, which avoids gradual
disintegration at higher sorption cycles116. The composite adsorbents
synthesized in the literature using various methods and proportions are
tabulated in Table 2.13.
The results from the aforementioned studies suggest that the PC as a

binder is not fully effective in suppressing swelling and instead makes the
composite brittle, thereby increasing the possibility of disintegration. Moreover,
the adsorbent (CaCl2) on a thermally conducive host matrix with a firm
45
Chapter 2
structure (constant pore space) is desirable to have high and stable sorption
capacity. Hence, the ideal adsorbent must be porous to allow easy ammonia
sorption, tightly bound to avoid disintegration even in the long term, thermally
conducive for fast sorption rates (low cycle times), and should not not swell. In
addition, for a composite to be used in commercialized equipment, the
experimental assessment of the long-term performance with the high number
of adsorption/desorption cycles is crucial. It is interesting to note that none of
the studies in the literature have reported the long-term performance of the
developed composites. Moreover, reports on in-situ visualization of the
composite's swelling, agglomeration, and disintegration during long-term
experiments are absent in the literature. Accordingly, some studies in the
literature explore the potential of mixing chemical adsorbents such as CaCl2
with physical adsorbents as additives and binders, creating composite
110,123,124
adsorbents . These additives provide structural support and enhance
adsorbent-adsorbate interaction. However, the long-term performance of
CaCl2 composites after numerous sorption cycles are yet to be reported, and
detailed analysis of the composites’ changes during long-term experiments is
scarce.
46
Chapter 2
Table 2.13. Studies on various additives (X) and binders (Y) used with CaCl2−NH 3 adsorption pair.
Mass Transfer
Heat Transfer Characteristic Swelling,
Additive/Binder Ratio/method Characteristic Agglomeration, Cycles
Author (∆ χ ) (
X/Y CaCl2: X: Y (Thermal Cond.) and Tested
[W / ( m−K )]
kg NH 3 /kg CaCl 2 Disintegration
)
-/PC* 4 : 0: 1 Not affected 24 % swelling 5
116
Iloege, (1986) -
-/CaSO 4 4 : 0: 1 50% reduction 12 % swelling 10
4:1:0 No
AC/-
Simple Mixing
0.4 ≈ 0.52 agglomeration
7
12
Wang et al.,(2004)
16 : 4: 1 Agglomeration
AC/PC
Simple Mixing
- ≈ 0.8 and swelling
-
No
4:1:0
Simple Mixing
0.3-0.5 ≈ 0.8 agglomeration 15
Wang et al.,(2006) 110 but swelling
4:1:0 Swelling is
Simple Mixing
7.2-7.5 ≈ 0. 65 observed
-
ENG/-
Impregnation
Han et al.,(1999)115 10-49 - - -
of CaCl2
Avoid
Oliveira et al., 13 :7: 0
- 0.90 agglomeration ≈ -
(2007)120 Impregnation
50% swelling
4:1:0 Avoid
Jiang et al.,(2014)119 ENG-TSA#/- 20-90 0.40 7
Simple Mixing agglomeration
4:1:0 Avoid
Yan et al., (2014)121 CNT/- - 0.54 1
Impregnation Agglomeration
47
Chapter 2
* PC-Portland Cement, # ENG-TSA- Expanded graphite treated with sulfuric acid
48
Chapter 2
2.5 Concluding Remarks
In view of the above discussion, it is evident that there is a pressing need to

devise and showcase solutions based on biomass gasification for off-grid cold
storage and processing of farm perishables. Developing technologies that
utilize biomass, often discarded through open burning, as an energy source is
crucial. This not only reduces harmful emissions but also adds economic value
to farm residue.
The current advancements in biomass gasification technology highlight
the need to devise methods to tackle parasitic heat losses, thereby enhancing
thermal efficiencies. Moreover, extending the turndown ratio of gasification-
based thermal systems is also crucial. Further, exploring adsorption
refrigeration systems, which are dependent on thermal energy, as a feasible
alternative for off-grid cold storage is warranted. For example, a
comprehensive investigation of chemisorption-based adsorption pairs, such as
CaCl2−NH 3, should be conducted. This involves preparing CaCl2 composites
with additives such as expanded graphite (EG) to address the long-term
reliability issues in the adsorption beds. Such research may contribute
significantly to developing sustainable and efficient off-grid storage and
processing units for perishables.
49
CHAPTER 3
DEVELOPMENT OF A BIOMASS-GASIFICATION-
BASED HOT WATER GENERATION SYSTEM
As per the literature review, biomass gasification with the downdraft gasifier is
identified to be one of the most environmentally friendly ways to generate
useful energy from biomass in the form of producer gas. The energy of
producer gas can be further utilized for power generation through Internal
combustion engines or gas turbines125–127 and thermal applications through
burners using suitable heat transfer fluid 128–133. However, the lower efficiencies
of biomass gasification-based systems should be addressed using
engineering interventions.
In this chapter, we work on designing and developing biomass gasification-

based water-heating systems. The main purpose of designing the biomass
gasification-based hot water generator is to devise an environmentally friendly
(minimal emissions) central energy generation unit, especially for the storage
(cold preservation) and processing (heating) of farm-perishable items. In
addition, the hot water from such a unit may have huge applications in the
processing industry, such as textile, leather, food, and dairy134–139.
The thermal capacity of the water heating systems is selected such that it
operates a commercially available off-the-shelf 3 TR (cooling capacity ≈ 11
kW) adsorption-based refrigeration system (Make: New Leaf Dynamic
Technologies, Model: GreenCHILLTM)117. Considering a COP of 0.5, the
thermal capacity of 22 kW will be generated in hot water. Moreover, the
systems should provide a heating of ≈ 20 kW whenever the cooling is not
operated. The schematic of the heating and cooling module to be operated
using the hot water is shown in Figure 3.1. A detailed discussion of the design
and performance evaluation of the heating and cooling modules is discussed
in Chapter 5.
For reference, we first tested an off-the-shelf traditional direct combustion
hot water generator (DCHWG). The DCHWG consists of a biomass
combustion chamber with a grate underneath, a fire-in tube and water-in shell
Chapter 3
heat exchanger, and a chimney to exit flue gases. The uncontrolled

combustion occurring in the DCHWG can be considered equivalent to the
open burning, which not only emit significant emissions but also shows less
biomass to water heating efficiency of ≈ 27 % . The detailed design and
performance results are provided in Annexure A.
Figure 3.1: Schematic of biomass gasification-based hot water generator with heating and
cooling module.
In response to the high emissions and low efficiency of DCHWG, we design

and fabricate a biomass gasifier-based hot water generator (BGHWG)
comprising a biomass gasifier and a naturally aspirated producer gas burner.
3.1 Biomass gasifier-based hot water generator (version

1): BGHWG
BGHWG is an immediate attempt to address the issue of emissions in

response to the uncontrolled direct combustion of biomass with a relatively
cleaner process of generating the producer gas from a gasifier using the
biomass as the fuel. We keep the heat exchanger design the same as
DCHWG (Annexure A) to compare the changes in the thermal efficiency of the
system due to gasification.
3.1.1 Biomass pretreatment and characterization
Wood chips and pine wood pellets are used as feedstocks in all the
experiments. The picture of biomass used is shown in Figure 3.2. Most of the
52
Chapter 3
experiments are performed with uniform-sized wood chips and cylindrical pine
wood pellets. All the instruments used for the preparation and characterization
of biomass are shown in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1: List of instruments used in the preparation and characterization of biomass.
S. Instrument/specifications Real Image

No
1. Biomass Crusher IIT Patna
Shredding capacity: 100-200
kg/hr
Motor: 10hp/3p Biomass
Crusher
Biomass Pelletization Machine
Briquette/pellet
Pellet capacity:70-100 kg/hr Making Machine
Pellet size: 6, 8 and 12 mm
2. Digital Moisture meter

Make: INSIZE
Model: 9341-50
Accuracy: ± 2 %
3. Thermogravimetric Analysis (TGA)
Make: PerkinElmer
Model: STA 6000
4. CHNS elemental analysis

Make: Elementar
Model: Vario MICROcube
The characterization of biomass is performed using thermogravimetric

analysis (TGA) (Make: Perkin Elmer, Model: STA 6000) and elemental CHNS
analysis (Make: Elementar, Model: vario MICRO cube). The powdered
53
Chapter 3
samples of the wood and pine wood pellet are prepared using the domestic
mixer grinder followed by mortar and pestle. In TGA, the biomass sample ( ≈
10 mg) is placed inside the furnace. The nitrogen gas @20 ml/min is allowed
to flow through the furnace to purge any foreign gas or oxygen from the
furnace. The sample is first heated to 110 ℃ for 10 minutes to ensure a
moisture-free sample. Further, a step-wise heating (40 K /min ) of the sample
up to the temperature of 800 ℃ is performed. Eventually, for the char
combustion, the air is allowed to flow (instead of nitrogen @ 1 bar). The TGA
plot of the biomass wood and pinewood pellets is shown in Figure 3.2b.
Figure 3.2: The type of biomass feedstock and characterization used in this study.
In elemental CHNS analysis, the biomass sample (≈ 2-3 mg) is wrapped into
the tin foil and loaded into the combustion crucible. The atmospheric gases
are flushed out using nitrogen gas. The carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, and sulfur
present in the biomass sample are combusted with oxygen at ≈ 1150 ℃ and
the combustion products CO 2, H 2 O, NO x , SO x and N 2 pass through a reduction
tube to convert into CO 2, H 2 O, N 2, and SO 2, followed by gas-absorbing
columns. The individual gases are mixed with the carrier gas (Helium) and
pass through the TCD (thermal conductivity detector) chambers. The change
in the thermal conductivity of the mixture compared to the pure carrier gas led
to the estimation of the foreign gas (CO 2, H 2 O, N 2, and SO 2) amount. The
54
Chapter 3
resulting ultimate analysis and proximate analysis data are provided in Table
3.2.
Table 3.2: The proximate and ultimate analysis of the biomass feedstock used in this study.
Proximate Analysisa (wt %) Wood Chips Pinewood Pellets

Volatile matter 63.2 66.5
Ash 0.10 6.3
Moisture 14.8 18.9
Fixed Carbon 22.0 27.1
Ultimate Analysisb (wt %) Wood Chips Pinewood Pellets
Carbon 41.12 43.86
Hydrogen 5.814 6.089
Nitrogen 0.50 0.39
Oxygen 52.4 49.5
Heating Value ( MJ /kg )140 13.9 15.7
Bulk Density (kg /m 3) ≈ 550 >600
a - Dry basis, b – Dry ash free
3.1.2 Gasifier Design
The design and fabrication of the air-blown downdraft gasifier is explained in

this section. The biomass input energy ( Ėbm ) of the designed gasifier depends
upon the overall thermal efficiency ƞoverall of the HWG systems and water
heating capacity HWG capacity ≈ 22 kW th (Equation 3.1).
HWG capacity ( kW )
Ėbm ( kW )=ṁbm × HV bm= (3.1)
ƞoverall
Where ṁbm (kg /s ) is the biomass consumption rate, and HV bm (kJ /kg ) is the
lower heating value of the biomass. Further, the overall thermal efficiency
ƞoverall of biomass gasification-based HWG systems depends upon the
gasifier's efficiency ƞ gasifier, the producer gas burner efficiency ƞburner , and the
flame-to-heat exchanger efficiency ƞh−ex ., shown in Equation 3.2.
η overall=ƞgasifier × ƞburner × ƞh−ex . (3.2)
As per the range of efficiencies reported in the literature, as ƞ gasifier =65−80 %

76,85,86,141
, ƞburner =55−95 % 142–145, and ƞh−ex . =80−90 % (assumed), the η overall is
55
Chapter 3
estimated as 50 %. Accordingly, the biomass consumption rate ṁbm of ≈ 9 kg /hr

is calculated using the average heating value of biomass in this study as
HV bm=18 MJ /kg (Equation 3.3)146,147.
HWG capacity × 3600

ṁbm= (3.3)
ƞ overall × HV bm
Next, the inner diameter of the gasifier core/reactor is closely related to the
hearth load capacity ( Bs ) of the gasifier. Here, Bs (biomass-based) is defined
as the amount of biomass (in kg /hr ) consumed per unit cross-sectional (
2
measured ∈cm ) area of the reactor. In this regard, various studies in the
literature suggest the typical value of Bs in the range of 0.01-0.024 kg /cm2−hr
148–150
. Accordingly, reactor diameter is estimated to be 213 – 330 mm , as shown
in Equation 3.4.
d reactor =
√ HWG capacity ×3600 × 4
ƞoverall × HV bm × Bs × π
(3.4)
Furthermore, Venselaar et al. (1982) suggested that 300 mm is the optimal

diameter for a typical throat-less downdraft gasifier where the biomass
consumption rate is nearly 10 kg /hr 149. Consequently, for steady operation of
the gasifier, a 300 mm inner diameter of the gasifier core is selected as the
design value in addition to a height of 1100mm to accommodate both the
reactor and the ash removal system.
A batch-type hopper (Figure 3.3a) is designed by considering random
packing fraction RPF=0.5for frustum-shaped hopper151, half cone angleθ=20 °
76
for smooth sliding of biomass through the conical section, height h ≈ 1 m,
reactor diameter d=0.3 m (Figure 3.3b), outer diameter D ≈ 1m and average
biomass density ρbm=550 kg/m360. Accordingly, the hopper can accommodate
≈ 70−80 kg of biomass, sufficient to run the system for ≈ 7−8 hours . Further, a
biomass shaking mechanism (Figure 3.3c) is provided between the hopper
and the reactor to ensure a steady feedstock supply into the reactor core. A
rotating grate (Figure 3.3d) is designed to ensure continuous ash disposal
from the bed.
56
Chapter 3
Figure 3.3: Design of the downdraft gasifier comprising (a) Hopper, (b) Gasifier core, (c)
Biomass shaking mechanism, and (d) Grate.
Since the average temperature inside the gasifier reactor is typically

700 ± 100℃ 141,152–155, refractory insulation is required to prevent direct contact of
the combustion chamber with the metal surface. Accordingly, a refractory,
which can withstand up to 1450 ℃ with low thermal conductivity, is desirable.
Furthermore, the outer surface temperature of the metal casing (i.e., exposed
to ambient) may be high enough for accidents and heat losses despite the
refractory insulation. Moreover, metal outer surface temperature (i.e., exposed
to ambient) is also found to be high enough such that a substantial amount of
heat loss (3 to 18% of input energy) occurs, which affects the carbon
conversion efficiency significantly52,54,155,156. Hence, rockwool insulation, which
can withstand temperatures up to 700 ℃ , is considered for further calculations.
The detailed specifications of the refractory and rockwool insulation are
tabulated in Table 3.3. Heat transfer analysis of the gasifier reactor surface
with various thicknesses of refractory (used to insulate the reactor) and
rockwool insulation (used to minimize surface heat losses) is performed using
the thermal resistance network shown in Figure 3.4.
57
Chapter 3
Table 3.3: Adsorption-refrigeration system specifications and requirements.

Property Refractory Material Rockwool Insulation
Maximum Withstand Temperature ( 1450 700
℃)
Density ρ (kg /m 3) 2650 48
Thermal Conductivity [W / ( m−K )] 0.5 0.05
Figure 3.4: Heat transfer path with thermal resistance network in BGHWG with insulation.
Here, nodes A represents the gasifier core/reactor surface, B and C are the
carbon steel inner and outer surfaces, respectively, and D is the outer surface
of the rockwool insulation layer. Accordingly, the surface heat loss ( Q̇loss ¿, the
temperature of carbon steel (T C ), and the weight of refractory (M ¿¿ ref )¿ are
estimated using Eq. 3.5, 3.6, and 3.7, as shown below.
T A−T D T D −T ∞
= =Q̇loss
rB rC rD 1
ln ln ln (3.5)
hair A D + σε A D ( T D +T ∞ ) ( T D + T ∞ )
2 2
rA rB rC
+ +
2 π k AB L 2 π k BC L 2 π k CD L
[ ]
rB r
ln ln C
rA rB (3.6)
T C= + Q̇ +T
2 π k AB L 2 π k BC L loss A
M ref =π ( r 2B−r 2A ) L× ρref (3.7)
where r A =150 mmis the diameter of the gasifier core, and r B ,r C , r D are the
outer radius of refractory, the outer radius of carbon steel, and the outer radius
of rockwool insulation, respectively. In our calculations, the average
temperature of the gasifier inner surface T A (Figure 3.4) is assumed as 700 ℃.
Moreover, the thermal conductivities of the refractory, carbon steel and
rockwool insulation are assumed as k AB =0.5 W /m−K , k BC =35 W /m−K and
58
Chapter 3
k CD=0.05W /m−K respectively. L=1.1 m is the height of the gasifier reactor, h air
is the heat transfer coefficient of air, and it is estimated as 7.23 ± 0.47 W /m2−K
using the Churchill and Chu correlation157. A D is the outer curved surface area
(m2) of the rockwool insulation later, σ =5.67 ×10−8 W /m2−K 4 is the Stefan
Boltzmann constant, and, ε =0.1158,159 is the emissivity of the thin aluminium
sheet metal used for covering the rockwool insulation. Furthermore, it should
be understood that the aluminium sheet metal will not be required if carbon
steel is directly exposed to the ambient, i.e., no rockwool insulation is used.
Accordingly, carbon steel emissivity ε =0.3157 is considered, and respective
surface heat loss, outer surface, and carbon steel temperatures are shown in
Figure 3.5.
Figure 3.5: Variation of (a) the surface heat loss, (b) carbon steel temperature, (c) the weight
of the refractory, and (d) the outer surface temperature of BGHWG plotted as a function of
refractory thickness and rockwool insulation thickness.
In our design process, the three major operational constraints are: (i) surface
heat losses should be minimal (Q̇loss ≤ 4400 W , i. e . , ≈ 10 % of energy input ¿ 52–54,155,
(ii) the temperature of the carbon steel should not exceed those based on
material considerations (T C ≤ 400 ℃ )160, and, (iii) the overall weight of the
59
Chapter 3
refractory layer should be reasonable ( M ref ≤ 300 kg ). A careful look at Figure

3.5 suggests that the feasible region identified per the constraints (Figure
3.5a-c) would imply refractory thickness and insulation thickness in the
≈40−85 mm range and ≈ 0−8 mm, respectively. Hence, a refractory thickness
of 80 mm ( M ref =278 kg ¿without rock-wool insulation (point X in Figure 3.5) was
2
selected as the design value. Considering h air =7.23± 0.47 W /m −k and
T ∞=30 ± 10 ℃, Q̇loss and T C were accordingly estimated to be 3.824 ± 0.7 kW ,
and 227 ± 33 ℃ respectively. Accordingly, all parts of the gasifier were
fabricated from carbon steel as shown in Figure 3.6a.
3.1.3 Water Heater Design
The designed gasifier is further connected through a pipe that supplies

producer gas to a non-premixed burner with an off-the-shelf commercially
available direct combustion water heater (Annexure A). We purposefully
remove the grate from the bottom of the water heater to make space for a
non-premixed producer gas burner beneath the shell and tube hot water
generation unit (Figure 3.6a,b). A water heater consists of two concentric
cylindrical shells where the inner shell (an outer diameter of 616 mm and a
height of 1350 mm) and the outer shell (an outer diameter of 736 mm and height
of 850 mm ) are assembled as shown in Figure 3.6b. A radial gap of 52 mm is
provided between the shells. Furthermore, the inner shell consists of a
producer gas combustion chamber (height of 500 mm) with a burner
underneath. A fire tube heat exchanger with flue gas in the tube and water in
the shell is welded above the combustion chamber. It consists of 33 straight
tubes (outer diameter of 60.3 mm, thickness of 4.5 mm, and height 800 mm )
contained within the inner shell. A chimney with an outer diameter of 176 mm
and height of 1600 mm is attached above the heat exchanger with the help of a
suitable cone and flanges. A water level indicator and pressure gauge are
mounted on the system. In addition, a pressure relief valve (PRV) is also
provided to maintain the working pressure of water (3 bar) as per the
requirement of the adsorption-refrigeration system and to ensure safe
operations.
60
Chapter 3
A 40 W blower (Make: Delta, Model: BFB1224GH) was used to supply

air for the gasification process, and the resulting producer gas was combusted
in a naturally aspirated burner (Figure 3.6b). The hot flue gas is routed to a
typical/traditional fire tube heat exchanger (Figure 3.6b) for hot water
generation. The outside surface temperature of the reactor and the flue gas
exit temperature are measured using the infrared temperature gun (Make:
TM
HTC , Model: MT-6) and the k-type thermocouple, respectively.
Figure 3.6: Biomass gasification-based HWG (BGHWG) with physically separated gasifier and
water heater units. (a) Downdraft gasifier, (b) Traditional heat exchanger, and (c) Physical set-
up of BGHWG.
3.1.4 Performance evaluation
The experiment with BGHWG starts with lighting up the gasifier after a
measured amount of feedstock (wood chips of average size of
40 mm× 50 mm ×30 mm) is fed into the reactor via the hopper. Once the hopper
(Figure 3.3a) is filled with biomass, which also acts as a seal to prevent gas
leakage from the bottom of the gasifier, is also filled with water. Sub-
stoichiometric air is supplied via an air ring via a blower (Delta, BFB1224GH)
(Figure 3.3b). Combustible producer gas is realized at the burner access
within 5-10 minutes and lighted up with a torch. Consequently, the flue gas
passes through the heat exchanger, resulting in a rise in water temperature.
The biomass shaking mechanism (Figure 3.3c) and grate (Figure 3.3d) are
operated manually every ≈ 15−20 minutes to avoid channeling and bridging
problems.
61
Chapter 3
We checked the water heating capacity of the system by integrating the

off-the-shelf adsorption-refrigeration system with a cold room. When the water
in the shell reaches 120 ℃, hot water is circulated to initiate cooling the room
(cold room). This experiment is continued for up to 3−5 hours to achieve the
desired cooling temperature (7 ℃ in this case), depending upon the
ambient/starting temperature in the cold room. The hopper is refilled every
≈ 5 hours for unimpeded continuous runs.
Biomass consumption rate (ṁbm ¿ is noted to estimate the overall
thermal efficiency. Further, the experiments are repeated multiple times to
ensure that the average biomass consumption rate is accurately estimated
and repeatable over longer runs. The overall biomass-to-water heating
efficiency is estimated as 24 ± 0.6 % based on the average biomass
consumption ṁbm of 18 ± 0.5 kg /hr and Equation 3.3. This value is comparable
to those reported by Tippayawong et al. (2010) 131, who experimentally
investigated the performance of a downdraft gasifier in the cashew processing
industry using a physically separated gasifier and heating system similar to
BGHWG. According to their study, a physically separated gasifier and heating
system demonstrated an overall thermal efficiency of ≈ 20 % with cashew nut
shells as the feedstock.
It is clearly seen that the performance of BGHWG with η overall ≈ 24 %

does not meet the design values set earlier ( ƞoverall =50 % ¿. We believe that the
low efficiency is primarily due to the increase in gasifier surface heat losses
(the average surface temperature of the reactor was recorded as 227± 10 ℃ ¿
and flue gas temperature exit from the chimney (recorded as 380 ±10 ℃ ). The
flue gas exit temperature was measured to be significantly higher than
DCHWG due to the relatively high flame temperature during the producer gas
combustion processes (please note that the design of the gas-to-water heat
exchanger does not change between DCHWG and BGHWG). Hence, an
estimation of major heat losses is performed based on experimental
observations to relate and identify the primary reason for the decrease in
thermal efficiency.
While the gasifier's outer surface temperature T D of 225 ± 10℃ (without
rockwool insulation) matches with the design value of 227 ± 33 ℃, it is
62
Chapter 3
nonetheless a source of surface heat loss Q̇loss ≈ 3.8 kW (Figure 3.7). Besides
this, a substantial amount of heat loss is observed with flue gas ( T fg ,out = 380±
20 ℃ ). Heat loss from flue gas is calculated using Equation 3.8.
Q̇loss , fg =ṁfg × C p ,fg ×(T fg , out −T w ) (3.8)
where ṁfg (kg /s ) and C p ,fg (kJ /kg −k ) are the mass flow rate and the specific
heat of the flue gas, respectively, and, T out (℃ ) is the flue gas exit
temperature. T w is considered as 116 ℃ (GreenCHILLTM operating
temperature), representing the average hot water temperature. We estimate
the air-fuel ratio of biomass for complete combustion (C-52.6%, H-6%, O-
42.2%, N-0.15%)161.
C 4.26 H 6 O2.65 N 0.035+ 4.42 ( O2+ 3.76 N 2 ) → 4.26 CO 2 +3 H 2 O+16.62 N 2 (3.9)
Accordingly, the airflow rate ṁair (≈ 6.2 kg air/ per kg of biomass ) is estimated for
the complete combustion of 18 Kg/hr of biomass. Afterward, the mass flow
rate of flue gas is estimated to be 129 kg /hr through mass conservation
Equation (ṁbiomass+ ṁair = ṁfg + ṁash) by considering ash as 0.3 % 162
. Specific
heat value C p ,flue gas = 1.2 (kJ /kg −k ) is taken at the T fg ,out temperature (≈ 380±
10℃ ).Q̇loss , fg is calculated as ≈ 11.2 kW. Conclusively, a total heat loss (i.e.,
surface and flue gas) of ≈ 15 kW is observed. In addition, a substantial amount
of energy losses, which are typically difficult to quantify, may be attributed to
open burning of producer gas in the naturally aspirated burner (Figure 3.7b),
sensible heat loss of producer gas (due to separate gasifier and HWG unit in
Figure 3.6), and heat losses from water seals and hopper.
Such high heat loss corresponds to the extra fuel consumption, estimated
using Equation 3.10.
Q̇loss
ṁ bm ,ex = (3.10)
HV bm × ƞoverall
where ṁbm ,ex is the additional biomass consumption rate, ƞth ¿ 24% is the
thermal efficiency of BGHWG, and, HV bm= 18 MJ/Kg is the calorific value of
biomass. Based on above Equation 3.10, ṁbm ,ex ≈ 12.5 kg/hr of biomass was
63
Chapter 3
wasted through surface heat loss and flue gas, which was a major concern for
the low efficiency.
In light of the above discussion, a third version of the hot water

generator (Integrated Gasifier and HWG – IGHWG) has been developed to
mitigate surface heat loss and high flue gas exit temperature. The novel heat
recovery system design is introduced in IGHWG by putting a heat exchanger
around the surface of the gasifier and insulation on the heat exchanger (see
Figure 3.7b).
Figure 3.7: Comparison of different biomass gasification-based hot water generators. (a)
Biomass gasification-based hot water generator (BGHWG), (b) Integrated gasifier hot water
generator concept (IGHWG).
3.2 Integrated gasifier hot water generator (version 2): IGHWG
In light of the above discussion, a novel concept of an integrated gasifier HWG

(IGHWG), which incorporates the coupled design of a gasifier in the core and
a water shell with a helical coil heat exchanger in the annulus, is presented in
Figure 3.7b. Helical coil heat exchangers allow 16−43 % higher heat transfer
coefficient (due to secondary flows from centrifugal force) compared to the
typical straight tube heat exchangers163. However, it is important to optimize
such systems since the increased pressure drops in helical coils increase the
power consumption of the blower164. In addition, achieving a stable flame of
such low energy density producer gas is challenging. Hence, we first design
the burner and the helical coil of the system.
64
Chapter 3
A step-wise confirmation of the validity of the idea is done. The idea is to put
the helical coil heat exchanger around the gasifier reactor surface, as shown
in Figure 3.7b. Hence, a helical coil heat exchanger is designed as per
requirements. Design constraints of the helical coil heat exchanger, such as
thermal capacity, hot water temperatures, water flow rate, and water capacity
of the shell, are given in Table 3.4. As the water shell is to be fitted around the
gasifier, the outer dimensions of the gasifier are taken as the inner dimensions
of the water shell (inner diameter as 472 mm and height as 1100 mm).
Table 3.4: Design specifications and requirements of the helical coil heat exchanger.
Parameters Constraints
Thermal capacity of Heat Exchanger (Q̇ th ,h . ex) Greater than 20 kW
Diameter of Helical ring (d helix ) Greater than 500 mm
Height of the Coil ( H helix ) Not more than 1000 mm
Water capacity of the shell (WC shell ) At least 170 liter
Specifications of Water Shell
Hot water temperature (T w ,∈¿/T w, out ¿ ) ≈ 112 ℃ and ≈ 120 ℃
Flowrate of water (V̇ w ) 40 LPM
Inner diameter of the shell 472 mm
In addition, a premixed burner to burn the producer gas positioned before the
helical coil heat exchanger is to be designed. The full details of the design of
the helical coil and the producer gas burner are provided in Annexure B.
3.2.1 Design and Fabrication
The IGHWG system (see Figure 3.8) includes a blower(1) similar to BGHWG
to supply air to the gasifier(2) and the burner(3). The producer gas outlet
pipe(4) is connected to the horizontal premixed chamber(5) , which is further
connected to the burner(6) (inner diameter of 154 mm and length of 500 mm).
Premixed burners facilitate the thorough mixing of fuel with the air and
65
Chapter 3
increase the efficiency of the burner compared to naturally aspirated burners

used in BGHWG. Burner(6) is further connected to a helical coil heat
exchanger(7) (fabricated with a tube of 77 mm outer diameter), placed in the
annular region of water shell(9) (≈ 180 liter capacity and water shell thickness
132 mm). The flue gas travels through the helical coil 7 and exits from the
chimney(8) connected on the top. After several trials based on the thermal
requirements of ≈ 22 kW th and pressure drop limitations of the blower, 2.5 turns
of helix with 600 mm of helix diameter were chosen as the design value.
Furthermore, the water shell includes a water jacket(10) around the burner,
connected to a recirculation pipe(11). The recirculation pipe facilitates the
thorough mixing of water in the shell and the jacket. In addition, rockwool
insulation (80 mm thickness) is provided around the water shell to impede any
surface heat losses.
Figure 3.8: Gasification-based HWG with integrated gasifier and water heater units. (a) Front
view, (b) top view, and (c) perspective view.
The design dimensions of the IGHWG are provided in Table 3.5. Apart from
the novel integrated design, some additional electronics and instrumentation,
such as an automatic producer gas ignition system (comprising a spark plug
and an ignition transformer) and temperature sensors (k-type thermocouples)
66
Chapter 3
are incorporated to measure zones temperatures, i.e., oxidation zone ( T oxi .),
pyrolysis zone (T pyro.), and reduction zone (T red .), burner’s flame temperature (
T burner ), flue gas exit temperature (T f g), and water in shell temperature (T water ).
Water seals at various locations are provided to prevent gas leakage. The
testing procedure of this version is the same as that of BGHWG, and multiple
experiments are performed to ensure a reliable estimation of the average
biomass consumption rate. Experiments were performed many times to
compare the steady-state fuel consumption rate and heat losses, which will be
discussed in the next section.
Table 3.5: Design values of Helical coil and burner.
Helical Coil
Design Parameters Design Values
2” schedule 40 pipe
Diameter of tube ID 52.3 mm
OD 60.3mm
Number of turns ( N t ) 2.5
Diameter of helix (d helix ) 600 mm
Helix angle (θhelix ) 5°
Height of coil (H) 450 mm
Outer diameter of the shell 737 mm
Inner diameter of the shell 472 mm
Burner
6” schedule 40 pipe
Diameter (d burner )
ID 154 mm, OD 168mm
Length ( Lburner ) 500 mm
A full Solidworks model of the designed hot water generator and a prototype of
the working setup tested at the Indian Institute of Technology Patna is shown
in Figure 3.9. In addition, the partwise drawings and details of Solidworks TM
design are provided in Annexure C.
67
Chapter 3
Figure 3.9: (a) Solidworks model of integrated gasifier hot water generator. (b) Working setup
of IGHWG in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the Indian Institute of Technology
Patna, Bihar, India.
3.2.2 Performance Evaluation
Biomass consumption rate ṁbm of the integrated gasifier-based hot water

generator (IGHWG) is recorded to be 9 ± 0.5 kg /hr , i.e., an improved thermal
efficiency ƞoverall of 48 ± 2.6 % . Since the gasifier design is the same as
BGHWG, this improvement in overall thermal efficiency can primarily be
attributed to the heat recovery strategy due to the integrated design. This
saving, in addition to the confined/controlled burning in the case of IGHWG
(open burning of producer gas in BGHWG), is responsible for significantly
reducing biomass fuel consumption. Apart from improved efficiency, IGHWG
(Figure 3.11) is also compact and significantly lighter compared to BGHWG
with physically separated gasifier and hot water generator units (Figure 3.6). A
comparison of the performance/specifications of the three versions of HWGs
is listed in Table 3.6.
The outer surface temperature of the insulation T D is estimated to be 35 ℃ .

Accordingly, surface heat loss Q̇loss is found to be very nominal as 126 W,
validated with the designed value. In addition to reactor surface heat losses,
heat losses from high flue gas exit temperature are recorded at 240±10 ℃ ,
68
Chapter 3
and based on this temperature Q̇loss , fg is estimated to be 1.3 kW by using

Equation 3.8. The biomass consumption rate is recorded to be 9 ± 0.5 kg/hr.
Based on this fuel consumption value and the calorific value of 15 MJ/Kg, its
thermal efficiency is evaluated to be 48±2.6 % using Equation 3.1. Overall, a
total heat of 13.54 kW is recovered (from surface and flue gas) in the case of
IGHWG, equivalent to 6.37 kg/hr of biomass. However, experimentally, 8 ±0.5
Kg/hr of biomass reduction is observed in IGHWG as compared to BGHWG.
Apart from thermal efficiency, the geometry of this HWG became compact as
the heat exchanger was integrated with the gasifier unit. It is clear from Table
3.6 that the integrated water heater IGHWG has less weight and footprint area
compared to the second version of the development BGHWG. With the
addition of instrumentation, the system now operates conveniently. A look at
various other parameters of all three HWGs is listed in Table 3.6, which clearly
reflects the performance of IGHWG.
Table 3.6: Performance comparison between DCHWG, BGHWG, and IGHWG.

Parameters DCHWG BGHWG IGHWG
Mode of Operation Direct Comb. Gasification Gasification
System footprint (m 2) 1.17 1.54 1.2
Total weight of system (kg) (approx.) 600 1200 700
Outer surface area (m 2) - 1.63 2.29
Outer surface temperature (℃ ) - 225 ± 10 31 ±5
Exhaust flue gas temperature, T fg ,out ( 250± 10 380 ± 10 240 ± 10

℃)
Biomass consumption rate, ṁ bm (kg /hr 16 ± 0.8 18 ± 0.5 9 ± 0.5

)
Overall thermal Efficiency, ƞoverall (%) 27±1.3 24 ± 0.6 48 ± 2.6
69
Chapter 3
Figure 3.10: (a) Schematic of IGHWG (b) Temperatures at various locations (reactor, burner,
flue gas, and water shell) of IGHWG.
In summary, the design and development process of the first-of-its-kind

gasifier-based hot water generator system with a thermal capacity of 22 kW th
is reported. The typical heat losses during the gasification process are
recovered by covering the gasifier unit in the core with a fire-tube water heat
exchanger in the annulus. This integrated system with confined burning of
producer gas not only reduces emissions compared to direct combustion
boilers but also demonstrates a very high overall thermal efficiency of ≈ 48 % in
comparison to 20−24 % for conventional systems with physically separated
gasifier and hot water generator units (Figure 3.11). Overall, this integrated
design presents an efficient, environment-friendly waste-to-value concept with
large potential in domestic and industrial water heating applications. The use
of agro-residue in such units addresses the current problem of smog (for
example, in and around the Near Capital Region, Delhi), primarily due to the
field burning of crop residues and creating economic value to the dry farm
residue. Moreover, the current innovation is believed to have implications in
various industrial sectors such as textile, dairy, paper and pulp, and
pharmaceutical and in domestic use such as space heating and hot water
generation.
70
Chapter 3
Figure 3.11. Comparison of biomass-based hot water generator (HWG). (a) Conventional
direct combustion HWG, (b) Biomass gasification based HWG (gasifier and heat exchanger
are separate entities). (c) Biomass gasifier integrated HWG (IGHWG).
71
CHAPTER 4
ASSESSMENT OF LONG-TERM VIABILITY OF NH 3−CaCl2
COMPOSITES
In the previous chapter, we present the systematic design, development, and
experiments to develop a novel gasifier-based hot water generation (HWG)
system with high thermal efficiency and minimal emissions. We observed that
the gasifier designed with an integrated hot water generator (IGHWG) is ≈ two
times more efficient than the biomass gasification hot water generators with
separate gasifier and heat exchanger entities (BGHWG). In addition, the hot
water from the system has numerous applications in the process industries
and storage and processing of perishable items.
Now, we have taken a step toward developing the temperature control

unit, which comprises a cooling module, a heating module, and a storage
chamber (Figure 4.1). Further, the cooling module of the temperature control
unit is to be powered using the developed hot water generator.
Figure 4.1: Schematic of proposed temperature control unit (TCU) with heating and cooling
module and the integrated gasifier hot water generator as the central energy provider.
The cold preservation of the perishables for a longer period demands the
cooling module. In this regard, we selected the adsorption-based refrigeration
Chapter 4
systems, which run on low-grade energy (in the form of hot water), have less
rectifying equipment, longer life, and are resistant to high vibrations. In this
study, we consider a chemisorption-based CaCl2−NH 3 adsorption pair due to
high sorption capacities and environmentally friendly refrigerant. While the
CaCl2−NH 3 adsorption pair based refrigeration technology has been
extensively explored in the last few decades, it has yet not been commercially
112
scaled up to its potential . This is primarily attributed to the gradual
degradation in specific cooling power (SCP) due to the issues associated with
the long-term performance and reliability of the adsorption beds.
In this regard, we perform a thorough literature review of the available

adsorption pairs and lab-scale prototype designs112,119,120,122,124,165–169. The
studies show that chemical adsorption pairs have superior sorption
performance, such as sorption capacities and rates, compared to physical
adsorption pairs113. For example, one mole of calcium chloride can
adsorb/desorb up to six moles of ammonia (sorption capacity
∆ χ ≈ 0.92 kg NH 3 /kg of CaCl 2) at the typical operating conditions (Pressure ≈ 11
bar absolute, Temperature ≈ 100 ℃) in an adsorption refrigerator11. Moreover,
ammonia has excellent thermodynamic properties, environmentally friendly
nature, and is cost-effective170. Despite these advantages, attaining a stable
long-term performance of adsorption refrigeration systems based on ammonia
has been challenging. This is primarily attributed to the loss in the structural
integrity of the adsorbent material12. For example, loss of the adsorbent
material such as CaCl2 from the bed due to cyclic expansion-contraction of the
adsorbent matrix deteriorates the heat and mass transfer performance,
eventually hampering the specific cooling power (SCP). However, these
issues of disintegration are not observed with physical adsorbents such as
activated carbon AC, expanded graphite EG, and carbon nanotubes CNT.
Accordingly, many studies explore the possibility of mixing chemical

adsorbents (such as CaCl2) with the physical adsorbents as additives X (such
as activated carbon AC, expanded graphite EG) and binders Y (such as
Portland cement PC and calcium sulfate CaSO 4), termed composite
adsorbents110,113,115,116,119–121. A detailed discussion of the composite adsorbents
73
Chapter 4
and their mixing methods is provided in chapter 2 (section 2.4). The physical
adsorbent/additive (generally a porous material with a high surface area) acts
as a filler material or host matrix for the chemical adsorbent to provide
structural support and allows high adsorbent-adsorbate interaction 122.
Moreover, the possibility of structural failure on cyclic expansion-contraction of
the adsorbent composite is believed to be addressed by mixing binders116.
Further, the studies listed in the literature use various lab-scale prototypes,
i.e., either constant pressure or constant volume chambers, to evaluate the
equilibrium and dynamic NH 3 sorption capacities of the synthesized
composites for a few initial adsorption/desorption cycles (¿ 15
cycles)119,166,168,171. In addition, some researchers developed full-scale
refrigeration systems to test the synthesized CaCl2 composites with NH 3 and
evaluated the performance COP≈ 0.15−0.3 and SCP≈ 280−490 W /kg CaCl2 for
the initial cycles107,165,169,172. However, no study reports the long-term
performance of the CaCl2 composites after a sufficiently large number of
adsorption/desorption cycles. Moreover, the detailed visualization and
microscopic analysis of the swelling, agglomeration, and disintegration of the
CaCl2 composites during long-term experiments are scarce.
In view of these, we undertake a comprehensive investigation of CaCl2

composites, encompassing synthesis, long-term cyclic testing, and their
integration into a full-scale refrigeration system. We also perform a complete
microstructural analysis to identify the cause of composite degradation during
the long-term cyclic testing. In this regard, we first synthesize three EG-CaCl2
consolidated composite samples and a composite sample with AC−CaCl 2
sample with white cement as the binder12. We further test the synthesized
composites in a customized lab-scale sorption test unit to report the long-term
(> 300 sorption cycles) cyclic performance.
The procedures used for sample preparation and characterization are

elaborated in section 4.1. The details of the lab-scale sorption test unit and the
methodology adopted to estimate the sorption quantity of ammonia are
presented in section 4.2. The long-term performance testing results and the
74
Chapter 4
microstructural analysis of the pristine and deteriorated samples are discussed

in sections 4.3 and 4.4, respectively.
4.1 Sample Preparation and Characterization
Three samples ( B1, B2, and B3), i.e., composites ofCaCl2 and expanded
graphite (4:1) and an additional sample A, i.e., a composite of CaCl2-activated
carbon-white cement in the ratio of 16:4:1 is synthesized. The CaCl2 (as
adsorbent) is a hygroscopic material that contains free and crystallized water.
Hence, we adopt a two-step drying of CaCl2 powder, initially at 100℃ for 10
hours, followed by 270℃ for 14 hours in the oven. The activated carbon AC
and raw expandable graphite EnG are procured from SVS Enterprise Pvt. Ltd,
Pune, India. However, EnG (treated with H 2 SO4 ) further requires additional
heat treatment to convert it into expanded graphite EG. Studies in the
literature suggested that temperatures above 600 ℃ are desired to release
trapped intercalate from EnG and increase volume by 80-100 times in
EG115,173. We heated the EnG flakes on flame for ≈ 10 minutes with
simultaneous manual shaking/stirring, transforming them into the worm-like
EG174, as shown in Figure 4.2 (Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscopy-
FESEM images, Make: Zeiss, Model: Gemini - 500). The resulting EG is
stored and naturally cooled in an airtight container to avoid moisture uptake.
Figure 4.2: SEM images of (a) Expandable graphite EnG flakes. (b) Expanded graphite EG
(worm-like structure) 174.
The complete procedure for preparing the composite samples is shown in

Figure 4.3a. Anhydrous CaCl2 is adequately mixed with the EG (
CaCl2 : EG :: 4 :1 ¿ with a known quantity of water to make a thick composite
75
Chapter 4
paste (process A). We further coat the composite paste uniformly within the
fins of a 250 mm long fin tube (process B-C). Further, the composite-coated
fin tube is wrapped with a protective layer of stainless-steel SS-304 wire mesh
(process D), which is crucial in holding the material within the fins during long-
term cyclic testing. After wrapping the wire mesh, stepwise heat treatment of
the coated fin tube is performed using oven drying (process E) as per the
following protocol: initial drying is performed at 60 ℃ for eight hours, followed
by increasing the heating rate at 10 ℃/hour until the temperature reaches 150
℃ 116. Finally, the sample is maintained at 230 ℃ for 4 hours. The purpose of
stepwise heat treatment is to gradually introduce porosity in the composite
samples without melting the CaCl2 hydrates175. The gradual heating of the
sample removes the free and crystallization moisture from the sample and
provides structural strength to the sample.
Figure 4.3: (a) Steps for preparing the composite samples with CaCl2 as adsorbent with
expanded graphite as fillers. (b) The geometry of the fin-tube used to coat the samples.
Three such samples ( B1, B2, and B3) are prepared with different amounts of
CaCl2, EG, water content, and the wire mesh wrap. Additionally, a composite
of CaCl2 with activated carbon and white cement (CaCl2:AC:WC::16:4:1) is
also prepared12,117. Activated carbon of grain size 150-300 μm is mixed
vigorously with CaCl2 and white cement WC. The other steps regarding the
76
Chapter 4
coating (step B-C), wire mesh wrapping (step D), and heat treatment (step E)
are similar to those followed for the EG category samples. The composition of
all EG and AC category samples is shown in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1: Composite samples prepared using binder (white cement WC) and additives
(Activated carbon AC and Expanded graphite EG).
Sample Category A B
Sample Name A B1 B2 B3
No. of fin-tube 2 1 1 1
Mass of adsorbent, mCaCl (

2
80 ± 1 70 ±1 88 ± 1 84 ± 1
g/tube )
Mass of Additive, m X (
AC: 20 ± 1 EG: 16 ± 1 EG: 22 ±1 EG: 21 ±1
g/tube )
Mass of Binder, m Y ( g/tube
WC: 5 No Binder
)
Mass of Water, m w ( g/tube
25 ± 1 40 ± 1 43 ± 1 22 ±1
)
50 mesh
50 mesh 50 mesh 60 mesh
Wire-mesh Double
Single Wrap Single Wrap Double Wrap
Wrap
Despite the stepwise heat treatment, samples B1 and B2 with relatively high
water content demonstrated the bubbling sites, as shown in Figure 4.4 116.
These bubbling sites appear due to the melting of CaCl2 hydrates, and
eventually cause material loss from the samples 176. Conversely, samples A
and B3 with relatively less moisture (less than 25 % by mass) content showed
no sign of bubbling and material loss. Such bubbling behavior may lead to
different porosity and morphology of each sample, highlighting the importance
of the initial water content used in sample preparation.
77
Chapter 4
Figure 4.4: Heat-treated samples (A, B1−B3 ¿ with initial moisture content (% by mass).
Next, we conduct the prolonged sorption characterization of the synthesized

composite samples within a custom-built single-tube sorption test rig. The
design and construction of the unit, along with the testing procedure followed,
are discussed below.
4.2 Lab-scale Sorption Test Rig
The primary components of the sorption test rig include a test chamber, a
system for hot and cold-water circulation, and a system for measurement and
control, as depicted in Figure 4.5a.
78
Chapter 4
Figure 4.5: (a) Experimental set-up of customized constant volume single fin-tube
adsorption/desorption bed comprising the hot and cold cycle arrangements and an Arduino-
based controlled cyclic sorption of ammonia. (b) Top flange assembly with fin-tube. (c) Test
chamber with the flange at the top and globe valves for purging and charging ammonia gas.
The test chamber is a stainless steel 8-inch schedule-40 pipe (inner diameter
– 220 mm, height – 420 mm) closed from the bottom and flanged from the top
(see Figure 4.5c). The chamber accommodates the composite coated finned
tube ¼ inch schedule-80 pipe (see Figure 4.3b). The bottom end of the fin-
tube connects to a U-bend and a pipe such that openings of the fin-tube
connect to the top flange, as shown in Figure 4.5b. A sight glass at the
periphery of the test chamber provides access for in-situ visuals of the fin tube
during long-term experiments. A resistance temperature detector RTD PT-100
(accuracy 0.1℃ ) and an ammonia pressure gauge (accuracy 0.1 bar gauge)
measure the temperature (T bed) and pressure ( Pbed ) of the test chamber,
respectively. In addition, an ammonia charging globe valve (GV1) and
ammonia purging-cum-degassing globe valve (GV2) control the charging and
purging of ammonia. The fin-tube is further connected to the hot and the cold
circuits using solenoid valves (SV1 and SV2) and non-return valves (NRV1
and NRV2), respectively, as shown in Figure 4.5a.
The hot circuit incorporates an electrically heated water boiler, a hot

pump (Make – Wilo, Model – RS25/6), a solenoid valve SV1, and a non-return
79
Chapter 4
valve NRV1. The water boiler is an 8-inch schedule 40 pipe (diameter – 219
mm, height 400 mm) closed from both ends and equipped with two 2 kW
electrical heaters. Conversely, the cold circuit incorporates a cold-water tank (
≈ 1000 liters), a cold pump (Make – Wilo, Model – RS25/8), a solenoid valve
SV2, and a non-return valve NRV2. The hot and cold circuit operations enable
the cyclic desorption and adsorption of ammonia from the adsorbent material,
which are controlled using an Arduino-based measurement and control
system, as shown in Figure 4.6.
Figure 4.6: (a) Arduino-UNO-based temperature measurement, i.e., test chamber ( T bed), fin-
tube water inlet (T w ,∈¿¿) and water outlet (T w ,out ), and control system for hot and cold circuit
actuation. (b) Boiler temperature (T boiler ) control system.
The Arduino-based measurement and control system further incorporates an

Arduino-UNO programmable microcontroller, two solid state relays SSR (hot
and cold), and three MAX31865 ADC (analog to digital converter), as shown in
Figure 4.6a. The program allows the time-dependent alternate actuation of the
hot and cold circuits using hot and cold relays, respectively. Three MAX31865
ADC modules with RTDs record the temperatures of the test chamber ( T bed),
water inlet¿ and the water outlet (T ¿¿ w , out)¿ of the fin-tube. In addition, the
number of hot and cold cycles is also recorded. A temperature control system
in the boiler consists of an RTD PT-100 (T boiler), a temperature controller, and
80
Chapter 4
a heater contactor to maintain the desired water temperature inside the boiler
(Figure 4.6b).
Being CaCl2 a hygroscopic material and NH 3 a hazardous gas, specific

initial protocols must be meticulously followed before assessing ammonia's
sorption characteristics. The first critical step is to guarantee the hermetic
sealing of the test chamber, which necessitates a high-pressure leak test. In
this regard, argon gas at ≈ 15 bar gauge is introduced into the chamber
through GV1 (Figure 4.5a), monitored for any static pressure drop, and
eventually released via valve GV2. Next, before introducing ammonia, the
chamber must be free from foreign gas and moisture. Hence, a vacuum pump
connected to globe valve GV2 (with GV1 off) is employed for degassing with
hot water at around 114-116 ℃ circulates through the fin tube to remove
residual moisture or trace gases from the adsorbent composite. After an
intensive degassing for ≈ 3 hours, Ammonia was next charged in the test
chamber and fin-tube material with cold water (≈ 20-40℃ ) running through the
fin-tube. Cold water cools down the adsorbent material, allowing for maximum
NH 3 adsorption. It is ensured that no liquid NH 3 is present in the chamber, and
pressure in the range of ≈ 2-10 bar gauge is maintained to simulate the actual
operating conditions of an adsorption refrigeration system.
The cyclic desorption, i.e., hot cycle, and adsorption, i.e., cold cycle of
ammonia from adsorbent composite, were facilitated by circulating hot (≈ 114-
116℃ ) and cold (≈ 20-40℃ ) water streams through the fin tube. A hot and a
cold cycle cumulatively represents a complete sorption cycle. The hot cycle
results in the desorption of ammonia from composite material into the
chamber's space, eventually increasing the pressure Pbed and temperature T bed
of the test chamber. Subsequently, the cold cycle enables the back-absorption
of ammonia into the composite material, eventually decreasing the pressure
and temperature of the chamber. A hot and a cold cycle cumulatively
represents a complete NH 3 sorption cycle. Maximum ( Pmax , T max) and minimum
( Pmin , T min) pressures and temperatures in a complete cycle are attained at the
end of the hot and cold cycle. Moreover, the amount of ammonia ( mNH ) in the
3
81
Chapter 4
chamber at any instant is estimated using the real gas equation Equation
4.1168,
( Pbed +1 ) ×105 ×V
mNH = (4.1)
3
Z × R NH × ( T bed +273.15 )
3
where Pbed (bar gauge) and T bed (℃ ) are the pressure and temperature of the
test chamber. V (≈ 0.015 m3) is the measured volume of the test chamber, R NH 3
(≈ 489 J /kg−K ) is the characteristic gas constant for ammonia, and Z is the
compressibility factor. Further, the compressibility factor (Z) is calculated using
the virial equation of state (with second virial coefficient approximation) using
Equation 4.2168,
5
G × ( P bed +1 ) ×10
Z=1+ (4.2)
R NH × ( T bed + 273.15 )
3
where G is the second virial coefficient, which depends upon the critical
¯
temperature (T c =405.4 K ) and pressure ( Pc =113.4 absolute ) of the pure
ammonia gas and calculated as per Equation 4.3168,
R NH × T c
G= 3
Pc
( g 0 +w g1 + g2 ) (4.3)
where g0, g1 and g2 are expressed in terms of reduced temperature (T r=T bed /T c
) as elaborated in Equations 4.4, 4.5, and 4.6, respectively 168; w=0.256 is the
acentric factor for ammonia177,178.
0.33 0.1385 0.0121 0.000607

g0=0.1445− − − − (4.4)
Tr Tr
2
Tr
3
Tr
8
0.331 0.423 0.008

g1=0.0637 + 2
− 3 − 8 (4.5)
Tr Tr Tr
3.38153
g2 = 6 (4.6)
100 ×T r
The hot or cold cycles result in cyclic variation in the thermodynamic state (
Pbed , T bed) of the ammonia present in the chamber. The hot cycle results in the
desorption of ammonia from composite material into the chamber's space,
eventually increasing the pressure Pbed and temperature T bed of the test
82
Chapter 4
chamber. Subsequently, the cold cycle enables the back-absorption of

ammonia into the composite material, eventually decreasing the pressure and
temperature of the chamber. Maximum ( Pmax , T max) and minimum ( Pmin , T min)
pressures and temperatures in a complete cycle are attained at the end of the
hot and cold cycle, respectively. Similarly, the mNH 3, max
and mNH are the amount
3, min
of ammonia in the chamber, corresponding to Pmax , T max and Pmin , T min attained
at the end of the hot and cold cycle, respectively. The net ammonia sorption
quantity mNH 3 ,sorp (inkg ) within a hot/cold cycle is estimated as the difference in
maximum mNH 3, max
and minimum mNH 3, min
amount of ammonia in the chamber as
per Equation 4.7.
mNH 3 ,sorp =mNH 3,max

−mNH 3 ,min
(4.7)
The ammonia sorption quantity ∆ χ (inkg NH 3 /kg of CaCl 2) is estimated using

Equation 4.8.
mNH , sorp
∆ χ= 3
(4.8)
mCaCl 2
where mCaCl is the mass of calcium chloride (in kg ) in the composite sample.
2
Moreover, percentage attenuation in ∆ χ that occurs after a certain number of

cycles (N = 300 in this study) is estimated using Equation 4.9.
Attenuation(%)=
( ∆ χ N ≈ 2−∆ χ N ≈ 300
∆ χ N ≈2
×100
) (4.9)
4.3 Long-term sorption performance and structural

integrity
The sorption characteristics for activated carbon (AC) based sample A are
shown in Figure 4.7. The hot and cold cycle intervals (20 minutes each) and
the corresponding changes in water inlet temperature T w ,∈¿¿ are shown in
Figure 4.7a. Water temperature in the hot cycle varies from ≈ 100 ℃ to 116
℃ due to the mixing of ≈ 1-liter cold water initially present in the fin-tube and
auxiliary piping with the ≈ 7-8 liter of water in the boiler upon switching to the
hot cycle. Conversely, the temperature is nearly constant at ≈ 30℃ during the
83
Chapter 4
cold cycle since the small quantity of initially hot water is mixed with ≈ 1000-
liter water in the cold tank upon switching from the hot to the cold cycle. A hot
cycle followed by a cold cycle together represents one complete cycle. The
desorption/adsorption of ammonia is reflected by an increase/decrease in
pressure Pbed and temperature T bed of the test chamber, respectively, for the
2nd cycle ( N ≈2) and the 300th cycle ( N ≈300) are shown in Figure 4.7b.
Figure 4.7: Assessment of the long-term performance of sample A. (a) Cyclic heating and
cooling of composite material. (b) Transient pressure Pbed , temperature T bed variation of the
chamber at the 2nd cycle (N≈ 2) and the 300th cycle (N≈ 300). (c) Transient ammonia sorption
quantity ( χ ) at the 2nd cycle (N≈ 2) and 300th cycle (N≈ 300). (d) Decrement of ammonia
sorption quantity (∆ χ ) with the number of cycles.
The pressure and temperature in the chamber increase for the first 20 minutes
(the hot cycle) due to the heating of the adsorbent material, resulting in the
desorption of ammonia from the adsorbent material to the chamber. After 20
minutes (onset of the cold cycle), pressure and temperature start decreasing
due to the cooling of the adsorbent material, leading to the re-adsorption of
ammonia from the chamber back to the adsorbent material. The asymptotic
behavior of Pbed and T bed at the end of the hot and cold cycles confirms that the
cycle time was sufficient to ensure nearly complete adsorption. These
asymptotic values of pressure ( Pmax , Pmin) and temperatures (T max,T min) noted for
84
Chapter 4
the 2nd and 300th cycle are tabulated in Table 4.2. It is clear from these
transient pressure and temperature data that ammonia in the chamber is
always in the superheated state, as desired in our experiments.
We also estimated the ammonia sorption quantity ∆χ (in

kg NH 3 /kg of CaCl 2) based on the variation in bed temperature and pressure at
the start and the end of cycle, and Equations 4.7-4.8, as per the data
summarized in Table 4.2. The ∆ χ for the 300th cycle ( N ≈300) is much lower
than the 2nd cycle ( N ≈2), demonstrating about ≈ 61 % attenuation in ammonia
sorption performance within 300 cycles, also illustrated in Figure 4.7c. The plot
depicting the gradual deterioration with the number of cycles (N) is shown in
Figure 4.7d.
Table 4.2: Adsorption characteristics of sample A during the 2nd cycle ( N ≈ 2) and the 300th
cycle ( N ≈ 300).
Phigh Plow ∆χ
T high T l ow mNH mNH 3,min
( )
3,max
Cycle (bar (bar kg NH 3
(℃ ) (℃ ) (kg) (kg)
gauge) gauge) kg CaCl2
≈2 11.9± 0.174.8 ± 0.1 2.1 ± 0.1 47.4 ± 0.1 0.123 ± 0.0010.030 ± 0.0010.58 ± 0.01
≈ 300 4.5 ± 0.1 69.3 ± 0.1 0.5 ± 0.1 44.7 ±0.1 0.051 ± 0.0010.015 ± 0.0010.23 ± 0.01
The deterioration can be directly linked to the degradation of adsorbent

material, which swells, agglomerates, and eventually disintegrates on multiple
sorption cycles, as shown in Figure 4.8. We observed severe swelling and
agglomeration at ≈ 100 cycles. Further, the uncontrolled agglomeration and
swelling tore off the SS wire mesh (Cycle 50) and disintegrated at ≈ 300
cycles. This is consistent with literature which suggests that while calcium
chloride and activated carbon composite ( CaCl2− AC ) avoid agglomeration 12
,
swelling is an with CaCl2− AC composite 113
. We accordingly intentionally
added white cement (WC) was to the CaCl2− AC composite (sample A) to limit
the composite’s swelling, but it was unable to completely prevent the swelling.
85
Chapter 4
Figure 4.8: In-situ visualization of adsorbent material degradation of sample A after various
cycles.
Conversely, the visuals of EG−CaCl2 samples B1−B3 captured during similar

tests are shown in Figure 4.9.
Figure 4.9: In-situ visuals demonstrate the material degradation of expanded graphite - CaCl2
composite samples B1 , B2∧B3.
All samples in this category demonstrate negligible agglomeration in
comparison to sample A. The little swelling and penetration of the adsorbent
material through the wire mesh, especially for samples B1 and B2, is primarily
attributed to the relatively high water content (45 % and 36 % by mass) used
in preparing these samples (see Figure 4.4 and Table 4.1). The resulting
increase in moisture leakage during the heat treatment process imparts high
porosity in the adsorbent material, eventually decreasing the compressive
86
Chapter 4
strength of the adsorbent material. Accordingly, we observed the leakage of

the dispersed material through the wire mesh (50 mesh) even after the double
wrap (as in the sample B2 in Figure 4.9). In this regard, the third sample B3
prepared using relatively less water content (20 % by mass) and a double
wrap of wire mesh (60 mesh) demonstrates negligible material loss during
heat treatment and NH 3 sorption cycles (Figure 4.9). Accordingly, sample B3
with best performance was subsequently tested for a prolonged duration of up
to 800 cycles, as shown in Figure 4.9. The results of cyclic sorption tests for
samples B1−B3 are next compared with sample A in Figure 4.10a and Table
4.3. The ∆ χ for N ≈ 2 (initial stage) for the samples B1, B2 and B3 are 0.6, 0.65,
and 0.69kg NH 3 /kg of CaCl 2 respectively, which is reasonable higher than the
sample A (0.58kg NH 3 /kg of CaCl 2). In comparison to sample A where about 61
% attenuation in ∆ χ was noted after 300 cycles, relatively less attenuation of
20 %, 17 %, and 13 % were recorded for samples B1, B2 and B3. Among all
samples in category B, sample B3 performed best with the minimal attenuation
of ≈ 13 %, ad was accordingly tested up to ≈ 800 cycles.
Figure 4.10: (a) Transient behavior of ammonia sorption quantity (𝜒 inkg NH 3 /kg of CaCl 2)
at the 2nd cycle (start) and 300th cycle for all samples (A, B1−B3). (b) The ammonia sorption
quantity ( χ inkg NH 3 /kg of CaCl 2) attenuation trend with the number of cycles for all
samples (A, B1−B3).
Table 4.3: Sorption performance of samples ( A , B1−B3) for 2nd cycle ( N ≈ 2) and the 300th
cycle ( N ≈ 300).
Sample A B1 B2 B3
∆χ ∆χ ∆χ ∆χ
Cycle ≈ 2 0.58 ± 0.01 0.60 ± 0.01 0.65 ± 0.01 0.69 ± 0.01
Cycle ≈ 300 0.23 ± 0.01 0.48 ± 0.01 0.52 ± 0.01 0.60 ± 0.01
87
Chapter 4
Cycle ≈ 800 - - - 0.57 ± 0.01

Deterioration @300
cycles (%)
61 ± 4 20 ± 3 17 ± 3 13 ± 3
Moreover, since the trend of ∆ χ with cycles for all samples quite accurately
follows an exponential trend¿):
−bN
∆ χ =∆ χ 0+ ae (4.10)
We could extend the trendline for all samples up to N¿2000 cycles (Figure
4.10b) to estimate the long-term performance from the standpoint of designing
practical systems. The constants, i.e., a and b, and predicted stable ∆ χ 0 for all
samples are tabulated in Table 4.4. Clearly, sample B3 with a very high stable
sorption capacity (∆ χ ) of 0.57 kg NH 3 /kg of CaCl 2 among all the tested
composite samples, shows promise for practical implementation.
Table 4.4: Predicted stable sorption quantity ( χ 0 ) and constants (a, b) of all samples ( A ,
B1−B3).
Sample A B1 B2 B3
∆ χ0 (
0.18 ± 0.03 0.46 ± 0.01 0.52 ± 0.03 0.57 ± 0.01
kg NH 3 /kg of CaCl 2 ¿
a 0.40 ± 0.03 0.18 ± 0.01 0.16 ± 0.02 0.12 ± 0.02
b 0.0065 ± 0.00110.0083 ± 0.0011 0.0055 ± 0.0015 0.0067 ± 0.0029
4.4 Morphology and pore structure analysis
Next, we perform morphological and internal surface area analyses of all

carefully stored composite samples before moving to full-scale performance
testing. The BET-specific surface area and pore size analysis (Make:
Quantachrome, Model: Autosorb iQ-C-XR) of the raw materials (AC, EG, and
CaCl2) using N 2 adsorption/desorption isotherms are compared in Table 4.5
and Figure 4.11a.
Table 4.5: BET analysis of the raw material and initial and final samples A , B 2∧B 3.
Parameter DFT Pore

Degas Temp. Degas Time BET Surf.
Volume (cc / g
(℃ ) (h) Area (m 2 /g )
)
88
Chapter 4
Raw AC 150 6.2 0.101 263.24

Material
EG 150 6.2 0.245 263.32
CaCl2 150 6.2 0.032 24.25
Sample A 0 Cycle 150 3.2 0.021 28.93
307 Cycles 150 3.2 0.086 33.50
Sample B2 0 Cycles 150 3.2 0.026 6.79
450 Cycles 150 3.2 0.06 19.02
Sample B3 0 Cycle 150 3.2 0.018 9.09
803 Cycles 150 3.2 0.038 13.58
The BET surface areas of filler materials (AC and EG) are reasonably high (
≈ 263 m /g ), which enhances the exposure of CaCl2 to adsorb NH 3. Further, a
2
significant reduction in the BET surface area of AC and EG after mixing with
CaCl2 indicates the pores filling of filler material with CaCl2 (see Table 4.5)179. It
is clear from Figure 4.11a that EG has a wider pore size range and pore
volume compared to AC. Such high pore size and volume in EG provide large
expansion space for CaCl2 and an easy path for ammonia adsorption
throughout the volume of the composite samples B2 and B3. Conversely, AC
with a smaller pore size (¿ 1 nm) makes CaCl2 loading a tight fit in AC-based
composite sample A.
Several morphological changes, such as pore expansion, cracks, and

increased BET surface area occur in the composite samples after NH 3 cycles.
The SEM images of the initial and the final samples of A , B 2 and B3 are
compared in Figure 4.12. The cracks in the final sample A (Figure 4.12b)
compared to no visible cracks in the initial sample A suggest the brittle failure
of the AC structure (Figure 4.12a). The primary reason for the failure is the
agglomeration and expansion of the CaCl2 during NH 3 adsorption is attributed
to the agglomeration due to restriction in the expansion of CaCl2, wherein the
expansion space-to-volume ratio is below 2:1 12.
89
Chapter 4
Figure 4.11: Pore size distribution of initial material along with initial and final composite
samples A, B2 and B3. (a) Raw materials, i.e. CaCl2, AC and EG (b) Sample A (c) Sample B2
(d) Sample B3.
It is worth noting that even the white cement WC present in sample A could
not suppress the expansion ofCaCl2. As the sorption cycles progress, further
expansion and agglomeration of CaCl2, in sample A tore the steel wire mesh,
leading to the loss of the composite material from the fin tube (Figure 4.8). We
finally observed ≈ 310 % expansion in pore volume after 307 sorption cycles in
sample A (Table 4.5). Correspondingly, the pore size range expanded from
0.5-3 nm to 1.5-7 nm, as shown in Figure 4.11b. Conversely, the minimal
agglomeration in B-category samples leads to relatively less pore expansion
(Figure 4.11c and 4.11d). Specifically, sample B3 retained its pore size (1.5-3
nm) and experienced the least pore volume expansion (≈ 100 %) even after
803 NH 3sorption cycles (Figure 4.11d). In addition, no cracks are observed in
the B-category samples (Figure 4.12d and 12f) due to EG, which absorbs the
expansion/contraction movement ofCaCl2 via interlayer adjustment.
90
Chapter 4
Figure 4.12: FESEM images of the initial and the final composite samples A, B2 and B3. (a)
Fresh sample A (after 0 cycles), (b) Sample A after 307 cycles, (c) Fresh sample B2 (after 0
cycles), (d) Sample B2 after 450 cycles, (e) Fresh sample B3 (after 0 cycles), (f) Sample B3
after 803 cycles.
In this chapter, we address the practical issues of agglomeration and

expansion of the adsorbent (CaCl2) on NH 3 sorption in CaCl2−NH 3 by using
activated carbon (AC) and expanded graphite (EG) as fillers to prepare the
CaCl2 composites (samples B1, B2, and B3). The ammonia sorption
characteristics and structural integrity of CaCl2composites are analyzed for
many cycles (at least 300 cycles) in a customized constant volume single-bed
lab-scale test unit. Sample A showed severe agglomeration and brittle
disintegration of adsorbent material, whereas sample B3 showed remarkable
stability and retained pore size. The disintegration of sample A resulted in
91
Chapter 4
≈ 61 % attenuation in ammonia sorption capacity, while sample B3 showed a

minimal attenuation of ≈ 17 % in sorption capacity even after 800 cycles. Next,
we perform morphological and internal surface area analyses of all initial
(fresh) and final (deteriorated) composite samples using BET and FESEM
techniques. The brittle cracks in final sample A suggest the agglomeration and
expansion (≈ 310 %) of theCaCl2. Conversely, the minimal agglomeration in B-
category samples leads to relatively less pore expansion. Specifically, sample
B3 retained its pore size and experienced the least pore volume expansion (
≈ 100 % ) even after 803 NH 3sorption cycles. Hence, the improved stability and
reliability of EG−CaCl2 composites are observed and likely to be used as
adsorbent in the adsorption beds. Such high-performance composites
encourage wider use of ammonia-based adsorption refrigeration systems.
92
CHAPTER 5
DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF AN OFF-THE-GRID

TEMPERATURE-CONTROLLED UNIT
In the previous chapters, we presented the design and development of an
efficient biomass gasification-based hot water generator (IGHWG). We also
presented a comprehensive study on how the CaCl2−NH 3 composites (with
activated carbon AC and expanded graphite EG as fillers) addressed the
problem of sorption bed deterioration.
In this chapter, we present the design and development of a biomass-

gasification-powered off-the-grid temperature-controlled unit (TCU) for the
storage and processing unit of perishables. The unit shows the autonomous
control of temperature in the range (5 – 55 ℃). The developed unit comprises
of a novel biomass gasification-based hot water generator (IGHWG), i.e., a
central energy source unit, a heating module, a cooling module, an auxiliary
power unit, and a control unit.
Accordingly, we design and develop the cooling module wherein we

implement the best-performing sample B3 in an off-the-shelf adsorption
refrigerator (≈ 3 tons of refrigeration) and estimate the long-term cooling
capacity of the module. Next, we design and develop the heating module. We
evaluate the thermal capacity of various designs of off-the-shelf multipass fin-
tube heat exchangers (heating fan-coil unit) using the matrix method. Further,
we integrate the chosen heat exchanger into the storage room (size 10 feet×
8 feet × 8 feet). We also perform steady-state experiments for the thermal
capacity estimation of the heating module. We also devise a bang-bang
temperature control strategy to control the temperature inside the storage
chamber.
5.1 Cooling Module
We implement the best-performing composite in a commercially available off-

the-shelf adsorption-based refrigeration system (Make: New Leaf Dynamic
Chapter 5
Technologies, Model: GreenCHILLTM). The refrigeration system gets the

necessary heat input from the integrated gasifier hot water generator
(IGHWG) unit recently developed and reported in Chapter 4, as shown in
Figure 5.1180.
Figure 5.1: Schematic diagram of biomass gasification-based cooling module.
5.1.1 Methodology
The technical specifications of the refrigerator, its schematic, and the actual
picture of the employed physical setup are provided in Table 5.1 and Figure
5.2, respectively. The adsorption refrigeration system is a two-bed system with
ammonia-solid adsorbent as the working pair. Each sorption bed (shell and
tube type) is a cylindrical vessel (16-inch diameter, 1100 mm long) comprising
36 adsorbent fin tubes of size ¼ inch and length 1100 mm. The hot/cold water
flows through the tubes (in six passes), and ammonia as refrigerant is inside
the shell. Sorption beds connect to the condenser (shell and tube type) and
evaporator (fin-tube type) through multiple non-return valves of NRV1-NRV2
and NRV3-NRV4, respectively.
During the desorption process, the hot water circulates through the hot
bed (sorption bed 1) to desorb NH 3 and the bed pressure rises. After the bed
pressure matches the condenser pressure, the NRV1 opens, and the
94
Chapter 5
desorbed NH 3 flows to the condenser. The superheated NH 3 further

condenses and gets stored in the condenser shell. Next, the liquid NH 3 flows
through the expansion valve, generating the cooling effect in the evaporator
and opening the NRV4 to adsorb NH 3 in the cold bed (sorption bed 2). After
the desired half-cycle time (τ HCT ), bed-switching occurs wherein hot water
circulates to the earlier cold bed (e.g., sorption bed 2), and vice versa. Such
switching of beds allows the next adsorption/desorption cycle to occur and
provides uninterrupted air-cooling into the evaporator.
Table 5.1: Technical specifications and requirements of off-the-shelf adsorption refrigerator180.
Technical Specifications
Type Vapor adsorption refrigeration system
Adsorption pair NH 3−CaCl2 composite (mCaCl ≈ 12.6 kg )

2
No. of adsorption bed Two
Typical Refrigeration Power ≈ 3 TR/ 11 kW

Requirements
Inlet water temperature (T w ,∈¿¿) 120 ± 10℃

Desorption
Volume Flow Rate (V̇ w ) −4
6.67 ×10 m /s
3
Bed
Specific Heat (c p , w) 4.23 kJ / kg−K
Inlet water temperature (T w ,∈¿¿) 25 ± 10℃

Adsorptio
Volume Flow Rate (V̇ h) −4
6.67 ×10 m /s
3
n Bed
Specific Heat (c p , w) 4.18 kJ /kg−K
Condenser Inlet water temperature (T w ,∈¿¿) 25 ± 10℃
95
Chapter 5
Figure 5.2: Off-the-shelf adsorption refrigeration system used to test the composite sample.
(a) Schematic Diagram. (b) Photo of the adsorption beds.
The connections of the off-the-shelf adsorption refrigeration system with the

developed hot water generator are shown in Figure 5.3. The time-dependent
switching of the sorption beds is performed using the electronically operated
solenoid valves and non-return valves (NRV) with an inbuilt ECU control. The
desorption and the adsorption bed of the refrigerator are connected to the
IGHWG and the cooling tower, respectively.
96
Chapter 5
Figure 5.3: Integration of Off-the-shelf adsorption refrigeration system with the hot and the
cold water circuits.
Here, we explain the circuit of the hot and the cold water, considering sorption
bed 1 as the hot bed and sorption bed 2 as the cold bed, wherein the solenoid
valves SV1 and SV6 are actuated, respectively (Figure 5.3). The hot water
from IGHWG flows to the sorption bed 1 through SV1, and NRV8 follows the
circuit (a-b-c-d-e-f-g-h-i-j-k-l-m). Similarly, the sorption bed 2 receives the cold
water from the cooling tower through NRV6, and SV6 follows the circuit (a1-
b1-c1-d1-e1-f1-g1-h1-i1-j1-k1). Interestingly, before switching the bed to the
next cycle, the water in both beds (cumulatively ≈20 liter) is mixed internally
using the recirculation circuit (e-f-f1-e1) and the recirculation pump and SV4.
This strategy results in the heat recovery from the hot water ( ≈ 120 ℃ ) present
in sorption bed 1 (desorption bed) and mixes it with the water ( ≈ 30 ℃ ) in the
sorption bed 2 (cold bed). The recirculation time is ≈ 70 seconds, and the
water temperature in both beds reaches ≈ 75 ℃ .
Next, the switching of the beds occurs, which actuates the solenoid
valve SV2, which allows hot water from IGHWG to flow through the sorption
bed 2. However, the immediate connection of the sorption bed 1 with the
cooling tower does not happen. This is due to the high-temperature water (≈ 75
℃ ), which is likely to damage the material using in the construction of the
97
Chapter 5
cooling tower. Hence, the solenoid valve SV7 gets actuated, and the ≈ 75 ℃
water from sorption bed 1 goes to the water tank 2 following the circuit (a1-b1-
c1-e-f-m-n-o), termed the bypass circuit. Moreover, water tank 1 supplies
fresh cold water to the cooling tower sump. The bypass circuit breaks as the
temperature of the water passing through the sorption bed 1 reaches below 40
℃ . It takes approximately 120 seconds to drop the temperature of sorption
bed 1 from 75 ℃ to 40 ℃ . This temperature ensures no damage to the
cooling tower material. Further, the solenoid valve SV7 deactivates as per the
control strategy. For the rest of the cycle, the sorption bed 1 connects with the
cooling tower (SV5 is activated) and follows the circuit (a1-b1-c1-e-f-p-q-i1-j1-
k1).
Further, the hot water desorbs the ammonia refrigerant (in superheated
form) from the hot bed, which further condenses in the water-cooled shell and
tube condenser. The liquid ammonia then expands through a solenoid type
expansion valve and passes through the evaporator coil, producing the
required cooling effect inside the chamber. The evaporator coil of the
refrigeration system is installed inside a storage chamber (10 feet X 8 feet X 8
feet).
The thermophysical parameters such as temperature and pressure at

various locations are measured using resistance temperature detector RTD
and pressure gauges (ammonia and water). Water flow rates through hot and
cold circuits are measured using the electromagnetic flowmeter. The hot wire
anemometer measures the airflow through the evaporator coil. The equipment
used in the fabrication and instrumentation of the cooling module, along with
their specifications, are shown in Table 5.2.
Table 5.2: List of equipment/instruments used in the fabrication and instrumentation of the
cooling module.
S. Instrument/specifications Real Image

No
98
Chapter 5
1. Integrated gasifier hot water generator

Heating capacity: 22 kW
Biomass consumption: 9 kg/hr
Off-the-shelf adsorption refrigerator
Cooling capacity : 3 TR/11 kW
Adsorbent: CaCl2−EG composite
Refrigerant: Ammonia
Bed type: shell and tube
Condenser type; water cooled
2. Storage room:
Size: 10 feet X 8 feet X 8 feet
Material: PUF sandwiches between
SS sheets
PUF thickness: 60 mm
SS sheet thickness: 0.5 mm
Storage capacity: 5 Metric Ton
3. Evaporator:
Thermal capacity: 11 kW
H-ex type: Fin-tube (suction type)
Air Flow : 1200 CFM
Electrical Power: 200 W
4. Ammonia expansion valve

Make: Danfoss
Type: AKV electrically operated
Duty cycle: 6 second (O/C:0.5/5.5)
5. Hot Pump
Make: Grundfos
Model: Magna1 25-60
Electric consumption: 100 W
Water Flow: 40 LPM
6. Cold Pump
Make – Wilo
Model – RS25/6
Water flow: 40 LPM
Electric consumption: 100 W
Max. operating pressure: 10 bar
99
Chapter 5
7. Water flowmeter
Make: Everest water meter
Model: E-MAG DN25
Type: Electromagnetic type
Accuracy: ± 0.5 %
8. Air flowmeter
Make: Lutron
Model:AM-4204
Range of velocity: 0.2-20 m/s
Accuracy: ±5 %
9. Temperature and humidity sensors

Make: TE Connectivity Sensors,
Model: HPP809A031
Range: T: -40/85 ℃ , RH: 0-100 %
Accuracy:(T: ±1%), (RH:± 3 %)
10. Control panel
The cooling module integrated with the hot water generator is shown in Figure
5.4. We performed long-term experiments on the adsorption refrigeration
system modified with new composite (as discussed in chapter 4). We further
discuss the methodology used to estimate the long-term performance of the
cooling module.
The studies in the literature evaluate the performance of the full-scale

systems mainly using two methods: (a) Estimation of NH 3 sorption capacity of
the adsorber bed165, and (b) Performance of the full-scale refrigeration system
using the evaporator, i.e., an air-cooled or water-cooled heat
exchanger107,169,172,181. In the first method, we estimate the amount of liquid NH 3
in the condenser shell in a half-cycle by shutting off the expansion valve. We
measure the change in the height of the liquid NH 3 in the condenser through
the level indicator (see Figure 5.2) and estimate the mNH 3, storage
(kg) as per
Equation 5.1.
100
Chapter 5
Figure 5.4: Integration of cooling module with the IGHWG.
ρl , NH × Acond × ∆ H
mNH = 3
(5.1)
3,storage
1000
where ρl , NH (kg /m3) is the density of the liquid NH 3 at the average saturation
3
pressure in the condenser Pcond in a half-cycle. Acond =0.068 m2 is the NH 3 side

cross-sectional area (shell-side) of the condenser, and ∆ H is the height
difference (in mm) in NH 3 level from the start to the end of the half-cycle.
Further, ∆ χ sys ,bed as the amount of liquid NH 3 per kg of CaCl2 and specific
cooling power SCP sys ,bed for any half-cycle is also estimated, as per Equations
5.2 and 5.3.
mNH
∆ χ sys ,bed = 3 ,storage
(5.2)
mCaCl 2
∆ χ sys × hfg , NH × 1000

SCP sys ,bed = 3
(5.3)
τ HCT ×60
where mCaCl =12.6 kg is the mass of CaCl2 used in each adsorption bed.
2
h fg, NH =1300 kJ /kg10 is the latent heat of vaporization of ammonia and

3
τ HCT =15 minute is the half-cycle time. It is to note that the cooling effect
produced directly depends on the amount of ammonia adsorbed in the cold
101
Chapter 5
(adsorption) half cycle of the adsorption refrigeration system. However, we

measured the amount of ammonia accumulated in the condenser shell during
the hot half-cycle. In this regard, we assume the stable run of refrigeration
system, wherein the ammonia level inside the condenser at the start (0 min)
and end (15 min) of a cycle is nearly the same as shown in Figure 5.5a and
5.5b.
Figure 5.5: The schematic of the hot bed along with the condenser at the start and the end of
the hot half-cycle (a) At the start (0 min) and (b) end (15 min) of the hot half-cycle. (c) The
schematic of the full-scale refrigeration system shows no change in liquid ammonia level
inside the condenser.
This suggests that the quantity of ammonia desorbed and condensed during
the cycle run is utilized entirely to produce the cooling effect and is absorbed
in the cold bed. Hence, the amount of ammonia desorbed during the hot cycle
is equal to the ammonia adsorbed in the cold cycle in the two-bed adsorption
refrigeration system.
We also estimated the refrigeration system's performance using the

evaporator, i.e., an air-cooled fin-tube heat exchanger. The
refrigerating/cooling power Q̇rs is estimated using the airflow rate V̇ air and
temperatures of air in T air ,∈ ¿¿ and out T air ,out from the fin-and-tube type
evaporator, as per Equation 5.4,
Q̇rs =V̇ air × ρ air ×c p air ×¿ ¿ (5.4)
3
where V̇ air =0.52m / s is the measured volume flow rate of air,
c p , air =1.00 kJ /kg−K is the specific heat of the air and ρair =1.16 kg/m3 is the
density of air, are assumed constant due to the negligible variation in the
102
Chapter 5
T air ,∈¿+T
average temperature of air (T av , air = air,out
¿ ). Further, we estimate the
2
specific cooling power SCP rs (W /kg of CaCl2) of the refrigeration system as per
Equation 5.5:
Q̇rs
SCP rs= (5.5)
mCaCl 2
5.1.2 Performance Testing
We use a commercially available off-the-shelf adsorption refrigeration system

to test sample B3 for a large number of NH 3 sorption cycles (¿ 800 cycles) as per
the method discussed in section 5.1.1. We estimated the amount of liquid
ammonia mNH 3, storage
stored in the condenser for the initial (at 2 nd cycle) and final
stage (at 845th cycle) of testing as per Equation 5.1. Further, we calculated the
ammonia sorption capacity of the adsorber bed ∆ χ sys ,bed and corresponding
specific cooling power SCP sys ,bed , using Equations 5.2 and 5.3. The mNH 3,storage
,
∆ χ sys ,bed and SCP sys ,bed for the initial and final stages is tabulated in Table 5.3.
An attenuation of ≈ 18 % in ∆ χ sys ,bed is recorded within sorption 845 cycles,
which closely matches the sorption capacity attenuation of ≈ 17 % predicted
during lab-scale testing of the sample B3 (chapter 4, last column, Table 4.3,
section 4.3).
Table 5.3: Sorption performance of sorption bed initially (2 nd cycle) and after final cycle (at
845th cycle).
Parameters Initial Stage (at 2nd cycle) Final Stage (at 845th cycle)
Height of NH 3 column ΔH 160 ± 1 130 ± 1

(mm)
Average Pcond (bar gauge) 15 ± 0.1 16 ± 0.1

ρl , NH (kg /m3)
3
577.8 ± 0.2 574.2 ±0.2
τ HCT (minute) 15 15
mNH 3,storage
(kg) 6.3 ± 0.1 5.1 ±0.1
∆ χ sys ,bed (kg NH 3 /kg CaCl 2) 0.5 ± 0.01 0.41 ± 0.01
SCP sys ,bed (W /kg CaCl2) 720 ± 10 590 ± 10
103
Chapter 5
We would like to acknowledge that the testing reveals an initial sorption

capacity performance gap of ≈ 27 % from ∆ χ B =0.69 kg NH 3 /kg CaCl2 (in single
3
tube lab-scale setup, Table 4.3) to ∆ χ sys ,bed =0.5 kg NH 3 /kg CaCl 2 in the full-
scale adsorber bed (first column, Table 5.3). This disparity is primarily due to
the practical issues of thermal losses and increased heat and mass transfer
resistance when moving from a simple lab scale unit to the commercial
system with an increase in the length and number of adsorber fin tubes (36
tubes, 1100 mm long), and the number of tube-side water passes (Figure
5.2a, six water passes). Moreover, the reduction in the half-cycle time τ HCT
from 20 min (in lab-scale) to 15 min (in full-scale) also results in ≈ 5 %
reduction in ammonia sorption capacity.
Next, we evaluated the performance of the full system using an air-

cooled evaporator. Accordingly, the pressure of the adsorber bed ( Pbed ) along
with the cooling/heating water temperatures (T w ,∈¿¿,T w ,out ), during two
consecutive initial and final cycles, are recorded, as shown in Figure 5.6. The
nearly steady average inlet/outlet air temperatures from the evaporator are
recorded as T air ,∈ ¿=36 ±1 ℃ ¿ and T air ,out =26 ±1 ℃ for the initial stage, and
T air ,∈ ¿=25 ±2 ℃ ¿ and T air ,out =17 ± 2 ℃ for the final stage. We observed that the
difference in T w ,∈¿¿ and T w ,out is higher at the start of every half-cycle,
subsequently decreasing until the end. This is primarily due to the gradual
decrease in sorption rates of NH 3 as discussed in section 4.3 (chapter 4).
Figure 5.6: Pressure ( Pbed 1 ) and temperatures (T w) of adsorber bed 1 for five consecutive
cycles: (a) Initial cycles: 2-3rd cycles; (b) Final cycles: 844-845th cycles.
We use the outcome of these tests along with Equations 5.1-5.3 to evaluate
the performance parameters (Table 5.3), such as refrigeration power Q̇rp , and
104
Chapter 5
specific cooling power SCP rs, initially (2-3rd cycles). We observed that a ≈ 15 %
drop in refrigeration power Q̇rp is recorded in the final cycles (Table 5.4). This
decrease in Q̇rp from initial to final stage is a direct indication of the decrease
in NH 3 sorption capacity during the desorption half-cycle, which eventually
implies a deterioration in the adsorbent composite's heat and mass transfer
performance. It is interesting to note that a ≈ 15 % drop in the refrigeration
capacity Q̇rp after 845 cycles using this commercial system, once again closely
matches the sorption capacity deterioration (≈ 17 % ) predicted during the lab-
scale testing of the sample B3 (last column, Table 5.9). An attenuation of
≈ 18 % in ∆ χ sys ,bed is recorded within sorption 845 cycles, which closely
matches the sorption capacity attenuation of ≈ 17 % predicted during lab-scale
testing of the sample B3 (last column, Table 4.3). Overall, we observed a
nominal performance attenuation of ≈ 15−18 % even after the long-term
operation of the composite sample B3, both in lab-scale testing and under
practical scenarios of the full-scale system.
Table 5.4: The performance comparison of the sample B3 in Adsorption Refrigeration System.
Performance Parameters Initial cycles (≈ 2−3 rd ) Final cycles (≈ 844−845 th )
Refrigeration Power Q̇ rs (kW) 6.1 ± 0.1 5.2 ±0.1

Specific Cooling Power SCP rs
490 ± 5 410 ± 5
(W /kg CaCl2)
5.2 Heating module
The heating module comprises the integrated gasifier water heating system
(IGHWG) and a heating fan-coil unit in the room (size 10 feet× 8 feet × 8 feet)
connected via suitable piping with instrumentation.
105
Chapter 5
Figure 5.7: Schematic of the heating module with IGHWG.
The full heating module is explained in two subsections, which include a

discussion regarding the geometrical details of the available off-the-shelf heat
exchangers (section 5.2.1) and the performance assessment of the heat
exchangers (section 5.2.2). Eventually, a suitable thermal capacity heat
exchanger is integrated with IGHWG, and capacity estimation experiments are
performed and reported in section 5.2.3.
5.2.1 Geometry of off-the-shelf heat exchanger
Regarding designing the heat exchanger for the heating module, we

considered analyzing an off-the-shelf heating fan-coil unit available in the
market. Hence, a detailed heat transfer analysis of the existing sizes of the fan
coil (Coil A to Coil E in Table 5.5) units available in the market is performed.
Table 5.5: Dimensions of various off-the-shelf fin-tube heating fan coil units.
Parameters Coil A Coil B Coil C Coil D Coil E

Face Area A face (m 2) 1.34 1.15 0.93 0.36 0.27
Height H (mm) 305 305 305 185 185

Length L (mm) 1067 914 740 430 324
Width W (mm) 76 76 76 76 76
Air Flow Rate V̇ a (CFM) 1200 1000 800 600 400
Water Flow Rate V̇ w 40 40 40 40 40

(LPM)
Number of Unit Cell ( N cell ) 5 5 5 3 3
106
Chapter 5
The schematic of a typical fin-tube heating coil is shown in Figure 5.8. The
details of heat exchanger geometry are provided in Table 5.6.
Table 5.6: Common geometrical parameters of the unit cell of all the heat exchangers coils.
Coil Geometry Tube Dimensions and Material

Number of Rows/ 3/6 8.52 mm
Inner Diameter of tube (d i )
tube passes
Tube Spacing (B) 19 mm Outer Diameter of tube (d o ) 9.52 mm
Row Spacing (C) 25.4 mm Material of Tube Copper

Fin Thickness (t) 0.12 mm Copper Thermal Cond. (k cu) 390 W / ( m2 −K )
Fin Spacing (D) 1 mm Material of Fin Aluminium

Fins per inch (FPI) 12 Aluminium Thermal Cond. (k al) 237 W / ( m2 −K )
Figure 5.8: Schematic of a typical fin and tube coil with coil parameters 157.
In addition, the heat exchanger geometry and the unit cells are shown in
Figure 5.9.
107
Chapter 5
Figure 5.9: The air-to-water Fin-tube heat exchanger with blower unit considered in this study.
(a) Isometric view of the coil. (b) Coil geometry. (c) The flow path circuit of air (through fins)
and water (in tube) inside the unit cell.
5.2.2 Heat transfer analysis
Assessing the thermal performance of a heat exchanger with a certain

geometry often involves determining the heat exchanger effectiveness ( ϵ ),
which depends upon both the heat capacity rates ratio ( C r), and the number of
heat transfer units (NTU), termed as effective-NTU approach 157. In addition,
estimation of the thermal capacity of the exchanger requires the information
regarding the outlet temperature of the two fluid streams, provided the inlet
temperatures and the flow rates of the fluid steams are known 157. Further, the
performance and the capacity of a heat exchanger is influenced by the
geometry and configuration of the exchanger. Hence, it is imperative to
analyze the heat exchangers theoretically, prior to use for a specific process
industry application.
In this study, we analyze the multipass fin-tube heat exchangers with

complex geometry (Figure 5.9). Multiple studies in literature explores various
methods to analyze the performance of cross flow heat exchangers with
complex geometries182–185. Domingo et al. (1968) introduced a general
108
Chapter 5
approach to derive the overall effectiveness and intermediate temperatures of

a variety of cross flow heat exchangers, based on the pass-wise estimation of
the effectiveness and the heat capacity ratio 185. However, the concept of NTU
was not explicitly employed in the analysis. Karthik et al. (2013) devised a
steady-state performance model aimed at assessing the efficiency of multi-
row, multi-pass crossflow fin-tube heat exchangers186. The proposed matrix
approach employs the principles of local effectiveness ( ϵ ), energy balance or
heat capacity ratio (C r), and the number of transfer units (NTU), applied to
each pass or row within a cross-flow heat exchanger, to forecast thermal
performance.
Here, we follow the matrix approach developed by Karthik et al. (2013)

on the different off-the-shelf heat exchanger geometries186. The heat
exchangers geometry discussed in the above section have water in tube and
air on the fin side. The steady-state heat transfer analysis of the heat
exchangers is performed under the following assumptions.
1. External fluid is assumed to be perfectly mixed between tube columns.

2. External fluid is considered unmixed in a given pass.
3. Global NTU is distributed equally among heat exchanger passes.
4. The fluid heat capacity rate ratio is constant.
5. The thermal fluid properties are considered constant and no phase change
of any fluid occur during the heat transfer.
6. An even distribution of the fluid streams is considered within different
passes.
7. A negligible or no heat transfer occur from the heat exchanger to the
surroundings.
8. The negligible potential and kinetic energy in the rows or passes of the
heat exchanger.
The objective of this study is to conduct a steady-state analysis of the
multipass finned tube crossflow heat exchanger. This involves applying the
effectiveness-NTU method to each pass, resulting in a set of linear algebraic
equations. We further solve the equations simultaneously and estimate the
outlet temperatures of the two fluids (T ao , T wo).
109
Chapter 5
Prior to that we need to estimate the performance parameters such as the

airside heat transfer coefficient (h air), water-side heat transfer coefficient (h w),
overall heat transfer coefficient (U o ), overall surface efficiency (η o), and the
rate of heat transfer (Q̇a and Q̇w ). In this regard, we used an algorithm based
MATLAB code with an iterative approach, briefly explained in Figure 5.10.
Initially, the inlet and outlet temperatures are assumed as T ai =35 ℃,

T ao=90 ℃ and T wi=120 ℃ , T wo =110 ℃. The geometrical details of the various
heat exchangers and flow rates of the fluid streams are provided in Tables 5.5
and 5.6. In the first step, we estimate the initial heat transfer rates of air ( Q̇air )
and water (Q̇w ), using equations 5.6 and 5.7, and estimate ∆ Q̇initial =|Q̇a −Q̇w|.
Q̇a= V̇ a × ρa ×C p ,a × ( T ao−T ai ) (5.6)
Q̇w =V̇ w × ρw × C p ,w × ( T wi−T wo ) (5.7)
The ρair , ρw , C p ,a and C p ,w are the density and the specific heat of air and water
respectively.
110
Chapter 5
Figure 5.10: Algorithm of estimating the performance of the heat exchanger of a specific
geometry.
111
Chapter 5
The heat exchangers considered in this study are of fin-tube type wherein air
flows through a bank of tubes with fins and water flows through the tubes. The
airflow occurs through the fin spacing, which makes it crucial to calculate the
airside heat transfer area ( At ). The air-side heat transfer area is the
summation of the bare tube area ( Ab ) and the fin surface area ( A f ), calculated
using the Equations 5.8, 5.9 and 5.10. The parameters used to estimate the
different areas of the fin-tube heat exchanger are provided in Table 5.6.
Bare Tube Area ( Ab ): It is the area of the tube outer surface exposed to the
air. It does not include the area that is covered by the fins.
L
Ab =π d o ×(D−t)× × Nt × N L (5.8)
D
Fin Area ( A f ): It is the fin area on either side of the fins participating in the heat
transfer.
( [ ] )(
2
Af=
L
D
× W × H−N t × N L ×
π d0
4
× 2 + 2 ×t ×(W + H)×
L
D ) (5.9)
Air-side Total Heat Transfer Area ( At ): The total heat transfer area is the
summation of the bare tube and fin areas.
At = Ab + A f (5.10)
The heat transfer area per cell is assumed to be divided equally among each
of cells and consequently estimated using Equation 5.11.
At
Air Side HT Area/cell= A cell= (5.11)
N cell
Minimum Flow Area ( Ac ): Minimum flow area (cross-sectional area) is the area
within the base area ( Ab ase) from where the air flows through the coil spacing.
L
Ac = × ( D−t ) × [ H−N t × d o ] (5.12)
D
Apart from air-side, the waterside heat transfer area calculated using Equation
5.13, which excludes the elbow bends portion as it is not theoretically a part of
112
Chapter 5
the cross-flow heat exchanger in consideration. However, the heat loss from
the bends could deteriorate heat transfer and might increase the ∆ Q̇ new.
Water Side HT Area=A w =30× π di × L × N t (5.13)
where d i, L and N t are the internal diameter, length and number of tubes.
Further, we present the method of the estimation of the overall heat transfer
coefficient (U o ).
( ( ) )
do
ln
1 1 di 1 (5.14)
= + +
U o A o ηo ha A o 2 π k Cu ×30 × L h water A w
To estimate the overall heat transfer coefficient, we require water and air side
heat transfer co-efficients (h water, h air) andsurface efficiency of the heat
exchanger (η o). Further, we explain the process of estimating the above
parameters one by one.
For water-side heat transfer coefficient (h w), we estimate the water flow
velocity (V tube ) and the dimensionless parameters i.e., Reynold’s Number ( ℜw)
and Prandtl Number ( Pr w) using the tube dimensions and thermophysical
parameters of the water using Equations 5.15, 5.16 and 5.17.
V̇ w
V tube =
( )
2
π di (5.15)
5×
4
ρw × V tube × d i
ℜw = (5.16)
μw
μw × c p , w
Pr w = (5.17)
kw
The thermophysical properties i.e., ρw , μw , c p , w and k w are evaluated at the

reference temperature (T ref ,w ). Further, we use different correlations for the
Nusselt Number ( Nuw ) calculations as provided in Table 5.7157.
Table 5.7: Nusselt Number correlations to estimate the heat transfer coefficient inside the
tube.
113
Chapter 5
turbulent, fully developed,

0.6 ≤ Pr w ≤ 160
Dittus-bolter Correlation:
ℜw ≥ 10,000, ( L/ D ) ≥10 , n=0.4
4/5 n
Nuw =0.023 × ℜw × Pr w for T s >T ∞ and
n=0.3 for T s <T ∞

Turbulent, fully developed,
( f /8 ) × ( ℜ D−1000 ) × Pr w 0.5 ≤ Pr w ≤ 2000,
Nuw =
1+ [ 12.7 × ( f /8 ) ] × ( Pr 2w/3−1 )
1 /2
6
3000 ≤ ℜw ≤5 ×10 ,
−2
Where f =( 0.790 × ln ℜw −1.64 )
( L/ D ) ≥10
Further, the water-side heat transfer coefficient (h w) is calculated using

Equation 5.19.
k w × Nuw
h w= (5.18)
di
Where k w is the thermal conductivity of water in [ W / ( m−K ) ] and d i is the

internal diameter of the tube in (m).
Afterwards, the air-side heat transfer coefficient depends upon the minimum
cross section area through which the air undergoes a cross flow over a bank
of tubes (in staggered arrangement) with fins. The passes over the bank of
tubes with fins have different flow velocities provided the changes in flow
areas ( A1, A2 ) as shown in Figure 5.11.
Reynold’s number is to be calculated at the maximum velocity, which

can be found out by estimating the maximum velocity V max =max {V A ,V A }. 1 2
Further, V max depends upon the transverse pitch ( B) and diagonal pitch ( P D)
and of the tubes arrangement (see Figure 5.9 and 5.11a).
B+d o
if 2 × ( P D −d o ) < ( B−d o ) ⇒ C< ⟹V max=V A (5.19)
2 2
Otherwise, V max =V A 1
(5.20)
V̇ a
V face = (5.21)
A face
114
Chapter 5
Figure 5.11: (a) Airflow over a bank of the tubes arranged in a staggered configuration 157. (b)
Heat-transfer correlation for smooth plate-fine-tube coils with four columns of tubes187.
Provided the volume flow rate of the air ( V̇ a ) is constant during the steady-
state operation, the face velocity V face and V max are correlated as per the
Equation 5.22.
V face × A face V face

V max = =
( )
Ac Ac (5.22)
A face
where the face area of the coil is, A face=L × H , Ac is the area corresponding to
V max . Further, we estimate the air-side heat transfer coefficient. The j factor
corresponding to four number of rows ( j 4) can now be found from equation
5.27, and the JP factor can be estimated using Equation 5.26 (12 FPI as fin
spacing).
ρair × V max ×d o (5.23)

ℜ a=
μa
μair × c p ,a (5.24)
Pr a=
ka
At At (5.25)
=
A bt π d o L × N t × N L
( )
−0.15
−0.4 At (5.26)
JP=ℜa ×
A bt
115
Chapter 5
j 4=0.2694 × JP +0.0013 (5.27)
ρa × V max ×C
ℜS = (5.28)
L
μa
j n 1−( 1280 × N L × ℜS )
−1.2
= (5.29)
L
j4 1−(5120 × ℜS )
−1.2
L
The above correlation can be applied to any number of tube rows (currently
equal to 3) to calculate the corresponding j-h factor.
( )
2
ha
jn = × Pr 3 (5.30)
ρa ×V max × c p ,a
j n × ρa × V max × c p ,a
h air = 2 /3 (5.31)
( Pr a )
In addition, the overall surface efficiency depends upon single fin efficiency ( η f
) and the fin area ( A f ) and airside heat transfer area ( At ) is estimated using
Equation 5.32.
Af
η o=1−
At
( 1−ηf ) (5.32)
The single fin efficiency (η f ) is estimated using a hexagonal fin with a

staggered tube array, as shown in Figure 5.12.
116
Chapter 5
Figure 5.12: Hexagonal fin with staggered tube array187.
The equivalent radius Re is estimated using the equation 5.34.
ηf=
√ hPk A c × tanh ⁡(mrϕ)×(T b−T ∞ ) = tanh ⁡(mrϕ) (5.33)
hP(rϕ)×(T b −T ∞ ) mrϕ
Re 0.5
=1.27 ψ ( β−0.3 ) (5.34)
r
M P
d
do B
where ψ= , β= ,r = ¿ M =
r M 2 2
Further, ϕ and m are estimated using Equations 5.35 and 5.36.
ϕ= [ ][
Re
r
−1 1+0.35 ln
Re
r ( )] (5.35)
( )
ha × P
1
2
(5.36)
m=
k cu × A c/ a
where P=2 × [ 2× π × R e +t ] and Ac /a =2× π × Re × t
Fin efficiency is estimated by substituting the value of ϕ and m in equation

5.33. We evaluate the overall surface efficiency (η o) using equation 5.32.
Further, the effectiveness (ϵ ) of the heat exchanger is to be estimated

which depends upon the number of transfer units (NTU) and heat capacity
117
Chapter 5
ratio (C r) of the water and air. We consider a single cell (Figure 5.9c) and
''
estimate the pass-wise heat capacity ratio (C r ) and number of transfer units (
''
NT U ) using equations 5.37 and 5.38.
V̇ a × ρa
× c p ,a
'' C c 2 × N cell
C r =¿ = (5.37)
C h V̇ w × ρw
× c p, w
N cell
A cell
U o×
'' 6
NT U = (5.38)
V̇ a × ρ a
×c p , a
2 × N cell
The input parameters required to estimate C r' ' and NT U ' ' are provided in
Table 5.8. Further, the geometric parameters i.e., number of unit cells N cell of
the heat exchangers is provided in Table 5.6. The thermophysical parameters
i.e.,c p , air, c p , w, ρair and ρw of the fluid streams is evaluated at the average fluid
temperatures.
Table 5.8: Input volume flow rates and temperatures of the fluid streams (water and air).
INPUT
Air Flow Rate V̇ a (CFM) 1200 1000 800 600 400
Water flow rate V̇ w (LPM) 40 40 40 40 40
Air Temperature in T a ,i (℃ ) 35 35 35 35 35
Water Temperature in T w ,i (℃ ) 120 120 120 120 120
Provided all the heat exchangers share a common unit-cell with the six-pass
water flow circuit and three rows (see Figure 5.9). The schematic of air and
water circuit in the unit cell are shown in Figure 5.13. As the tubes are
arranged in a staggered configuration, the inlet air temperatures to the tubes
in the 2nd and 3rd columns have been taken as averages of the preceding
tubes. For example, T a 156 is the average of T a 15 & T a 16 (see Figure 5.13a).
Similarly, the outlet air temperature has been taken as an average of T a 11 &
T a 12.
118
Chapter 5
Figure 5.13: Dissected view of the unit cell and the air and water temperatures in each pass of
the unit cell.
After the estimation of C r' ' and NT U ' ' , the pass-wise effectiveness (ε '' ) of the
unit cell is estimated using equation 5.39.
''
ε =
1
Cr
'' [
1−exp (−C r {1−exp (−NT U ) })
'' ''
] (5.39)
Further, the C r' ' and ε '' for all the passes are evaluated as C r' '1 i and ε '' 1 i, where
i varies from 1 to 6. In addition, the matrix method involves to evaluate the
outlet temperatures of the water and air streams through each pass 186. The
'' ''
pass-wise heat capacity ratio (C r 1 i) and the effectiveness (ε 1i ) can be
expressed in the form of inlet and outlet temperatures of the corresponding
passes. The C r' '1 i and ε '' 1 i for all six passes are expressed in equations 5.40 to
5.51. Accordingly, there are 12 unknowns: T a 1i ∧T w1 i. It is clear that the 12
unknowns can be solved by solving the 12 equations (5.40 to 5.51) and used
T a , 11 +T a ,12
to estimate the water (T wo =T w , 16) and air outlet temperatures (T ao= ).
2
'' T w ,i −T w , 11 '' T a ,11 −T a ,143

Cr 11 = (5.40) ε =
11 (5.46)
T a , 11−T a ,143 T w ,i −T a ,143
'' T w , 11−T w ,12 '' T a ,12−T a , 143

Cr 12 = (5.41) ε 12 = (5.47)
T a ,12−T a ,143 T w ,11 −T a , 143
'' T w , 12−T w , 13 '' T a , 13−T a ,156

Cr 13 = (5.42) ε 13 = (5.48)
T a ,13−T a ,156 T w , 12−T a ,156
119
Chapter 5
'' T w, 13−T w ,14 '' T a ,14−T a ,156

Cr 14 = (5.43) ε 14 = (5.49)
T a ,14 −T a , 156 T w ,13−T a ,156
'' T w ,14−T w ,15 '' T a ,15−T a ,i

Cr 15 = (5.44) ε 15 = (5.50)
T a ,15−T a , i T w , 14−T a ,i
'' T w ,15−T w ,16 '' T a ,16−T a ,i

Cr 16 = (5.45) ε 16 = (5.51)
T a ,16 −T a , i T w , 15−T a ,i
Further, the fluid side heat transfer rates are estimated using Equations 5.52-
5.63.
Q̇1 ,c =C c ×(T a , 11−T a ,143 ) (5.52) Q̇1 ,h =Ch ×¿ ) (5.58)
Q̇2 , c=C c ×(T a , 12−T a , 143 ) (5.53) Q̇2 ,h =Ch ×(T w ,11−T w , 12) (5.59)
Q̇3 , c =Cc ×(T a , 13−T a ,156 ) (5.54) Q̇3 , h=C h ×(T w ,12−T w ,13) (5.60)
Q̇4 ,c =C c ×(T a ,14−T a , 156 ) (5.55) Q̇4 ,h=C h ×(T w ,13−T w , 14) (5.61)
Q̇5 , c =Cc ×(T a , 15−T a ,,i ) (5.56) Q̇5 , h=C h ×(T w ,14−T w ,15 ) (5.62)
Q̇6 , c =Cc ×(T a , 16−T a ,i ) (5.57) Q̇6 , h=C h ×(T w ,15−T w ,16 ) (5.63)
Finally, the total heat transfer is estimated using Equations 5.64 and 5.65.
i=6 i=6
Q̇Total =5 × ∑ Q̇i , cold fluid =5× ∑ Q̇i ,hot fluid (5.64)
i=1 i=1
Q̇Total =5 × ( Q̇ 1+ Q̇2 + Q̇3 + Q̇ 4+ Q̇5+ Q̇6 )=5 ×C h ( T w ,i−T w ,16 ) (5.65)
All the calculated parameters are tabulated in Table 5.7.
Table 5.7: Comparison of all coils suitability for the heating module per heating constraints.
INPUT
Air Flow Rate V̇ air (CFM) 1200 1000 800 600 400
Water flow rate V̇ w (LPM) 40 40 40 40 40
Air Temperature in T a ,i (℃ ) 35 35 35 35 35
120
Chapter 5
Water Temperature in T w ,i (℃ ) 120 120 120 120 120
OUTPUT
Bare Tube Area Ab (m 2) 0.90 0.77 0.63 0.22 0.16
Minimum cross-section area (m 2) 0.21 0.18 0.15 0.052 0.039
Fin Area A f (m 2) 21.3 18.2 14.7 5.2 3.92
Total Area At (m 2) 22.2 19.0 15.4 5.42 4.10
Air-side Heat transfer Coefficient h w

42.2 41.6 41.3 63.9 59.2
(w /m 2−k )
Water-side Heat transfer Coefficient

18041 18122 18204 27309 27385
h a (w /m2−k )
Overall Surface Efficiency η o (%) 93.5 93.6 93.6 90.5 91.1
U o (w /m2−k ) 37.3 36.8 36.6 54.7 51.2
Air Temperature Out T a ,o (℃ ) 89.1 90.2 91.0 81.0 83.2
Water Temperature Out T w ,o (℃ ) 105.4 107.6 110.0 113.8 115.6
Heating Capacity Q̇ total (kW ) 33.2 28.2 22.9 14.3 9.92
It can be seen from Table 5.7 that the capacity of coil C (i.e., ≈ 23 kW) is the
closest to the defined constraint (i.e., 21 kW), which can be recommended for
further consideration. Hence, we acquired the corresponding coil C and
installed it inside the storage chamber.
5.2.3 Integration and performance evaluation of the heating

module
We further integrate the heating fan-coil unit with the integrated gasifier hot
water generation system (IGHWG). The specifications of the heating coil are
provided in Table 5.8.
Table 5.8: Specifications for Fin and Tube heating coil.
Parameters Value Parameters Value

Heating Capacity (kW) 21 No. of pass 6
Water Temperature (℃ ) 110-125 Fin Area (m2) 15.37
Pressure Range (bar) ≈3 Material Aluminium-Copper

Electrical Consumption
100 Tube Spacing (B) 19 mm
(maximum) (W)
Hot Water Flow Rate (LPM) 20-40 Row Spacing (C) 25.4 mm
121
Chapter 5
Air flow rate (CFM) 1000 Number of Rows 3
Moreover, the physical setup of IGHWG with the heating module is shown in
Figure 5.14.
Figure 5.14: Integration of heating module with IGHWG.
The heating module comprises a gasifier water heating system (IGHWG), a

heating fan–coil unit, a hot pump (Make: Grundfos, Model: Magna1 25-60),
and an electronically controlled solenoid valve (Make: UFlow Automation,
Model: MCP43). The water flow rate and the water in and out temperatures
are measured using an electromagnetic flowmeter (Make: Everest Water
Meter, Model: E-MAG25) and K-type thermocouples (Make: Nippon
Instruments). The heating fan-coil unit is a fin-tube water-to-air crossflow heat
exchanger positioned in the chamber and connected to IGHWG with suitable
piping. The hot water (≈ 120 ℃) supplied by IGHWG is circulated through the
fan-coil unit positioned in the chamber. Moreover, the heating capacity of the
fan-coil unit is controlled using an electronically operated solenoid valve.
We perform the experiments and acquire the inlet ( T w ,i, T a ,i ) and outlet (
T w ,o , T a ,o ) temperatures of air and water, as shown in Figure 5.15. Moreover,
we also measured the water (ṁw ) and air flow rate (ṁa). The hot water enters
122
Chapter 5
at ≈ 122 ℃ , heating the air (stabilizing duration); eventually, stabilized, and

steady heating is observed (steady-state operation). In the steady-state, the
air temperature raised to 81 ℃ . We also observe a consistent drop in water
temperature due to a drop in temperature in the water shell of IGHWG.
Overall, the heating capacity of the coil is estimated using Equation 5.67.
Q̇air = ṁa ×C p , a × ( T a , o−T a ,i ) (5.67)
Figure 5.15: Experiments on the heating coil.
The results from performance quantification during the steady-state operation

of the heating coil is provided in Table 5.9.
Table 5.9: Performance of fin and tube heating coil.
Parameters Water Air
Average inlet temperature (℃ ) 112±3 36±3
Average outlet temperature (℃ ) 100±3 82±1
Mass flow rate (kg /s ) 0.38 0.42
Heating Capacity Q (kW) ≈ 19.2 ≈ 19.4
Further, we integrate the heating and cooling module with the integrated
123
Chapter 5
gasifier-based hot water generator. The heating coil and evaporator of the
adsorption refrigeration system are installed inside the storage chamber. The
detailed construction and testing of the temperature control unit are discussed
in the following section.
5.3 Off-the-grid Temperature Control Unit
The off-the-grid temperature-controlled unit broadly comprises the biomass

gasification-based hot water generator (IGHWG), i.e., the central energy
source unit, a heating module, a cooling module with a storage chamber, an
auxiliary power unit, and a control unit. The schematic of the full temperature
control unit is shown in Figure 5.16.
Figure 5.16: Schematic of the biomass gasification powered temperature control unit
comprising: a) Biomass gasification based hot water generator, b) Heating module, c) Cooling
module, d) Control unit, and e) Auxiliary power unit.
The hot water generator acts as the primary energy source. The biomass
processed in the gasification reactor releases a combination of combustible
gases ( H 2, CO , and CH 4 ) further burner into a burner and pass through the
helical coil of the shell and helical tube heat exchanger (Figure 5.16a). The
flame in the burner and flue gas in the helical tube heat the water in the shell.
This hot water supply requires thermal energy input for the cooling and
heating modules.
124
Chapter 5
The heating module (Figure 5.16b) is a fin-tube water-to-air heat

exchanger (installed inside the chamber) connected to the hot water generator
using a hot water pump, a solenoid valve, and a water flow meter. The
chamber can store up to ≈ 5 metric tons (10 feet × 8 feet × 8 feet ) of perishables
(Figure 5c). The walls, floor, and door of the chamber are fabricated using
polyurethane foam, i.e., a ≈ 60 mm thick insulating material sandwiched
between two ≈ 0.5 mm thick galvanized iron sheets. The hot water passes
through the fin-tube heat exchanger with air blowers, providing the required
heating inside the chamber. Conversely, the cooling module (Figure 5.16d) is
a two-bed adsorption refrigerator with a cooling capacity of 3 tons of
refrigeration along with an evaporator fan-coil unit (fin-tube heat exchanger)
installed inside the chamber. The hot water desorbs the ammonia refrigerant
(in superheated form), which further condenses in the water-cooled shell and
tube condenser. Further, the liquid ammonia gets expanded through a
solenoid-type expansion valve and passes through the evaporator coil,
producing the required cooling effect inside the chamber. The control of
switching the hot water through heating and cooling modules is performed
using the solenoid valves actuated using inbuilt ECU control.
In addition, the solid-state relays (SSRs) control the operation of the auxiliary
electrical components, such as fans/blowers and water pumps in the modules.
Accordingly, a control unit (Figure 5.16e) that uses an Arduino-based
MATLAB® program to operate the auxiliary components warrants temperature
control. The detailed connections of the auxiliary equipment to the control unit
are shown in Figure 5.17.
125
Chapter 5
Figure 5.17: Schematic depicting connections of the auxiliary components of the heating and
the cooling modules to the temperature control system.
The gasifier-based hot water generator and the adsorption refrigeration

system run constantly while operating the temperature control unit. Further,
some of the auxiliary components in the heating module, i.e., heating coil
blowers, solenoid valve, hot water pump, and cooling module, i.e., cooling coil
fans and the expansion valve, operate using the solid state relays SSR1 and
SSR2, respectively. The indoor (T room, RH room) and outdoor (T ambient , RH ambient )
temperature and relative humidity data are acquired using a Data Acquisition
Unit (DAQ) (Make: Keysight, Model: 34972A LXI) through humidity and
temperature sensors (Make: TE Connectivity Sensors, Model: HPP809A031)
and saved in a MATLAB® program. The room’s temperature information is
used to devise the different control strategies and dictate the switching of the
heating and cooling module components. Further, an auxiliary power unit
comprising solar photovoltaic panels (≈1.5 kW e) backed by storage batteries
(Figure 5.16f), generates the electrical power sufficient to operate the auxiliary
components such as pumps, blowers, control panels, and valves in an off-the-
grid manner. The physical image of the temperature control unit is shown in
Figure 5.18.
126
Chapter 5
Figure 5.18: Physical setup of the off-the-grid temperature control unit developed at IIT Patna.
Moreover, the technical specifications of the temperature-controlled unit are

shown in Table 5.10.
Table 5.10: Components and technical specifications of the temperature-controlled unit (TCU).
S. Module Technical specification Value

No.
Thermal Capacity ≈ 22 kW
Biomass
Biomass Consumption 8-9 kg /h
gasification
a. hot water Water shell capacity ≈ 200 Liter
generator
Temperature Limits 40-150 ℃
(IGHWG)
Thermal Efficiency ≈ 50 %
Type Fin-Tube
Heating Thermal Capacity ≈ 21 kW

b.
module Inlet and outlet temperature 120 ± 5℃ and 112 ± 5℃
Flow rate of water 40 liter per minute
Size 10 feet X 8 feet X 8 feet
Storage and
c. Processing Insulation Polyurethane foam (60 mm thick)
Chamber Storage Capacity ≈ 5 metric tons
d. Cooling Type Adsorption refrigeration system
127
Chapter 5
Adsorption pair/beds NH3 - CaCl2:EG composite/2 beds

Refrigeration capacity ≈ 3 TR/11 kW
Requirements
Inlet temperature 120 ± 5℃ (Hot bed),
module
25 ± 5℃ (Cold bed)
Outlet temperature 112 ± 5℃ (Hot bed),
33 ± 5℃ (Cold bed)
Water pressure and flow 3 bar (absolute),
rate 40 liter per minute (each bed)
Type Bang-bang control with SSR
Programming software MATLAB
e. Control unit
T and RH Sensor Make: CE, Model : HPP809A031
Accuracy: T: ±1 %, RH: ± 3 %,
Type Solar Photovoltaic
Auxiliary Electrical Power Generation ≈ 1.5 kW e

f.
power unit UPS 2kVA
Battery 12 V (150Ah) × 2
We further performed experiments on the temperature control unit under no

load condition (empty room). We first perform the independent actuation of
heating and cooling modules consecutively, as shown in Figure 5.19b.
Multiple runs of heating and cooling of the temperature control unit showed
the corresponding rise and fall in the room’s temperature ( T room). Moreover, the
temperature of the air exiting from the heating coil ( T hc air , out). and the cooling
coil (T cc air ,out ) is also recorded. The location of different temperature and
humidity sensors are shown using a schematic in Figure 5.19a.
The first cooling actuation (C 1) reduced the room’s temperature from 30

℃ to ≈ 5 ℃ within 50 minutes. Moreover, the cooling coil exit temperature (
T cc air ,out ) of the air dropped to around 0 ℃ , showing that the cooling coil can
reduce the room’s temperature below 5 ℃ . However, the consecutive heating
actuation resulted in a sudden rise in the room’s temperature from ≈ 5 ℃ to
50 ℃ . Such a sudden temperature rise is due to the high thermal capacity of
the heating module. Further, the exit temperature of the heating coil reached
up to ≈ 80-85 ℃ . Similarly, additional cooling and heating cycles are
128
Chapter 5
performed, and the minimum and the maximum room temperatures are
recorded as 5 ℃ and 45 ℃ , respectively. In addition, we also performed
controlled experiments with automatic actuation of heating and cooling
modules.
Figure 5.19: Experiment with independent actuation of heating and cooling module.
In this regard, we devise a simple bang-bang control strategy. As per the

strategy, we set the temperature range of the chamber having the upper-
temperature limit (T UL) and the lower limit (T ¿). As per the control logic, the
heating module gets turned on as the chamber’s temperature is below T ¿, and
turned off as the temperature reaches the upper limit T UL. Conversely, the
cooling module gets turned on as the temperature of the chamber reaches the
T UL and turned off at T ¿. It is observed from the literature that the simple bang-
bang (On/Off type) control is less often used with grid-based systems (such as
VCRS). However, implementing advanced capacity control techniques for
thermally operated systems, i.e., adsorption/desorption refrigeration systems,
which are further comprised of multiple components, is complex. Hence, we
restricted our experiments to a bang-bang control algorithm based on
numerous experimental trials, enabling a reasonable temperature control.
We performed a controlled experiment by setting the temperature

range of 45 – 55 ℃ . We conducted this experiment in August 2023 in Patna,
India (25.6 ° N 85.1 ° E). The month is usually a rainy season, during which the
storage and processing of perishables are challenging and most desired. We
have chosen the temperature range of 45–55 ℃ , suitable for the drying and
129
Chapter 5
processing of various perishables such as herbs and spices. The attained

psychrometric conditions inside the chamber are shown in Figure 5.19.
Figure 5.19: High-temperature demonstration of the temperature control unit for the drying and
processing of perishables (a) Temperature variation in the chamber and ambient (b) Relative
humidity (RH) inside the chamber and ambient.
Accordingly, the temperature control system (i.e. cooling and heating

modules) was operated to maintain the set temperature range. The resulting
relative humidity (RH) inside the chamber is recorded as shown in Figure
5.19b. The ambient temperature and relative humidity were recorded around
31 ℃ and above 80% respectively. As per the set range of temperature 45 –
55 ℃ , relative humidity inside the drying chamber was recorded in the range
of 20 – 30 %, significantly less than the ambient relative humidity (85 – 95 %).
The maintained psychrometric condition is suitable for the drying and
processing of the perishables. We also observed a slight deviation in the 2 nd,
5th, and 9th actuation of the cooling module (Figure 5.19a). This deviation is
due to the shifting of adsorption bed, which includes a recirculation loop (70
seconds). In recirculation, the expansion valve does not open, allowing no
ammonia to pass through the condenser to the evaporator. The details of the
working of adsorption refrigeration system are provided in section 5.1 of this
chapter. Hence, the cooling effect for the corresponding time duration is
disturbed.
In addition, we also show the low-temperature demonstration of the

TCU, which is suitable for storing various fruits and vegetables. In this regard,
we selected the temperature of 5-15 ℃ wherein the low temperature (5-10 ℃ )
is suitable for storing fruits and vegetables, and the temperature ( ≈ 15 ℃ ) is
130
Chapter 5
suitable for the ripening of various fruits. We conducted this experiment in the
hot and dry summer months wherein the ambient temperature and relative
humidity are recorded in the range of ≈ 40 ℃ and ≈ 10 % (Figure 5.20).
Figure 5.20: Low-temperature demonstration of TCU suitable for the storage and ripening of
perishables (a) Temperature variation in the chamber and ambient (b) Relative humidity (RH)
inside the chamber and ambient.
In such harsh climates, maintaining a low temperature and high relative

humidity is challenging. We have successfully maintained the 5-15 ℃ .
However, the resulting relative humidity inside the chamber is recorded in the
range of 20-60 %, which is a bit on the lower side compared to the required
humidity range (above 90 %) for storing fruits and vegetables. Hence, we
conclude that mere temperature control unit may not be suitable for all-year
storage of perishables. This information implies using a humidification module
(later discussed in future scope section 7.2). We have also observed some
deviations in the temperature drop during the 1 st and the 3rd cooling cycles due
to recirculation loop operation amid the adsorption bed switching, as
discussed in the above paragraph.
Overall, the unit shows the autonomous control of temperature in the

range (5 – 55 ℃). The temperature control unit consumes biomass at the rate
of ≈ 9 kg/hr, an electric power of 1.35 kW e for running the adsorption
refrigeration system. In addition, auxiliary components associated with the
heating and cooling module consume 0.175 kW e and 0.100 kW e respectively.
Hence, the overall electric power consumption does not exceed 1.525 kW e,
which is easily satisfied using the auxiliary power unit (roof-top solar panels).
131
Chapter 5
In this demonstration, we performed controlled experiments without the

actual perishable load. Moreover, the different storage and processing loads
demand various heating or cooling capacities, requiring the gasifier (the
primary energy source) to have load flexibility. Especially at low load
conditions, the designed gasifier needs to operate efficiently with low thermal
capacities. In addition, capacity control strategies for auxiliary equipment have
not been explored in this thesis. Hence, in the next chapter, we work on
improving the turndown ratio (TR), i.e., the maximum to the minimum thermal
capacity of the gasifier-based water-heating unit, which makes the system
more flexible for various storage and processing loads.
132
CHAPTER 6
EXTENDING THE TURNDOWN RATIO OF THE

DOWNDRAFT GASIFIER
In the previous chapter, we presented the design and development of a

biomass-gasification-powered off-the-grid temperature-controlled unit (TCU)
for the storage and processing unit for perishables. The developed unit
comprises a novel biomass gasification-based hot water generator (IGHWG),
i.e., a central energy source unit, a heating module, a cooling module, an
auxiliary power unit, and a control unit (Figure 5.18 from the previous chapter).
The unit facilitates autonomous control of temperature in the range (5 – 55 ℃).
It can provide 3 tons of refrigeration (≈ 11 kW of cooling) and 20 kW of heating
with ≈ 5 metric tons of perishable storage capacity. For such heating and
cooling loads, the unit primarily consumes biomass at the rate of ≈ 9 kg/hr and
nominal auxiliary electrical power of 1.5 kW e provided using photovoltaic
panels.
However, variations in storage and processing loads with various heating or

cooling capacities require the ability to tune the capacity of the gasifier, i.e.,
the primary energy source for both the cooling and the heating units.
Especially at low load conditions, the designed gasifier needs to operate
efficiently with low thermal capacities. However, typical downdraft gasifiers
offer a moderate turndown ratio (TR), which results in limited load flexibility,
particularly evident during low-load operations 188. This is because the low-
capacity operation requires the gasifier to operate at low biomass
consumption rates, which demand less gasification air. However, at low
gasification air, the maintenance of the temperature zones of the self-
sustained gasifiers becomes challenging. Hence, there is a need to explore
strategies to address these issues, such as allowing the gasifier to operate at
lower thermal capacities than the nominal designed value.
Accordingly, the technique of producer gas recirculation in the pyrolysis

zone, exhaust gas (flue gas) recirculation, and water and steam injection have
Chapter 6
been explored to enhance the efficiency and flexibility of the downdraft

gasification process49,188,189. Chen et al. (2003) report that increasing pyrolysis
temperature up to 700 ℃ can lead to a noticeable increase in producer gas
189
yield . The long residence time of the volatile phase in the reactor is also
favorable for producer gas yield 189. A temperature of 700 ℃ for tar cracking is
preferable. Kitipong et al. (2011) suggested that the producer gas recirculation
(PGR) with air at the pyrolysis zone helps increase the pyrolysis zone
temperature 49. Moreover, the gasifier can operate well with low gasification air
(equivalence ratio ϕ below 0.3)49. Zachl et al. (2021) investigated the
combination of water injection and exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) from the
top of the stratified downdraft gasifier. The study confirmed that the exhaust
gas recirculation to the gasifier reduced the fuel consumption rate slightly 188.
These studies clearly suggest that operating the gasifier at low equivalence
ratios while maintaining the temperature of the various zones in the reactor
helps the gasifier operate at relatively lower thermal capacities in comparison
to the nominal designed value.
In this chapter, we explore the possibility of operating the gasifier at low

gasification air, thereby extending the turndown ratio of the downdraft biomass
gasifier. To accomplish this, we designed a new small-sized downdraft gasifier
with a thermal capacity of 5 kW. We further modify the downdraft gasifier by
introducing the re-routing of the producer gas to the combustion zone using an
additional blower. The schematic of the concept is shown in Figure 6.1.
Figure 6.1: (a) Conventional downdraft gasifier. (b) Modified downdraft gasifier with producer
gas recirculation (PGR) in the combustion zone.
134
Chapter 6
The design and construction of the modified downdraft gasifier is discussed in

section 6.1. Further, we performed the capacity estimation of the gasification
system. We developed an experimental setup comprising a naturally aspirated
producer gas burner and a water-to-flue gas heat exchanger. The details of
the full experimental setup and instrumentation are discussed in section 6.2.
We performed experiments with the designed downdraft gasifier at various
airflow rates, with and without producer gas recirculation (PGR) under steady-
state conditions. We estimate the thermal capacity, performance, and
emissions characteristics of the gasification-based heating system.
6.1 Downdraft Gasifier with Producer Gas Recirculation
In this section, we present the design and fabrication of a 5 kW throat-less

type downdraft gasifier. The gasifier is mainly comprised of three main parts:
(a) Reactor, (b) Feeding mechanism, and (c) Grate mechanism with ash
container. Initially, we estimated the fuel consumption rate (FCR) by assuming
the thermal efficiency of the gasifier (ƞ gasifier ) as 75 % using Equation 6.1.
Q̇th × 3600
FCR= (6.1)
ƞgasifier × HV bm
Here Q̇th ≈ 5 kW is the output thermal capacity of the gasifier, HV bm ≈ 15 MJ /kg
is the heating value of biomass. Further, we estimated the diameter of the
gasifier reactor (d reactor ) using Equation 6.2.
d reactor =
√ 1.27 × FCR
SGR
(6.2)
where the specific gasification rate (SGR) of the gasifier is defined as the ratio
of fuel consumption rate per unit cross-section area of the reactor (kg /h−m2)
74
. Studies in the literature report the typical values of SGR in the range 0.01-
0.024 kg /h−m2 and the reactor diameter is calculated as 110 mm76,190.
Moreover, the height of the gasifier reactor ( H reactor ) is estimated using

Equation 6.3.
FCR × τ × 4
H reactor = 2 (6.3)
ρbm × π × d reactor × RPF
135
Chapter 6
where FCR is the fuel consumption rate in ( kg /h), ‘τ ’ denotes the time of
operation in (hours), ρbm=¿ 450 kg /m3 is the density of biomass fuel 60, and
RPF is the random packing factor taken as 0.50 191. Further, the hopper is
considered to be a truncated cone where a half-cone angle of 10° is assumed
for the smooth flow of biomass76. Moreover, the hopper is designed to
accommodate about 10 – 12 kg of biomass, sufficient to run the system for at
least 8 hours. Accordingly, the hopper height and diameter (bottom & top side)
are estimated as 600 mm and 110 mm & 400 mm respectively.
Next, the airflow rate for the gasification process is dictated by the
equivalence ratio (ϕ ), defined as the ratio of the air supply to the stoichiometric
air required for the complete burning of biomass. Studies in the literature
report a range of 0.25 to 0.4 for efficient gasifier operation 9,49,76,87,89,90. To
maintain a specific air flow rate (AFR) for the gasification process, the flow
velocity (V air , nozzle) of the air penetrating the biomass bed inside the reactor is
crucial. Studies in the literature report the typical velocity of the air through the
nozzle is reported as ≈ 2−4 m/ s192. Accordingly, the diameter of the air nozzle
is estimated using Equation 6.4. Four air nozzles are considered at the
periphery of the gasifier reactor at an angle 90° to each other. These nozzles
are connected to an air ring, which receives the air from a common air blower
(see Figure 6.2a).
d air nozzle =
√ AFR × ρair
3600 × π ×V air , nozzle
(6.4)
In addition, the producer gas is re-routed to the combustion zone using a

recirculation pipe (1/2 inch schedule 40 pipe) and a PGR blower. The outlet of
the PGR blower is connected to one of the air nozzles. Accordingly, three
nozzles are responsible for the air insertion, and the fourth nozzle allows
producer gas recirculation as and when needed. The Solid Works TM model of
the modified gasifier is shown in Figures 6.2a and 6.2b, respectively.
Moreover, the technical specifications are listed in Table 6.1.
Table 6.1: Technical specifications of the 5 kW throat-less type downdraft gasifier with
producer gas recirculation.
Parameter Value
Thermal power output (Q̇ th) 5 kW
Gasification efficiency (ƞ gasifier ) 75 %
136
Chapter 6
Fuel consumption rate (FCR) 1.2 kg /h
Specific gasification rate (SGR) 160 kg /h−m2
Random packing factor (RPF) 0.5
Nozzle diameter (d air nozzle ) 10 mm
Reactor diameter (d reactor ) 0.11 m
Height of reactor (H) 1m
Figure 6.2: (a) SolidWorksTM model (detail drawings listed in Annexure D) and (b) Working
model of the gasifier.
6.2 Setup for the capacity estimation of the downdraft gasifier
Here, we report the methodology for the capacity estimation of the modified
downdraft gasifier. To this end, we designed and integrated additional parts
such as a naturally aspirated producer gas burner and a flue gas to water
shell and tube heat exchanger. We adopted the design of a naturally aspirated
premixed burner from the literature (Figure 6.3a)142.
137
Chapter 6
Figure 6.3: (a) Solid WorksTM model of the producer gas burner in literature. (b) Design
improvisation for better air mixing. (c) Solid WorksTM model of the modified burner. (d) The
physical image of the fabricated burner.
Further, an ingenuous modification to the design suggested in the literature is

implemented. We refined the burner design by incorporating the additional
ports for the secondary air entrainment at the top (Figure 6.3b), enabling
better combustion. The corresponding Solid WorksTM model and the actual
picture are shown in Figures 6.3c and 6.3d, respectively. The detailed design
and drawing of the burner are provided in Annexure D (section D.1).
Table 6.2: Specifications of Producer Gas Burner.
Parameter Value
Diameter of injector (d i ) 20 mm
Diameter of the throat (d t ) 34 mm
Length of the converging section, Lconv = 2.5
85 mm
dt
Length of the diverging section, L¿= 10d t 340 mm
Angle of converging section (θconv ) 39
0
Angle of diverging section (θ¿ ) 10

0
Diameter of ports (d p ) 2 mm
Number of ports ( N ) 640
The combusted producer gas in the burner is supplied to heat water. In this
regard, a shell and tube heat exchanger is designed. The full design of the
heat exchanger is provided in Annexure D (section D.2). The Solid Works TM
model and the actual picture of the designed heat exchanger are shown in
138
Chapter 6
Figures 6.4a and 6.4b, respectively. Moreover, the specifications of the heat
exchanger are provided in Table 6.3.
Figure 6.4: (a) SolidWorksTM model designed shell and tube heat exchanger. (b) Picture of the
fabricated heat exchanger.
Table 6.3: Specifications of Heat exchanger.
Parameter Value
Thermal Capacity 5-10 kW
Type of Heat Exchanger Shell and tube
Shell Diameter Inner shell - 14-inch schedule 40 pipe
Outer shell – 16-inch schedule 40 pipe
Tube Diameter 1 inch – schedule 40 pipe
Length of shell 300 mm
No. of tubes 31
Baffle cut 25 %
We integrate the modified downdraft gasifier with the producer gas burner and
the heat exchanger. The schematic and full SolidWorks TM model of the
experimental setup is shown in Figures 6.5a and 6.5b, respectively.
139
Chapter 6
Figure 6.5: Experimental setup for capacity estimation of downdraft gasifier. (a) Schematic. (b)
CAD Model.
We also employed temperature sensors and flow meters to measure the

temperatures and air and water flow rates at various locations. We positioned
multiple K-type thermocouples for the measurement of the reactor’s zones
temperatures (T 1 to T 7), producer gas exit temperature (T pg), burner flame
temperature (T flame ), and water in (T w ,∈¿¿), and out (T w ,out ) temperature. We
also installed an orifice meter and electromagnetic water flowmeter to
measure the gasification air flowrate (V̇ air ) and water flow rate (V̇ water ). We also
used an exhaust gas analyzer (Make: Applied Techno, Model: ATS-206A,
Accuracy: ±2 %) at the chimney of the heat exchanger for characterizing the
emissions measurement. The actual image of the full experimental setup is
shown in Figure 6.6.
140
Chapter 6
Figure 6.6: Image of the experimental setup for the capacity estimation of the downdraft
gasifier.
A typical experiment starts with igniting the gasifier from the air nozzle after a
measured amount of feedstock (pine wood pellet ≈ 12 kg) is fed into the
reactor via the hopper. A sub-stoichiometric air is supplied using a blower
(Make: Delta, Model: BFB1224GH) via an air ring (Figure 6.5a). Combustible
producer gas is lit in the burner using a flame torch. Consequently, the flue
gas is passed through the heat exchanger to heat the water. We perform
experiments with and without the producer gas recirculation (PGR) for
comparison. The time of the experimental run is taken such that a substantial
time of steady-state operation of the gasification system is recorded. The
water flow rate through the heat exchanger is also kept constant (
3
V̇ water ≈ 0.5 m /h) throughout the experiment and measured using an
electromagnetic water flow meter (Make: Everest Flowmeter, Model: EMAG
DN25). The output thermal capacity of the gasifier in the form of water heating
capacity is evaluated using Equation 6.5.
Q̇w =V̇ water × ρ w × c pw ×¿ (6.5)
where the ρw and c pw are the density (kg /m3) and specific heat (kJ /kg−K ) of
water at average water temperature.
Further, we estimated the air flow rate entering the gasifier using an orifice
meter using Equation 6.6.
141
Chapter 6
a1 ×a 2 × √ 2 × ( Pd / ρw ) × ( ρ w / ρair )
V̇ air =C d (6.6)
√ a −a
2
1
2
2
where a 1=5.72× 10−4 m2 and a 2=1.43 ×10−4 m2 are the areas of the pipe and the
orifice. Pd (in Pascal) is the static pressure difference measured using a
pressure transmitter (Make: Omicron, Model: M110-AD, Accuracy: ±1 %) on
the upstream and at the vena-contracta of the orifice meter. The density of
water and air is taken as ρw =1000 kg/m3 and ρair =1.2 kg /m3, and C d is the
coefficient of discharge, which is assumed to be 0.6 as provided by the
manufacturer of the orificemeter (Make: KC Engineers, Model: DN25).
Further, the mass flow rate of air entering the gasifier ( ṁair ) using Equation
6.7.
ṁair =V̇ air × ρ air (6.7)
The equivalence air-fuel ratio at which the gasifier operates in an experimental
run is estimated using Equation 6.8.
¿ ṁair (¿ kg/ s)
ε = Actual air supplied ¿ the gasifier = (6.8)
Stoichiometric air ṁair , sto ( kg /kg of biomass ) × ṁbm (kg /s)
Further, the stoichiometric air (ṁair , sto) is the quantity of air required to burn the
specific amount of biomass (say 1 kg) completely. Hence, ṁair , sto depends
upon the type of biomass and its elemental composition. We used pinewood
pellets as the biomass feedstock in this study. The elemental composition of
the biomass (C-43.86%, H-6.089%, O-49.5%, N-0.39%) is provided in chapter
3 (section 3.1). The stoichiometric air requirement of the pine wood pellets is
estimated using Equation 6.9.
C 3.66 H 6.09 O3.09 N 0.02+3.63 ( O2 +3.76 N 2 ) →3.66 CO 2 +3.04 H 2 O+16.62 N 2 (6.9)
The stoichiometric air for the pinewood is estimated as ≈ 5 kg air/ kg of biomass.

We estimated the overall thermal efficiency of the gasifier water heating
system using Equation 6.10.
Q̇ w (6.10)
η overall=
HV bm × ṁbm
where HV bm and ṁbm are the heating value of pinewood pellet ( MJ /kg ) and
average pellet consumption rate (kg /s ) during the experimental run.
142
Chapter 6
We performed multiple experiments at various airflow rates and estimated the

water heating performance and emissions under steady-state conditions. The
results of the experiments are analyzed and discussed in the next section.
6.3 Results and Discussion
We performed batch feeding type experiments (Total 7 runs) at various airflow

rates (≈ 1 to 5 kg /h) with the equivalence ratio (ϕ=0.1¿ 0.3 ) and investigated
the performance and emissions characteristics under the steady-state
conditions (Table 6.4).
Table 6.4: Number of experiments run on the gasifier-based water heating system.
Run 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Air flow rate (kg/h) 4.8 2.6 1.2 0.8
Equivalence Ratio (ϕ ) 0.28 0.22 0.25 0.14 0.16 0.11 0.12
PGR status without without with without with without with
Here, we discuss the experimental runs (Run 4 and 5 in Table 6.4) with and
without PGR. The corresponding location of all the thermocouples is depicted
through the schematic shown in Figure 6.5a. The transient plot of the reactor’s
temperature (T 1 to T 7), producer gas temperature (T pg), burner flame
temperature (T flame ), flue gas exit temperature (T fg) and water in (T w ,∈¿¿) and
out (T w ,out ) temperature for the whole run without PGR are provided in Figures
6.7a, 6.7b, and 6.7c.).
The airflow rate to the reactor is maintained at ≈ 1.2 kg/h (with ϕ ≈0.15).
It is clear from Figure 6.7a that the gasifier takes ≈ 50-60 minutes to attain a
steady-state at such a low equivalence ratio. Under steady-state conditions,
the maximum temperature is attained at the location of air supply into the
reactor (T 4). Moreover, a steady flame with a temperature ≈ 600 ℃ (Figure
6.7b) is recorded. The high-temperature flame and resulting flue gas heat the
water in the heat exchanger. The corresponding inlet ( T w ,∈¿¿) and outlet
temperature (T w ,out ) of water from the heat exchanger is shown in Figure 6.7c.
The steady- state of the gasifier operation ends with a sharp drop in T 4 with a
simultaneous increase in T 5 (Figure 6.7a). This is due to the fact that the
143
Chapter 6
biomass from the hopper to the T 4 location is consumed and indicates that the
drying and pyrolysis zones are no longer present (see Figure 6.1a and 6,5a).
Now, the further shifting of biomass downward leads to shifting of the
combustion zone downward (thinning of the reduction zone occurs), leading to
an increase in temperature T 5 followed by T 6 and T 7. During the gasifier
operation with PGR at similar air flow rates, the reactor’s temperatures
seemed sufficient for efficient gasification but were disturbed multiple times
(see T 4 in Figure 6.7d). This suggests that the PGR generates turbulence
inside the reactor, fluctuating the zone temperatures (especially T 4).
Figure 6.7: Transient plot of the experimental run 4 & 5 at low equivalence ratio ϕ ≈ 0.15
without (run 4) and with PGR (run 5). (a,d) The gasifier reactor temperatures and producer
gas exit temperature. (b,e) The flame temperature of the burner and the flue gas exit
temperature from the heat exchanger. (c, f) Temperature of water in and out of the heat
exchanger.
We estimated the performance parameters, i.e., biomass consumption rate (

ṁbm), thermal capacity (Q̇w ) and overall efficiency (η overall) of the gasifier water
heating system using Equations 6-5-6.10. We observed that the gasifier PGR
reduces the ṁbm and Q̇w (by 9 %), allowing to extend the run time by ≈ 0.6
hours (from 6.9 to 7,5 h) without affecting η overall. The performance parameters
for the runs 4 and 5 are compared in Table 6.5.
144
Chapter 6
Table 6.5: Performance and emission characteristics of the experimental run 4 and 5.
Ru ṁair ER Time of ṁbm Q̇w η overall Emissions

Type Exp. (h)
n (kg/h) (ϕ ) (kg/h) (kW) (%) (PPM)
Without CO <300
4 0.14 6.9 1.67 3.7 53.1
PGR NOx < 14
1.2
With CO < 300
5 0.16 7.5 1.54 3.4 52.9
PGR NOx < 20
This is due to the fact that the burning of producer gas consumes a portion of
the input gasification air and creates a more air-deficient environment in the
reactor. This phenomenon leads to the slow-burning of biomass, which leads
to the extended run of the gasifier. However, the heat released from burning
produce gas helps maintain reasonable zone temperatures. Hence, the
producer gas recirculation helps operate the gasifier at low thermal capacity
without compromising thermal efficiency. In addition, we also acquired the CO
and NO x emissions in the flue gas exit through the chimney. The emissions
are below 300 ppm and 12 ppm, respectively.
We understand that further reducing the airflow rates with PGR may
lead to a corresponding reduction in the thermal capacities, thereby extending
the operating thermal capacity range, i.e., the turndown ratio (TR) of the
gasifier. Hence, we performed experiments by reducing air to ≈ 0.8 kg/h (with
ϕ ≈0.11). The performance characteristics of the experimental run (Run 6 and
Run 7) are provided in Table 6.6.
Table 6.6: Performance and emission characteristics of the experimental run 6 and 7.
Time of
Ru ṁair ER ṁbm Q̇w η overall Emissions
Type Operation
n (kg/h) (ϕ ) (kg/h) (kW) (%) (PPM)
(h)
Without CO <1000
6 0.11 8.2 1.4 2.7 46.2
PGR NOx < 50
0.8
With CO <1500
7 0.12 8.6 1.34 1.53 27.4
PGR NOx < 100
The temperatures recorded at various locations are shown in Figure 6.8. The
temperatures are maintained with well-distinct gasification zones at low airflow
rates, even without producer gas recirculation (Figure 6.8a). This stability
leads to stable flame temperature (Figure 6.8b) and the ability to operate the
gasifier at a water heating capacity of ≈ 2.7 kW. Conversely, the circulating
producer gas at such low airflow rates disturbs the gasification zone
145
Chapter 6
temperatures (Figure 6.8d). Specifically, the temperatures T 4 and T 5 keeps on

fluctuating, which is due to the dominance of PGR at such low gasification air
inputs. The regular fluctuation in T 4 and T 5 lead to fluctuations in the flame
temperature (Figure 6.8e). Despite all the fluctuations, the gasifier is able to
operate well with relatively lower flame temperatures of 300-450 ℃ (Figure
6.8e) without flame being extinguished. Moreover, the use of PGR extended
the run time by ≈0.4 hours (in run 7) compared to run 6 (see Table 6.6) and
operated at a water heating capacity of ≈ 1.53 kW. Reducing the flow rates
could not maintain the stable gasification zone temperature, and a regular
flashback of the producer gas flame inside the burner was observed. Hence,
Q̇w ≈1.53 kW is the minimum thermal capacity of the gasifier water heating
system.
Figure 6.8: Transient plot of the experimental run at a very low equivalence ratio ϕ ≈ 0.1
without (run 6) and with PGR (run 7). (a,d) The gasifier reactor temperatures and producer
gas exit temperature. (b,e) The flame temperature of the burner and the flue gas exit
temperature from the heat exchanger. (c, f) Temperature of water in and out of the heat
exchanger.
Further, we performed an experiment with a higher airflow rate of 4.8 kg/h

without PGR to access a higher limit of the thermal capacity of the gasifier
heating system. A high biomass consumption of 3.25 kg/h is recorded with an
equivalence ratio (ϕ ) 0.28. The thermal capacity is estimated to be 6.53 kW.
The transient plots of reactor temperatures, the burner flame, and water in and
146
Chapter 6
out temperature are shown in Figures 6.8a, 6.8b, and 6.8c. It is observed that
the high gasification air flow rate leads to the regular shifting of the maximum
temperature zone from T 4 to T 5. Moreover, the high biomass consumption rate
leads to regular rearrangement of the bed, which reshifts the high-temperature
zone back to T 4. High zone temperatures of ≈ 1000 ℃ are also observed
(Figure 6.8a). Further, a high amount of producer gas with a consistent flame
temperature of ≈ 600 ℃ is observed in the steady-state region, as shown in
Figure 6.8b. This results in a high water heating rate of ≈ 11.2 ℃ in the heat
exchanger.
Figure 6.8: Transient plot of the experimental run at equivalence ratio ϕ ≈ 0.28 without PGR
(run 1). (a) The gasifier reactor temperatures and producer gas exit temperature. (b) The
flame temperature of the burner and the flue gas exit temperature from the heat exchanger.
(c) Temperature of water in and out of the heat exchanger. (d) Comparison of minimum and
maximum output thermal capacity of the experimental runs.
The gasifier operation with further high airflow rates, while attempted, could
not be possible due to the flame blowing out on the burner. Hence, the
maximum thermal capacity achieved is 6.53 kW.
We next compare the maximum output thermal capacity ≈ 6.53 kW in

run 1 (at ϕ=0.28, without PGR) with the minimum thermal capacity ≈ 1.53 kW in
run 7 (at ϕ=0.12, with PGR) in Figure 6.8d. The turndown ratio of the gasifier (
Q̇w , max=6.53 kW and Q̇w , min=2.7 kW ) without PGR is estimated as TR¿2.4.
Moreover, the turndown ratio of the system (Q̇w , max=6.53 kW and
147
Chapter 6
Q̇w , min=1.53 kW ) with PGR is estimated as TR¿4.3. The uncertainty in the

thermal capacity (Q̇w ) and the equivalence ratio (ϕ ) is estimated to be within ±
6 % and ±1 %. The comparison of the thermal capacities and the efficiency of
all experimental runs is shown in Figure 6.9.
Figure 6.9: The variation of output thermal capacity (Q̇ w ) and overall efficiency (η overall) of the
gasification-based heating system with an equivalence ratio (ϕ ).
The detailed parameters for experimental runs are compared in Table 6.4.
Table 6.4 Details the performance and emission characteristics of the experimental runs at
various air flow rates with and without producer gas recirculation (PGR).
Biomass Thermal
Air flow ER Efficiency Emissions
Run Type Consumptio Capacity
rate (kg/h) (ϕ ) (%) (PPM)
n Rate (kg/h) (kW)
Without CO <1500
1 4.8 0.28 3.25 6.53 48.2
PGR NOx < 50
Without
2 0.22 2.31 4.3 44.6 -
PGR
2.6
With
3 0.25 2 4 48.0 -
PGR
Without CO <300
4 0.14 1.67 3.7 53.1
PGR NOx < 14
1.2
With CO < 300
5 0.16 1.54 3.4 52.9
PGR NOx < 20
Without CO <1000
6 0.11 1.4 2.7 46.2
PGR NOx < 50
0.8
With CO <1500
7 0.12 1.34 1.53 27.4
PGR NOx < 100
148
Chapter 6
In this chapter, we explored the possibility of extending a biomass downdraft

gasifier's turndown ratio (TR) using producer gas recirculation (PGR) in the
combustion zone. We performed seven experimental runs on an indigenously
designed downdraft gasifier at various gasification airflow rates. We integrated
the gasifier with a naturally aspirated producer gas burner and a flue gas-to-
water heat exchanger for the thermal capacity estimation. We investigated the
performance and emissions characteristics at low equivalence ratios (
ϕ ≈ 0.1−0.3 ) under steady-state conditions. We observed that the burning of
producer gas consumes some input gasification air and creates a more air-
deficient environment in the reactor. This phenomenon leads to the slow-
burning of biomass and reduces the output thermal capacity of the gasifier.
The maximum and minimum thermal capacity (Q̇w ) of the system is estimated
as 6.53 kW (at ϕ=0.28, without PGR) and 1.53 kW (at ϕ=0.12, with PGR). The
TR without and with PGR are evaluated as 2.4 and 4.3, respectively. In
addition, we also acquired the steady-state CO and NO x emissions from the
indigenously designed producer gas burner are to be below 1500 ppm and 50
ppm, respectively.
149
CHAPTER 7
CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE SCOPE
This chapter discusses the intellectual contributions to the scientific

community and the potential benefits for the cold chain and food processing
industries arising from the advances detailed in this thesis. Additionally, the
outcomes of this research identifies potential future research directions, which
are presented in the final section.
7.1 Intellectual contributions and anticipated benefits
This thesis mainly focuses on the design and development of thermal systems
for off-the-grid preservation and processing of perishable items. The systems
can handle various heating/cooling loads and operate efficiently in an off-the-
grid manner. This section highlights the major findings of this thesis.
I. Biomass Gasification Based Water Heating System
The novel design of the hot water generation system proposed in this work
promises clean energy from biomass. The core-annulus geometry of the
gasifier and the water shell leads to significant heat recovery and claims
significantly higher efficiency than conventional biomass gasification-based
water-heating systems. This integrated system with confined burning of the
producer gas not only reduces emissions compared to direct combustion
boilers, but also demonstrates a very high overall thermal efficiency of ≈ 48 %
in comparison to 20−24 % for conventional systems with physically separated
gasifier and hot water generator units (Figure 7.1). Overall, this integrated
design presents an efficient and environment-friendly waste-to-value concept
with large potential in domestic and industrial water heating applications.
The integrated version of the biomass gasification hot water generator
(IGHWG) has the potential to minimize the dependence of small and medium-
scale industries on grid power/conventional fuels. For example, this system
has great relevance for other processes such as space heating, food and
Chapter 7
dairy, dehumidification, tanning, pasteurizing, sterilizing, bleaching and timber

seasoning, tea drying (Figure 7.2)134–139,193,194. The implementation of IGHWG
for such processes needs a critical investigation of corresponding
temperatures and thermal loads. In general, the thermal capacity of small and
195
medium-scale process industries ranges from a few kW to MW with a
temperature range of 40−150 ℃134,135,196–198. The aforementioned capacity and
temperature range falls well within the operational range of a downdraft
gasifier (10 kW −1 MW )199200. Suitable modifications in the gasifier size, heat
exchanger, and burner designs can facilitate the scale-up of the hot water
generator for higher heat demand applications. In addition, a multi-system
installation where a group of IGHWGs may work together in parallel
depending upon load fluctuations can be implemented for large-capacity
process industries.
Figure 7.1. Comparison of biomass-based hot water generator (HWG). (a) Conventional direct
combustion HWG, (b) Biomass gasification-based HWG (gasifier and heat exchanger are
separate entities). (c) Biomass gasifier integrated HWG (IGHWG).
Furthermore, this system can also act as a natural gas - producer gas
hybrid system wherever natural gas is available 201–204. Conversely, the mixture
of natural gas and producer gas can also be used in the confined burner to
heat the water in the helical coil heat exchanger 205–207. Apart from integration
with conventional resources such as natural gas, it can also be combined with
151
Chapter 7
solar thermal technology to develop a hybrid system, as discussed in Chapter

5 of this thesis.
Figure 7.2: Hot water requirements for process industries.
While discussing the potential, it is also important to acknowledge the

immediate challenges facing this technology. For example, biomass
gasification technology is still not well publicized and is under development. In
the absence of strict implementation of government regulations, it is very
difficult to compete with well-acquainted, less expensive, and traditional
uncontrolled direct combustion-based technology. Moreover, the easy
accessibility and affordable price of conventional fuels (coal, compressed
natural gas, and liquefied petroleum gas) discourage end users from using
environmentally friendly biomass in the absence of suitable policies. Hence, it
is important to sensitize people regarding the advantages of biomass over
conventional fossil fuels and develop a proper supply chain mechanism to
encourage its usage.
Furthermore, the agricultural residue, which has low energy density,

high moisture content (more than 20%), and random particle size, poses the
problem of supply (high transportation and storage cost) and feed (bridging
208,209
and channeling problem) in the gasification process . In this regard,
biomass gasification needs support from certain energy-intensive processes
such as drying, chopping, and pelletization. Agricultural residue can be
152
Chapter 7
transported to nearby pelletization plants (within a radius of 40-50 km), and

better-quality pellets can be produced. Such energy-intensive processes and
transportation result in greenhouse gas emissions. In this regard, mobile
210
pelletizers or stationary farm pelletizers can be used on fields where the
residue is decentralized and far from pelletization plants. Such an approach
will drop the transportation and storage costs in addition to the reduction in
greenhouse gas emissions. Apart from the aforementioned solutions,
introducing renewable energy resource for pelletization and drying may be
considered an option.
Finally, it is crucial to plan the disposal of waste such as solid char,
ash, and tar generated from biomass gasification. While char and tar may be
gasified to produce more energy and liquid fuels, biomass ash may be utilized
as building materials, soil amendment, fertilizer, and adsorbent211–213. The
problem of ash clogging and clinker formation is also a concern with some
high ash-content biomass fuels such as rice husk. Various techniques such as
air staging147, catalytic tar cracking214,215, and improved grate design may be
incorporated to address such issues regarding tar and ash clogging.
II. CaCl2 Composites for Adsorption Refrigeration Systems
This thesis also explores the use of adsorption refrigeration systems, which
rely on thermal energy, as a viable option for off-the-grid cold storage. It
presents a study on the chemisorption-based adsorption pair (CaCl2−NH 3)
and address the practical issues of agglomeration and expansion of the
adsorbent (CaCl2) on NH 3 sorption in CaCl2−NH 3 by using activated carbon
(AC) and expanded graphite (EG) as fillers to prepare the CaCl2 composites
(samples A, B1, B2, and B3). Ammonia sorption characteristics and structural
integrity of CaCl2composites are analyzed for a large number of cycles (at
least 300 cycles) in a customized constant volume single-bed lab-scale test
unit. Sample A (a composite of CaCl2 with AC and white cement) showed
severe agglomeration and brittle disintegration of adsorbent material, whereas
sample B3 showed remarkable stability and retained pore size. The
disintegration of sample A resulted in ≈ 61 % attenuation in ammonia sorption
capacity, while sample B3 showed a minimal attenuation of ≈ 17 % in sorption
153
Chapter 7
capacity even after 800 cycles. The implementation of B3 in a full-scale

adsorption refrigerator also showed a minimal drop of 15 % in specific cooling
power after prolonged operation over 800 cycles. Hence, the improved
stability and reliability of EG−CaCl2 composites adsorption beds encourage a
wider use of ammonia-based adsorption refrigeration systems.
Figure 7.3: Long-term sorption testing of calcium chloride composites used in this thesis.
III. Off-the-grid Temperature Controlled Unit
We design cooling and heating modules to develop a complete temperature-

controlled unit. As the cooling module, we implemented and tested the best-
performing sample B3 in an off-the-shelf 3TR adsorption refrigerator. For the
heating module, we designed and tested the fin-tube heat exchanger, which is
able to heat the ambient air from 36±3 ℃ to 86±1 ℃ , resulting in a thermal
capacity of 20± 1 kW. Finally, we demonstrate the biomass gasification-based
temperature-controlled unit comprising A. Integrated gasifier hot water
generator (IGHWG), B. heating module, C. cooling module, D. control unit,
and E. auxiliary power unit (Fig. 7.4). The unit consumes ≈ 1.7 KW e of
electrical power input, which is sufficed using solar photovoltaic panels. The
entire unit can provide ≈ 3 tons of refrigeration (≈ 11 kW th) of cooling, ≈ 20 kW th
154
Chapter 7
of heating and can maintain any temperature in the range of 5-55 ℃ . This
temperature range makes the system apt for cold storage and food processing
applications in off-the-grid areas.
In addition, such units are also useful for preserving dairy products such as
bulk milk chilling117. In addition, a simple extension of such a refrigeration
system can be conceived to develop an atmospheric water harvesting system
for the water-stressed regions216. Furthermore, the large-scale
commercialization of such technologies will empower farmers by creating an
economic value for the otherwise wasted crop residue. Moreover, such
systems also have the potential for job creation in rural and off-grid vicinities,
primarily in agrarian economies such as India.
Figure 7.4: Off-the-grid temperature control unit (TCU) for the storage and processing of
perishables.
IV. Extending the Operational Thermal Capacity Range of the

Downdraft Gasifier
We explored the possibility of extending the turndown ratio of a biomass
downdraft gasifier using the technique of producer gas recirculation (PGR) in
the combustion zone. We performed experiments on an indigenously
designed downdraft gasifier at various gasification airflow rates. We integrated
the gasifier with a naturally aspirated producer gas burner and a flue gas-to-
155
Chapter 7
water heat exchanger for thermal capacity estimation. We investigated the

performance and emissions characteristics at low equivalence ratios (
ϕ ≈ 0.1−0.3 ) under steady-state conditions. We observed that the burning of a
part of producer gas inside the reactor (PGR) helps in maintaining high reactor
temperatures (up to 800±100 ℃ ) even at relatively less ϕ ≈ 0.1. The burning of
producer gas consumes some input gasification air and creates a more air-
deficient environment in the reactor. This phenomenon leads to the slow
burning of biomass and reduces the output thermal capacity of the gasifier.
The maximum and minimum thermal capacities of the system are estimated
as 6.53 kW (at ϕ=0.28, without PGR) and 1.53 kW (at ϕ=0.12, with PGR). The
turndown ratio (TR) increases from 2.4 to 4.3 after the producer gas
recirculation. In addition, we also measured the steady-state CO and NO x
emissions from the indigenously designed producer gas burner and found
them to be below 1500 ppm and 50 ppm, respectively.
Moreover, a more flexible design of the producer gas burner and
varying the amount of producer gas recirculation may further optimize and
enhance the turndown ratio of the gasifier. Also, high producer gas
recirculation may disturb the oxidation flame front inside the gasifier.
Figure 7.5: Benefits of gasification with producer gas recirculation (PGR) over conventional
gasification in a downdraft gasifier.
Further, the gasifier operation with very low airflow rates ( ϕ <0.1 ) leads to the
flame flashback inside the producer gas burner. Conversely, the high air flow
rates (ϕ >0.3 ) lead to flame blowout in the burner. These events suggest that a
more flexible design of the producer gas burner (with more burner portholes
156
Chapter 7
and different port sizes) may enhance the thermal capacity range of the
system.
In our study, the amount of producer gas recirculation is not quantified

in this study. Hence, more experiments with varying amounts of PGR may be
helpful to further optimize and stabilize the gasifier operation with PGR. In our
study, we observed that the high PGR leads to a downward shift in the
combustion zone. Hence, optimization of the producer gas recirculation
amount is also essential to maintain the combustion flame front at a suitable
place inside the reactor.
7.2 Directions for Future Research
1. We used the simple mixing method to prepare CaCl2 composites.

Conversely, other methods, such as impregnation and intercalation
115,166,168,217
techniques , can also be explored to further extend the life and
performance of composites in practical adsorption refrigeration systems.
However, the relatively high cost and longer preparation time requirements
and scaling up challenges associated with these techniques will be the
main roadblocks in this direction.
2. Further, the temperature-controlled unit may be integrated with the
humidity-control subsystem to devise a climate-control unit, further
extending its capability to store and process all-season perishables. We
understand that the variety of perishables have different transpiration, i.e.,
the loss of moisture from the food commodity, and respiration rates, i.e.,
the release of CO 2 and heat. Accordingly, various perishables demand
different storage conditions, i.e., temperature and relative humidity, as
shown in Table 7.1 and on the psychrometric chart (Figure 7.6).
Table 7.1: List of perishables with their favorable storage condition and corresponding
shelf life at that condition.
Type of Temperature and Estimated

Food Item
Conditions Relative Humidity Shelf Life
Potato, Cabbage, Cauliflower, 0-13 ℃
5-10 months
Vegetables Spinach, Radishes 90-100 %
0-13 ℃
Onion, Garlic, Ginger, Beans 1-10 months
40-70 %
Fruits Banana, Mango, Guava, 5-15 ℃ 1-3 weeks
157
Chapter 7
Watermelons 85-95 %
>50 ℃
Spices Chili, Pepper, Tea -
-
Marguerite Daisy, Orchids,
0-8 ℃
Flowers Daffodil, Rose, English Daisy, 1-3 weeks
95-99 %
Calla Lily
Coffee, Onion, Corn, Barley, 2-5 ℃
Seeds >4 years
Peanut, Tomato 20-60 %
Figure 7.6: The favorable storage conditions of various perishable items on the
psychrometric chart.
Hence, the discrete storage conditions of the various perishables demand

an eco-friendly, off-the-grid, all-season, indigenous climate control unit
(CCU) with independent temperature and humidity control. Accordingly, we
are in the process to develop an agricultural waste-based off-the-grid
climate control unit. The schematic and actual setup developed at the
Indian Institute of Technology Patna are shown in Figure 7.7 and Figure
7.8, respectively.
158
Chapter 7
Figure 7.7: Schematic of the biomass gasification powered climate control unit
comprising: a) Biomass gasification based hot water generator, b) Heating module, c)
Cooling module, d) Dehumidification module, e) Humidification module, f) Control unit,
and g) Auxiliary power unit.
[3.] The capacity control techniques for more precise control over the low-
grade energy-based temperature and humidity control unit can be
explored. In the realm of environmental control systems, precision is
paramount for not only enhancing the performance of the systems, but
also extending the life of the equipments. Whether it i's in industrial
settings, commercial facilities, or residential spaces, maintaining
optimal temperature and humidity levels is crucial for comfort,
productivity, and the preservation of goods and equipment.
In this thesis, we developed a temperature control unit (TCU)
with a bang-bang control strategy. This strategy results in switching the
heating and cooling modules on and off during the system’s operation.
However, the central energy provider unit (IGHWG) runs continuously.
Hence, under low heating and cooling load demands, the capacity
modulation of the IGHWG is crucial.
In this regard, we developed the producer gas recirculation
technique as discussed in the Chapter 6, which helps in operating the
primary energy generation unit at lower capacities. However, further a
159
Chapter 7
more fine-tuning of the amount of PGR at various thermal capacities

can be explored in the future.
In addition, other capacity modulation or the load shifting techniques
can be explored in the future. For example, Sun et al. (2013) has
analyzed various load shifting techniques i.e., building thermal mass
(BTM), thermal energy storage (TES) and phase change material
(PCM) for load management in the commercial buildings 218. In this
regard, IGHWG developed in this thesis, has the hot water hold
capacity of ≈ 200 liters, which also acts as a thermal energy storage in
our case. However, the incorporation of TES is relevant to store the
surplus heating and cooling generated by TCU whenever needed. In
addition, Xu et al. (2018) reported a review on the temperature and
humidity control methods mainly comprising the hardware based and
the software based control strategies219. The hardware based capacity
control are performed using multiple heat exchanger and heat recovery
units with independent actuation. On the other hand, software based
decupling strategies are very difficult to implement in off-the-grid low-
grade energy based systems. Such strategies are more relevant to the
electric compressor based heating or cooling solutions.
Another capacity control technique that enhances precision is
staged or step control. In staged control systems, the capacity of the
control unit is divided into discrete stages or steps, each corresponding
to a specific level of output. As the demand for heating or , cooling,
changes, the control system activates or deactivates these stages as
needed to maintain the desired conditions. This approach provides a
level of granularity that allows for precise control over temperature and
humidity levels, particularly in systems with fluctuating loads.
FinallyAt last, the use of neural network to control the operation
of gasification systems can also be explored in future. Many studies in
the literature have explored the use of various neural network models
to control the gasification operation as well as capacity control 220–223.
The information of the crucial parameters in gasification such as, zone
temperatures, reactor’s pressure and producer gas composition can be
160
Chapter 7
used to model the input parameters such as primary air, secondary air,
and biomass flow rates.
[4.] Controlling the amount of producer gas recirculation and further
optimizing and enhancing the turndown ratio of the gasifier without
compromising the system's thermal efficiency. In dDowndraft gasifiers,
the utilization of producer gas (PG) recirculation can significantly
enhance the efficiency and performance of the gasification process 49.
This technique offers several benefits and is commonly employed to
improve gas quality, increase thermal efficiency, and mitigate tar
formation. Kitipong et al. (2011) explored reintroducing the producer
gas-air mixture in the pyrolysis zone. This technique results in relatively
high temperature in the pyrolysis zone and promote high yield of
pyrolysis products49. Moreover, high temperature promotes the tar
cracking and lead to the improvement in the heating value of producer
gas. However, the experiments with various PGR flow rates are not
explored.
One of the key advantages of PG recirculation is its ability to
enhance gas quality by promoting complete combustion of volatile
components and tar reduction. When producer gas is reintroduced into
the gasification chamber, it reacts with the remaining biomass and
char, undergoing additional pyrolysis and gasification reactions. This
extended residence time at high temperatures facilitates the
decomposition of complex hydrocarbons present in the gas stream,
leading to a cleaner and more homogeneous gas composition. As a
result, the concentration of tar and other impurities in the produced gas
is reduced, improving its suitability for downstream applications such as
power generation or synthesis processes.
Additionally, the use of PG recirculation enables better control
over the gasification process and facilitates stable operation under
varying load conditions. By adjusting the recirculation rate, operators
can fine-tune the gas composition, temperature profile, and residence
time within the gasifier chamber to optimize performance and meet
specific process requirements. This flexibility allows dDowndraft
gasifiers to accommodate fluctuations in feedstock properties,
161
Chapter 7
operating conditions, and power demand, ensuring reliable and

consistent operation over a wide range of operating scenarios.
In conclusion, the use of producer gas recirculation in
dDowndraft gasifiers represents a valuable strategy for improving
efficiency, enhancing gas quality, and ensuring stable operation. By
reintroducing a portion of the produced gas back into the gasification
chamber, this technique promotes complete combustion, maximizes
heat utilization, and facilitates better process control. As the demand for
clean and renewable energy continues to grow, PG recirculation offers
a promising approach to enhance the sustainability and performance of
gasification systems.
162
1. ANNEXURE A
DIRECT COMBUSTION-BASED HOT WATER

GENERATOR
A.1 Design
An off-the-shelf commercially available direct combustion-based hot water

generator (DCHWG) of heating capacity ≈ 22 kW th is tested as a reference
case in this study117. The DCHWG consists of a biomass combustion chamber
with a grate located underneath, a fire tube heat exchanger, and a chimney for
the exit of flue gases (Figure A.1). The Solidworks TM model and the working
set up of DCHWG are shown in Figure A.1.
Figure A.1: Direct combustion based HWG (a) Solidworks model (b) Working set-up.
Grate divides the whole chamber into two parts such that the lower part serves
as the ash collection chamber while the upper part is used as the combustion
chamber. The combustion chamber, with an outer diameter of 720 mm and
height of 850 mm, is naturally aspirated and surrounded by a water shell with
an 8 mm gap, which is further connected to the heat exchanger. A fire tube
heat exchanger with flue gas in the tube and water in the shell is welded
above the combustion chamber. It consists of 33 straight tubes (2-inch
Annexure A
schedule 40 pipes, 60.3 mm outer diameter, and 4.5 mm thickness) contained

within the shell with an outer diameter of 600 mm and a height of 840 mm. A
chimney with an outer diameter of 176 mm and height of 1500 mm is attached
above the heat exchanger with the help of cone and flange. Water level
indicator and pressure gauges are mounted on the system.
A.2 Test Procedure
Before starting the experiment, the water shell is filled up to its capacity of ≈
200 litres and the inlet and outlet valves are closed. Afterward, a measured
amount of feedstock is manually fed into the combustion chamber and lit with
a torch. Here, wood pieces/chips of size 45 mm x 45 mm x 50 mm with a
typical calorific value of 18 MJ /kg are used as the feedstock146,147. A steady
flame is maintained gradually, and the generated hot flue gas is passed
through the tubes of the heat exchanger, followed by the chimney, and
eventually exiting the system. The exit temperature of the flue gas is
measured by a k-type thermocouple. The flame in the combustion chamber
started heating the water in the shell of heat exchanger. We measured the
temperature of water inside the shell using an RTD sensor. Once the
temperature of the water in the shell attains a value of 120 ℃ (≈ 45 minutes),
hot water is circulated to GreenCHILLTM via a hot water pump (see Table 5.2).
This process marks the start of the adsorption refrigeration system, and the
operation of refrigeration system resulted in the temperature reduction of the
cold room. The experiment is continued for a significant time ( ≈ 5 hours) to
achieve the desire cooling temperature (7℃ in this case) in the cold room.
Afterward, GreenCHILLTM stops to receive hot water from HWG until the cold
room temperature exceeds the desires temperature in the cold room. During
the 5 hours of experiment, biomass consumption is noted to calculate the
overall efficiency (ƞoverall ) of this HWG. The overall efficiency is defined as the
ratio of heat gain by water to the energy of fuel (Equation A.1).
ṁw × C p , w × ( T hw, i−T hw, o ) ( A .1)

ƞoverall =
ṁbm × HV bm
where ṁw and ṁbm are the mass flow rate of water and biomass, respectively,
and, C p ,w and HV bm are the specific heat of the water and the calorific value of
164
Annexure A
biomass, respectively. T hw, i and T hw, o are the inlet and outlet temperature of
the hot water respectively. At the end of the experiment, the remaining ash
and residue are collected from the ash-collecting chamber. Experiments are
repeated several times to ensure the repeatability (minimize the uncertainty) in
the estimated rate of consumption of biomass under steady-state operations.
A.3 Performance Evaluation
The average fuel consumption in DCHWG for delivering 22 kW th of heat to

drive the GreenCHILLTM was recorded to be 16 ± 0.8 kg/hr. Based on this value
of the fuel consumption and the calorific value of 18 MJ/Kg 60, the thermal
efficiency of DCHWG was evaluated to be a low value of 27 ± 1.3% by using
Equation A.1. Other than the inefficient utilization of the biomass fuel due to
uncontrolled burning, we believe that the heat losses due to the relatively high
flue gas exit temperature of 250±10 ℃ was another factor responsible for
such low thermal efficiencies.
The traditional water heater does not allow controlled burning of

biomass and fails to meet the local government emission standards 224. There
is a strict order by the government of India to ban activities such as burning
(direct combustion) of crop residue municipal solid waste, among others,
which are responsible for anthropogenic effects32,33. Accordingly, steps are
directed to evolve the proper mechanism to utilize the waste biomass properly.
Biomass gasification is considered a cleaner technology as it offers better
process control due to two-step combustion9.
165
ANNEXURE B
DESIGN OF HELICAL COIL HEAT EXCHANGER AND

PRODUCER GAS BURNER
B.1 Design of helical coil heat exchanger
The version-2 of the hot water generator (called Integrated Gasifier and HWG
– IGHWG) washas been developed to mitigate surface heat loss and high
temperature of flue gas exit. The novel design of the heat recovery system is
introduced in IGHWG by placingutting a heat exchanger around the surface of
the gasifier and insulation on the heat exchanger (see Figure B.1). A stepwise
confirmation of the validity of the idea is done. The idea is to put the helical
coil heat exchanger around the gasifier reactor surface, as shown in Figure
B.1.
Figure B.1: The concept of integrated gasifier hot water generator (IGHWG).
Hence, the design of a helical coil heat exchanger as per requirements is

completed. Design constraint of the helical coil heat exchanger, such as
thermal capacity, hot water temperatures, water flow rate, and water capacity
Annexure B
of the shell, areis given in Table B.1. As the water shell is to be fitted around
the gasifier, the outer dimensions of gasifier are considered as inner
dimensions of water shell (inner diameter as 472 mm and height as 1100 mm
as depicted in Figure 3.3).
Table B.1: Design specifications and requirements of the helical coil heat exchanger.
Thermal capacity of Heat Exchanger (Q̇ th) Greater than 20 kW
Diameter of Helical ring (d helix ) Greater than 500 mm
Height of the Coil ( H helix ) Not more than 1000 mm
Water capacity of shell (WC shell ) At least 170 liter
Specifications of Water Shell

Hot water temperature (T w ,∈¿/T w, out ¿ ) ≈ 112℃ and ≈ 120℃

Flowrate of water (V̇ w ) 40 LPM (0.63 )
Inner diameter of the shell (mm) 472
The thermal capacity of the heat exchanger is evaluated as ≈ 21 kW using

Equation B.1.
Q̇th =V̇ w × ρ w ×C p , w × ¿ (B .1)
The flue gas inlet temperature is assumed to be as the adiabatic flame

temperature inside the burner as 1500℃ 133,225,226. Using the energy balance
Equation B.1, the T fg ,out is estimated as 118 ℃ . The thermophysical
properties, i.e., density ( ρw , ρ fg) and specific heat (C p ,w , C p ,fg ) of water and flue
gas, are evaluated at their respective bulk temperatures. Further, considering
the diameter of the helical ring (d helix ) as 600 mm, the length of the helical coil
is calculated using an iterative process. As it is well known, the heat transfer
rate from the interface solid, having two fluids on either side, is estimated as
per Equation B.2.
Q̇th =F × U i × A i ,ring × ∆ T LMTD ,cf (B .2)
where U i , ∆ T LMTD, cf , F and Ai , ring are the overall heat transfer coefficient,
logarithmic mean temperature difference for counter flow, correction factor,
168
Annexure B
and area of heat transfer, respectively. Further, area Ai , ring can be expressed
as Ai , ring=π d i L where d i and L is the internal diameter and length of the helical
coil. A 2-inch schedule 40 pipe (d i=52.5 mm and d o =60.3 mm) is selected for
the helical coil. In addition, the logarithmic mean temperature difference
∆ T LMTD, cf of water-to-flue gas heat exchanger is calculated using Equation
B.3.
∆ T LMTD, cf =¿ ¿ (B .3)
Figure B.2: Logarithmic mean temperature difference.
Further, the overall heat transfer coefficient is estimated using the iterative
process, as shown in Figure B.3227.
Figure B.3: Flow chart for calculation of heat transfer co-efficient227.
169
Annexure B
The thermophysical properties of water and flue gas are evaluated at their
respective bulk temperatures. The inner hi and outer h o heat transfer
coefficient are calculated as 45 W / ( m2 −K ) and 803 W / ( m2 −K ) respectively.
Further, the inner overall heat transfer coefficient U i is calculated as 43
W / ( m2 −K ) using Equation B.4.
1 1
= +
d i ln ⁡
d
+ i
[ ]
do
di (B .4)
U i hi 2 k pipe ho d o
Since the design is not perfectly counter flow, a correction factor F is
calculated as ≈ 0.83 using the correlation as Equation B.5157.
F=
√ R 2+1 ln ( 1−S
1−RS )
[ ]
(B .5)
2−S(R+ 1−√ R2 +1)
( R−1 ) ln
2−S (R+1+ √ R 2+ 1)
t ¿−t out
( )
∝−1 1−RP
1
T out −T ¿
where, R= , S= , ∝= N
, P= and N = Number of
T out −T ¿ ∝=R 1−P t ¿−T ¿
shell passes, t ¿ = Inlet temp of shell side fluid, t out = Outlet temp of shell side
fluid, T ¿ = Inlet temp of tube side fluid, T out = Outlet temp of tube side fluid.
The length of the helical coil ( L) can be estimated using Equation B.2 if all
other parameters are known. Further, the number of turns in the helical coil is
estimated using Equation B.6.
L
Nt= ( B.6 )
π d helix
The length of the helical is estimated as 11 meters, which will make 6 turns of
the helical coil with a helix diameter of 600 mm and a helix angle of 5°.
Height of the helical coil ( H helix ) is estimated using Equation B.7.
H helix =[ N t × ( π × d helix × sinθ helix ) ] + d o (B .7)
WHhere N t , d helix , θhelix and d o is the number of turns, mean helix diameter,
helix angle, and outside diameter of the helical tube. The design and
specifications of the helical coil are shown in Table B.2.
170
Annexure B
Table B.2: The preliminary design of the helical coil.
Parameters Value
Thermal capacity of Heat Exchanger (Q̇ th) ≈ 21 kW

Helical Coil Dimensions
Helical pipe size 2 inch schedule40 pipe
Number of Turns ( N t ) 6
Diameter of Helix (d helix ) 600 mm
Height of the Coil ( H helix ) 1000 mm
Shell Dimensions
The outer diameter of the Shell ≈ 740 mm
Inner diameter of the Shell ≈ 470 mm
Water capacity of shell (WC shell ) ≈ 220 liter
B.2 Design of Burner
The producer gas generated from the designed downdraft gasifier requires an
efficient burner prior to the flue gases entering into the helical coil of the heat
exchanger. The downdraft gasifier produces hot producer gas, which has
sensible, as well as combustion energy. The thermal input to the boiler is
estimated as Equation B.8, which is to be provided from the sensible and
combustion energy of the producer gas (Q̇sen +comb). Assuming the boiler
efficiency, i.e., the ratio of water heating to the total producer gas energy as
ɳ boiler =85 % .
Q̇th
Q̇sen +comb= (B .8)
ηboiler
The assumed temperature T PG ≈ 673 K and the composition of producer gas

along with the corresponding thermophysical properties is provided in Table
B.3.
171
Annexure B
Table B.3: Producer gas composition with thermal properties.
Lower Calorific
Percentage Density ( kg /m 3 ) Specific Heat
Components Value
(Vol %) ( kJ /kg−k )
(@ 673 K) ( MJ / Nm3 )
H2 12 0.0513 14.5 10.788
CO 25 0.717 1.06 12.622
C H4 2 0.408 2.8 35.814
C O2 11 1.12 0.997 -
N2 50 0.718 1.05 -
Average Valve 100 0.68 2.7 5.2
Temperature of Producer gas 673 K
The air is assumed to enter the burner at T air =298 K . The schematic diagram
of the producer gas burner is shown in Figure B.4.
Figure B.4: Producer gas burner.
The stoichiometric air required to combust the producer gas of the given
composition ṁair (stoichiometric air) is calculated as per Equation B.9.
0.12 H 2 +0.02C H 4 +0.2 CO+ 0.5 N 2+ 0.11C O2 + X ( O2 +3.76 N 2 ) → 0.38 C O2 +0.16 H 2 O+1.346 N 2
(B .9)
The stoichiometric amount of air (mole fraction) is estimated as X= 0.225. The
stoichiometric air-PG ratio is estimated using Equation B.10.
mair 4.76 (0.225)× MW air

( A /PG ) stoic = = (B .10)
mPG MW PG
HWhere MW air and MW PG is the molecular mass of air and produces gas. The
( A /PG ) stoic is calculated as 1.17. The ṁPG is estimated using Equation B.11.
The density of producer gas is evaluated at ambient temperature and pressure
3
is ρ PG @ 298 K ,1 atm =1.1 kg /N m using the weighted average of the densities of
different gases in producer gas (Table B.3). The lower calorific value ( LCV PG )
172
Annexure B
of producer gas is 5200 MJ / Nm3. Accordingly, the LCV PG in kJ/kg is calculated

as 4727.3 kJ /kg .
Q̇th
η
ṁPG = boiler (B .11)
¿¿
The calculated parameters of the producer gas, air, and mixture are provided
in Table B.4.
Table B.4: Producer gas composition with thermal properties.
Mass flow Volume flow

Temperature Density Specific heat
Medium rate rate
T (K ) ρ (kg /m3) [kJ / ( kg−K ) ]
ṁ (kg /h) V̇ (m3 /h)
Producer
16.6 673 0.68 2.7 24.4
gas (PG)
Air 19.4 298 1.22 1.0 15.9
Mixture
(Mix)
36 ≈ 500 0.9 - 40.3
As the speed of the mixture Smix inside must be within the limit of 0.4-0.5 m/s .
A speed of 0.5 is assumed228. Hence, the diameter of the burner pipe is
calculated using Equation B.12.
d burner =
√ 4 × V̇ mix
π × S mix ×3600
(B .12)
The diameter of burner d burner is calculated as ≈ 168 mm, and a schedule 40

pipe with a 6” diameter (outside diameter≈ 168 mm and internal diameter≈ 154
mm) is selected. The length of the burner is directly related to the length of
flame generated inside the burner. The open premixed flames from the
producer gas burners of various thermal capacities report flame lengths of 250
to 500 mm95,229–231. Moreover, the proper mixing of PG with the air leads to a
shortening of the flame length 231. Accordingly, the length of the burner is 500
mm in this case, considering the confined burning. All the design values are
tabulated in Table B.5.
Table B.5: Design values of Helical coil and burner.

Helical Coil
Diameter of Tube 2” schedule 40 (ID 52.3 mm, OD 60.3mm)
Number of Turns ( N t ) 6
173
Annexure B
Diameter of Helix (d helix ) 600 mm

Height of coil (H) 1000 mm
Outer diameter of Shell 737 mm
Burner
Diameter (d burner ) 6” schedule 40 (ID 154 mm, OD 168mm)
Length ( Lburner ) 500 mm
174
ANNEXURE C
SOLIDWORKSTM MODEL OF INTEGRATED GASIFIER

HOT WATER GENERATOR
Complete SolidworksTM Model and Parts
C.1 Furnace Assembly

C.2 Strainer Assembly
C.3 Gasifier Outer Shell
C.4 Helical Tube
C.5 Air Duct Assembly
C.6 Burner Assembly
C.7 Biomass Feeding and Shaking Mechanism
C.8 Hopper Support Assembly
C.9 Exhaust System
C.10 Ash Removal Mechanism
C.11 Chimney and Bottom Water-seal Tank
Annexure C
C.1 Furnace Assembly
177
Annexure C
C.2 Strainer Assembly
178
Annexure C
C.3 Gasifier Outer Shell
C.4 Helical Tube
179
Annexure C
C.5 Air Duct Assembly
C.6 Burner Assembly
180
Annexure C
181
Annexure C
C.7 Biomass Feeding and Shaking Mechanism
182
Annexure C
C.8 Hopper Support Assembly
183
Annexure C
C.9 Exhaust System
C.10 Ash Removal Mechanism
184
Annexure C
C.11 Chimney and Bottom Water-seal Tank
185
ANNEXURE D
DESIGN OF NATURALLY ASPIRATED PRODUCER

GAS BURNER AND FLUE GAS TO WATER HEAT
EXCHANGER
D.1 Design of Naturally Aspirated Producer Gas Burner
In order to estimate the thermal capacity of the gasifier accurately (chapter 6),
an efficient burner is needed. However, the existing burner is simply a non-
premixed burner with a diffuser, as shown in Figure D.1a. It is evident that the
existing burner configuration lacked proper air mixing with the producer gas
(especially at the center), resulting in incomplete combustion. This is primarily
due to the diffusion mixing of the producer gas with air. Accordingly, we
referred to the literature and adopted a design approach outlined in Sutar et
al. (2016)142. Following the guidelines presented in the paper, we engineered a
new burner system aimed at enhancing the efficient mixing of air with
producer gas, ensuring better air to gas mixing. The schematic and the
SolidWorksTM design of the new burner are shown in Figure D.1b and D.1c. In
addition, the thermal capacity of the gasifier in our study closely matches
Sutar et al. (2016). Hence, we also adopted the design parameters from
Sutar et al. (2016) are tabulated in Table D.1142.
Figure D.1: Primary burner design (a) Existing producer gas burner (b) Schematic of new
burner. (c) SolidWorksTM design of new burner.
Annexure D
In addition, an ingenuous modification to the design suggested in Sutar et al.

(2016) is implemented. We refined the burner design by incorporating the
additional ports for the secondary air entrainment at the top, enabling high air
entrainment. This modification is believed to improve the combustion quality of
the burner. This enhancement was achieved through the addition of a specific
component, as illustrated in Figure D.2a.
Table D.1: Parameters of Producer Gas Burner.
Parameter Value
Diameter of injector (d i ) 20 mm
Diameter of the throat (d t ) 34 mm
Length of the converging section, Lconv = 2.5
85 mm
dt
Length of the diverging section, L¿= 10d t 340 mm
Angle of converging section (θconv ) 39
0
Angle of diverging section (θ¿ ) 10

0
Diameter of ports (d p ) 2 mm
Number of ports ( N ) 640
Figure D.2: Modified burner (a) Additional Part for secondary air entrainment (b) CAD design
of modified burner. (c) Picture of the fabricated burner.
The observed outcome was a significantly improved flame. The comparison of

flame from the conventional diffusion burner with the newly designed burner is
shown in figure D.3. It is clearly seen that the flame of modified burner (Figure
187
Annexure D
D.3b) is short and blueish which confirms the better air-PG mixing and high
quality combustion. Conversely, conventional diffusion burner has high length
flame with smoky gas appeared at the core of the flame.
Figure D.3: (a) Producer gas burner with conventional diffusion mixing (b) Produce gas burner
with primary and secondary air entrainment.
D.2: Shell and Tube Heat exchanger

A heat exchanger is designed to estimate the thermal capacity of the
downdraft gasifier discussed in Chapter 6. The output producer gas from the
downdraft gasifier is routed to the producer gas burner (Figure D.3b) which
requires the thermal quantification. In this regard, we proposed a shell and
tube heat exchanger with an additional water jacket.
D.2.1 Calculation for Mass Flow Rate of Flue Gas:

In order to estimate the geometrical dimensions of the heat exchanger, we
apply the mass balance on the system comprising the downdraft gasifier,
producer gas burner and the proposed heat exchanger, as shown in Figure
D.3. The biomass (ṁbm) and the gasification air (ṁgasi ,air ) are the input to the
gasifier which produces the hot producer gas (ṁPG ) and a negligible quantity of
ash (ṁash). The hot producer gas further mixes with the combustion air ( ṁcomb , air
) and burn into the burner, further passes through the heat exchanger in the
form of hot flue gas (ṁfg ). Now, we proceed systematically to estimate the
amount of flue gas (ṁfg ) passing through the heat exchanger. The mass
balance equation of the heat exchanger is shown in Equation D.1.
188
Annexure D
ṁfg = ṁPG + ṁcomb ,air (D.1)
The mass of producer gas (ṁPG ) depends upon the biomass consumption rate
(ṁbm) and input gasification air (ṁgasi ,air ) as shown in Equation D.2.
ṁPG =ṁbm+ ṁgasi , air (D.2)
The gasifier used in this study is designed to have the biomass consumption
rate (ṁbm) of 1-3 kg /hr . For calculation purpose, we assume the biomass
consumption rate of the gasifier is 1 kg /hr . Accordingly, the input gasification
air is estimated using the air-fuel equivalence ratio ( ε ) as 0.259,76,156,232,233.
Considering, the stoichiometric amount of air per kg of biomass ( ṁsto .air ) as 5
kg air/ kg biomass (see Section 6.1). The amount of gasification air ( ṁgasi ,air ) is
estimated using Equation D.3.
ṁgasi ,air =ε ṁsto. air= 1.14 kg air/ kg biomass (D.3)
Further, the mass of producer gas ṁPG is estimated as ≈ 2.14 kg/kg biomass
using Equation D.2. Considering the biomass consumption rate (ṁbm) as 1
kg /h, we estimated the ṁPG ≈ 2.14 kg/h.
Figure D.3: Mass conservation of the gasifier unit with producer gas burner and proposed heat
exchanger.
Now, mass conservation for the burner and heat exchanger assembly is
shown in Equation D.4.
ṁfg = ṁPG + ṁcomb ,air (D.4)
189
Annexure D
The mass of combustion air (ṁcomb , air) required to completely burn the ṁPG
mass of producer gas is to be estimated. Accordingly, we assume a typical
composition of producer gas as provided in Table D.2.
Table D.2: Average composition of producer gas and its LCV9,74,76,154,156,232,233.
Raw Producer Gas (PG)
Lower Calorific Value ( MJ /m 3

Components Percentage (Vol %))
)
H2 18 ≈ 10
CO 20 ≈ 12
CH 4 2 ≈ 36
CO 2 20 -
N2 40 -
LCV of Producer Gas = ( 0.18 ×10 )+ ( 0.12× 12 )+ ( 0.02× 36 ) =4.92 ≈ 5 MJ /m 3
The volume fraction for an ideal gas can be used as a mole fraction
combustion reaction for producer gas. The stoichiometric amount of air
required to completely burn the produced gas is estimated using the reaction
shown in Equation D.5.
0.18 H 2 +0.2 CO2 +0.4 N 2+ 0.2CO +0.02 CH 4 +Z ( O2 +3.76 N 2 ) → X CO 2+ Y H 2 O+W

(D .5) N 2
By balancing the chemical reaction, we found

X =0.22 Y =0.42 Z=0.23 W =1.26
Accordingly, 1 kmol of producer gas needs { 0.23 × ( 1+ 3.76 ) }=1.1 kmol of air for
a complete burn. The mass of 1 kmol of PG is the molecular mass of producer
gas ( M PG ) estimated using the weighted average of the molecular masses of
the gases present in producer gas (Equation D.6).
M PG =( 0.18 × M H ) + ( 0.20 × M CO ) + ( 0.02 × M C H ) + ( 0.20× M CO ) + ( 0.40 × M N ) (D .6)

2 4 2
The molecular mass of producer gas ( M PG ) is estimated as 26.3 kg /kmol .

Further, assuming the molecular mass of air ( M air ) as 29 kg /kmol , the amount
of combustion air (ṁcomb , air) required for ṁPG is evaluated using Equation D.7.
190
Annexure D
( )
1.1× M air (D .6)
ṁcomb , air = × ṁPG
M PG
Accordingly, the ṁcomb , air is calculated as 2.6 kg /h. The total amount of flue gas
(ṁfg ) is estimated using D.4 as ṁfg =4.74 ≈ 5 kg /h.
D.2.2 Calculation for Flame Temperature of Flue Gas

In order to evaluate the flame temperature of the flue gas, we apply the
energy conservation on the burner and the heat exchanger as shown in Figure
D.4.
Figure D.4: Energy balance of the producer gas burner and the heat exchanger.
Energy Balance in Burner:
Ė PG + Ėcomb , air = Ė flame (D .7)
[ ( LCV PG × ṁPG ) ×η burner ] +0={ ṁfG ×C p , fg × ( T ad ,fg−T ¿ ) } (D .8)
where T ¿ is the average temperature of a mixture of (PG + Air) entering the

burner. Moreover, the T ad , fg is the adiabatic flame temperature of the flame.
We estimate the adiabatic flame temperature using Equation D .8. The
efficiency of the producer gas burner (ηburner ) is assumed to be 80 %. ṁPG and
ṁfG are estimated in the above sub-section.
(5000 × 2.145 ) × 0.80={ }

4.74
×1.3 × ( T ad ,fg −200 )
3600 3600
The flue gas temperature is estimated using equation D.8 as

T fg =1592 ℃ ≈ 1600℃ . Further, we apply energy conservation on the heat
exchanger part (Figure D.5a) and estimate an approximate rise in water
temperature (∆ T w ).
Ė flame − Ėfg = Ė w + Ėloss (D .9)
{ ṁfG ×C p , fg × ( T ad ,fg−T fg , out ) }= {ṁw × C pw × ( ∆ T w ) }+0 (D .10)
191
Annexure D
The rise in temperature of water is estimated as ∆ T w =3.6 ≈ 4 ℃ . Moreover, the

flow rate of water ṁw and flue gas outlet temperature T fg ,out are assumed as
10 LPM and 200 ℃ . Further, The Correction Factor of the cross-flow shell
and tube heat exchanger is estimated as F≈ 1 (Figure D.5b).
T w ,∈¿−T
R= w ,out
¿ (D .11)
T fg ,out −T fg,∈¿ =0.0036 ¿
T fg ,∈¿
P=T fg , out − ¿ (D.12)
T w ,∈¿−T fg ,∈¿
=0.89 ¿ ¿
Figure D.5: Mass and Energy balance of the shell and tube heat exchanger.
The heat transfer area of the heat exchanger is estimated using Equation
D.13.
Q (D .13)
A=
U F ∆ T LMTD ,counter
( 1600−29 )−( 200−25 ) D.14)

∆ T LMTD, counter = =636 ℃
( 1600−29 )
ln
( 200−25 )
AssumingU =15W /m2−K , A=0.30 m2 is estimated for the gasifier with ≈ 1kg/hr
biomass consumption. On the higher side, the biomass consumption may
extend up to 3 kg/hr for high thermal capacity operations. Hence, the heat
transfer area required for the heat exchanger is ≈ 0.9 m2.
 Sizing of the Heat Exchanger
192
Annexure D
Here, we evaluate the geometrical dimensions of the shell and tube heat
exchanger. We adopt a hit and trial method using various sizes of tube for the
heat exchanger and estimate the length of the shell of the heat exchanger.
Design constraints for the heat exchanger are as follows:
• The size of tube should not be less than ½ inch schedule 40 pipe.
• Diameter of the shell (which accommodates the burner) should not be less
than 300 mm.
• Height of the shell should not be more than 400 mm.
• Tubes of three sizes (½ inch, ¾ inch, and 1 inch) are tried, and the length of
the heat exchanger is calculated.
The schematic of the heat exchanger design is shown in Figure D.6.
Figure D.6: The schematic of producer gas burner and the shell and tube heat exchanger
assembly.
The design for various tube sizes is tabulated in Table D.3.
Table D.3: The design layout of various tube sizes in the shell and tube heat exchanger.
Parameter ½ Inch ¾ Inch 1 Inch
Schedule 40 Pipe Schedule 40 Pipe Schedule 40 Pipe
Shell Diameter 340 mm
Tube Diameter 21.3 mm 26.7 mm 33.4 mm
Pitch Pattern (° ) 30 (staggered) 30 (staggered) 30 (staggered)
Number of passes 2 2 2
193
Annexure D
Tube sheet Layout
Number of Tubes 70 42 31
Heat Transfer Area
0.9 0.9 0.9
(estimated)
Height of H-Ex 190 mm 255 mm 280 mm
We selected 1-inch diameter Schedule-40 pipes for the tube arrangement

because they offer reduced pressure drop compared to pipes with ½-inch and
¾-inch diameters. Based on our calculation and requirements, we designed
the heat exchanger. The exploded view and the sectional view of the designed
heat exchanger is shown in Figure D.7.
194
Annexure D
Figure D.7: Design of tube sheet for the shell and tube heat exchanger.
In the finalconclusive design, we implemented a water jacket surrounding the

burner to minimize radiation energy losses. Furthermore, a chimney was
installed at the top of the heat exchanger to create an updraft.
Table D.3: Design specifications of the heat exchanger.
Parameter Value
Thermal Capacity 5-10 kW
195
Annexure D
Type of Heat Exchanger Shell and tube

Shell Diameter Inner shell - 14-inch schedule 40 pipe
Outer shell – 16-inch schedule 40 pipe
Tube Diameter 1 inch – schedule 40 pipe
Length of shell 300 mm
No. of tubes 31
Baffle cut 25 %
Figure D.8: Heat exchanger with chimney (a) CAD Model (b) Picture of the fabricated heat
exchanger.
196
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1 Food and Agriculturae Organization in United Nation, Global food losses

and food waste Global food losses and food waste, 2021.
2 P. McKendry, Bioresour. Technol., 2002, 83, 47–54.
3 J. Dias, M. Costa and J. L. T. Azevedo, Biomass and Bioenergy, 2004,

27, 531–539.
4 M. Juszczak, Arch. Waste Manag. Environ. Prot., 2008, 8, 63–68.
5 E. Cardozo, C. Erlich, L. Alejo and T. H. Fransson, Biomass Convers.

Biorefinery, 2016, 6, 435–447.
6 V. K. Verma, S. Bram, G. Gauthier and J. De Ruyck, Biomass and

Bioenergy, 2011, 35, 272–279.
7 L. Limousy, M. Jeguirim, P. Dutournié, N. Kraiem, M. Lajili and R. Said,

Fuel, 2013, 107, 323–329.
8 U. Fernandes and M. Costa, Fuel Process. Technol., 2012, 103, 51–56.
10 ASHRAE, ASHRAE.Inc, , DOI:10.1522/030341784.
11 S. O. Enibe and O. C. Iloeje, Renew. energy, 2000, 20, 305–324.
12 L. Wang, R. Wang, J. Wu and K. Wang, Sci. China, Ser. E Technol.

Sci., 2004, 47, 173–185.
13 I. R. 2020, World Energy Balances: Overview, .
14 BP PLC, BP Energy Outlook 2023, 2023, 70, 8–20.
15 IEA, 2023, 1–9.
16 IEA, India Energy Outlook 2021, , DOI:10.1787/ec2fd78d-en.
17 World Population Data Sheet, 2020, 22.
18 S. M. F. I. and Z. Karim, Intech, 2016, i, 13.
19 ISHRAE, Refrigerants for Indian Refrigeration & Air Conditioning

Industry - Challenges and Responsibilities, 2015.
20 R. B. Schmunk, Video: Global warming from 1880 to 2019,

https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/139/video-global-warming-
from-1880-to-2019/, (accessed 10 January 2024).
Bibliography
21 US Energy Information Administriation, Where Greenhouse Gases

Come From, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-
gases, (accessed 4 January 2023).
22 T. M. Letcher, Clim. Chang. Obs. Impacts Planet Earth, Third Ed., 2021,
3–17.
23 P. Friedlingstein, M. O’sullivan, M. W. Jones and Andrew, Earth Syst.

Sci. Data, 2022, 14, 4811–4900.
24 Climate Central, 2022 in Review: Global Temperature | Climate Central,

https://www.climatecentral.org/climate-matters/2022-in-review-global-
temperature.
25 International Energy Agency, Net Zero by 2050: A Roadmap for the

Global Energy Sector, 2021.
26 G. of I. Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, India’s

Long-Term Low-Carbon Development Strategy, 2022.
27 W. B. Association, Global Bioenergy Statistics 2020, 2020.
28 S. Bhuvaneshwari, H. Hettiarachchi and J. N. Meegoda, Int. J. Environ.

Res. Public Health, 2019, 16, 832.
29 M. Perez and R. Perez, Sol. Energy Adv., 2022, 2, 100014.
30 World Energy Council, World Energy Counc. 2016, 2016, 6–46.
31 R. Lal, Environ. Int., 2005, 31, 575–584.
32 R. Lan, S. D. Eastham, T. Liu, L. K. Norford and S. R. H. Barrett, Nat.

Commun., , DOI:10.1038/s41467-022-34093-z.
33 N. Jain, A. Bhatia and H. Pathak, Aerosol Air Qual. Res., 2014, 14, 422–
430.
34 Tiy Chung, UN Environ. Program., 2021, 2–5.
35 T. S. Kapoor, C. Navinya, G. Anurag, P. Lokhande, S. Rathi, A. Goel, R.

Sharma, R. Arya, T. K. Mandal, K. P. Jithin, S. Nagendra, M. Imran, J.
Kumari, A. Muthalagu, A. Qureshi, T. A. Najar, A. Jehangir, D. Haswani,
R. S. Raman, S. Rabha, B. Saikia, Y. Lian, G. Pandithurai, P.
Chaudhary, B. Sinha, A. Dhandapani, J. Iqbal, S. Mukherjee, A.
Chatterjee, C. Venkataraman and H. C. Phuleria, J. Environ. Manage., ,
DOI:10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.118055.
36 S. K. Mittal, N. Singh, R. Agarwal, A. Awasthi and P. K. Gupta, Atmos.

Environ., 2009, 43, 238–244.
37 R. Sidhu, M. Bansal, G. S. Bath and R. Garg, Int. J. Mech. Prod. Eng.,

2015, 3, 72–76.
199
Bibliography
38 R. K. G. and S. C. G. Prabhat K. Gupta, Shivraj Sahai, Nhar Singh, C.

K. Dixit, D. P. Singh, C. Sharma, M. K. Tiwari, Curr. Sci., 2004, 87,
1713–1717.
39 U. environment Program, Food Waste Index Report, 2021.
40 W. and W. FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, The State of Food Security and

Nutrition in the World 2023. Urbanization, agrifood systems
transformation and healthy diets across the rural–urban continuum.,
2023, vol. 10.
41 Ministry of Agriculture and Farm Welfare, Post Harvest Loss of Fruits &
Vegetables, https://pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?
PRID=1910360, (accessed 7 January 2024).
42 H. Kumar, K. Bhardwaj, R. Sharma and E. Nepovimova, Molecules,

2020, 25, 1–21.
43 Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, Cold Storage Facilities in the

Country, https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1606341,
(accessed 3 January 2024).
44 MOFPI, Opportunities in Cold Chain Sector in India, 2016.
45 J. Parraga, K. R. Khalilpour and A. Vassallo, Renew. Sustain. Energy

Rev., 2018, 92, 219–234.
46 M. Lucia, V. Rios, A. M. González, E. Eduardo, S. Lora and O. Agustin,

Biomass and Bioenergy, 2018, 108, 345–370.
47 J. Watson, Y. Zhang, B. Si, W. T. Chen and R. de Souza, Renew.

Sustain. Energy Rev., 2018, 83, 1–17.
48 M. Rabaçal, U. Fernandes and M. Costa, Renew. Energy, 2013, 51,

220–226.
49 K. Jaojaruek, S. Jarungthammachote, M. K. B. Gratuito, H. Wongsuwan

and S. Homhual, Bioresour. Technol., 2011, 102, 4834–4840.
50 N. K. Ram, N. R. Singh, P. Raman, A. Kumar and P. Kaushal, Energy,

2019, 187, 1–16.
51 C. Mandl, I. Obernberger and F. Biedermann, Fuel, 2010, 89, 3795–

3806.
52 C. A. Forero-Núñez and F. E. Sierra-Vargas, Int. Rev. Mech. Eng.,

2016, 10, 239.
53 E. Natarajan, A. Nordin and A. . Rao, Biomass and Bioenergy, 1998, 14,

533–546.
54 K. Umeki, K. Yamamoto, T. Namioka and K. Yoshikawa, Appl. Energy,
200
Bibliography
2010, 87, 791–798.
55 T. H. Jayah, L. Aye, R. J. Fuller and D. F. Stewart, Biomass and

Bioenergy, 2003, 25, 459–469.
56 J. Wang, R.,Wang, L., Wu, Adsorption refrigeration technology: theory

and application, John Wiley & Sons, 1st edn., 2014.
57 R. W. Carling, J. Chem. Thermodyn., 1981, 13, 503–512.
58 R. P. Overend, Direct Combust. Biomass, 2002, I, 27.
59 The main advantages and disadvantages of biomass energy,

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F
%2Fwww.depidiomas.unitru.edu.pe%2F%3Fa%3Dthe-main-
advantages-and-disadvantages-of-biomass-energy-yy-
GKdN6NFn&psig=AOvVaw1d_odVjSL1tvVz6Hee_r7T&ust=170992606
4696000&source=images&cd=vfe&opi=89978449&ved=0CBUQj,
(accessed 8 March 2024).
61 R. Singh, B. B. Krishna, G. Mishra, J. Kumar and T. Bhaskar, Renew.

Energy, 2016, 98, 226–237.
62 M. K. Awasthi, T. Sar, S. C. Gowd, K. Rajendran, V. Kumar, S.

Sarsaiya, Y. Li, R. Sindhu, P. Binod, Z. Zhang, A. Pandey and M. J.
Taherzadeh, Fuel, 2023, 342, 127790.
63 K. Sivabalan, S. Hassan, H. Ya and J. Pasupuleti, J. Phys. Conf. Ser., ,

DOI:10.1088/1742-6596/1831/1/012033.
64 T. Nussbaumer, Energy and Fuels, 2003, 17, 1510–1521.
65 C. Serrano, H. Portero and E. Monedero, Fuel, 2013, 111, 564–573.
66 L. Carvalho, E. Wopienka, C. Pointner, J. Lundgren, V. K. Verma, W.

Haslinger and C. Schmidl, Appl. Energy, 2013, 104, 286–296.
67 L. S. Johansson, C. Tullin, B. Leckner and P. Sjövall, Biomass and

Bioenergy, 2003, 25, 435–446.
68 C. Boman, A. Nordin, D. Boström and M. Öhman, Energy and Fuels,

2004, 18, 338–348.
69 M. Olsson and J. Kjällstrand, Biomass and Bioenergy, 2004, 27, 607–

611.
70 Y. F. Xing, Y. H. Xu, M. H. Shi and Y. X. Lian, J. Thorac. Dis., 2016, 8,

E69–E74.
71 K. Sirisomboon and V. I. Kuprianov, Energy and Fuels, 2017, 31, 659–
201
Bibliography
671.
72 A. B. Abubakar, B. M. Tela, M. Ben Oumarou, A. A. Bukar, M. Ben

Oumarou, B. M. Tela, A. M. Eljummah and M. Ben Oumarou, Am. J.
Energy Res., 2019, 7, 1–14.
73 V. S. Sikarwar, M. Zhao, P. Clough, J. Yao, X. Zhong, M. Z. Memon, N.

Shah, E. J. Anthony and P. S. Fennell, Energy Environ. Sci., 2016, 9,
2939–2977.
74 Food and Agriculturae Organization in United Nation, Wood gas as

engine fuel, 1986.
75 N. Cerone, F. Zimbardi, L. Contuzzi, J. Baleta, D. Cerinski and R.

Skvorčinskienė, Energy Convers. Manag., 2020, 221, 113116.
76 Z. A. Zainal, A. Rifau, G. A. Quadir and K. N. Seetharamu, Biomass and

Bioenergy, 2002, 23, 283–289.
77 N. M. Nguyen, F. Alobaid, J. May, J. Peters and B. Epple, Energy, ,

DOI:10.1016/j.energy.2020.117744.
78 R. Migliaccio, P. Brachi, F. Montagnaro, S. Papa, A. Tavano, P.

Montesarchio, G. Ruoppolo and M. Urciuolo, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.,
2021, 60, 5034–5047.
79 S. Gupta and S. De, Energy, , DOI:10.1016/j.energy.2021.122868.
80 W. Wang, W. Li, Q. Ren and Q. Lyu, Energy, 2024, 293, 130714.
81 L. Liao, J. Zheng, Y. Zhang, C. Li and C. Yuan, Fuel, 2021, 289,

119919.
82 G. Li, L. Wang, C. Wang, C. Wang, P. Wu and D. Che, Energies, ,

DOI:10.3390/en13184937.
83 S. K. Sansaniwal, K. Pal, M. A. Rosen and S. K. Tyagi, Renew. Sustain.

Energy Rev., 2017, 72, 363–384.
84 G. Kumari and S. K. Karmee, Thermochemical routes applying biomass:

a critical assessment, INC, 2022.
85 F. Guo, Y. Dong, L. Dong and C. Guo, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 2014,

39, 5625–5633.
86 N. Striugas, K. Zakarauskas, A. Džiugys, R. Navakas and R.

Paulauskas, Appl. Therm. Eng., 2014, 73, 1151–1159.
87 and Q. Z. Zhongqing Ma, Jiewang Ye, Chao Zhao, BioResources,

2015, 10, 2888–2902.
88 V. Kirsanovs, D. Blumberga, I. Veidenbergs, C. Rochas, E. Vigants and
202
Bibliography
G. Vigants, Energy Procedia, 2017, 128, 332–338.
89 T. Khosasaeng and R. Suntivarakorn, Energy Procedia, 2017, 138,

784–788.
90 M. Awais, W. Li, A. Munir, M. M. Omar and M. Ajmal, Biomass Convers.

Biorefinery, 2021, 11, 429–444.
91 B. de Mena, D. Vera, F. Jurado and M. Ortega, Fuel Process. Technol.,

2016, 156, 394–406.
92 A. Saravanakumar, T. M. Haridasan, T. B. Reed and R. K. Bai, Fuel,

2007, 86, 2846–2856.
93 S. Dattarajan, R. Kaluri and G. Sridhar, Fuel Process. Technol., 2014,

126, 76–87.
94 K. Jirakulsomchok, T. Wongchang and K. Prasartthong, J. Therm. Eng.,

2021, 7, 1344–1352.
95 S. P. Deore, P. Gadkari, S. M. Mahajani, S. Kumar and S. Kumar,

Energy, 2023, 279, 128140.
96 H. L. Luo, Y. J. Dai, R. Z. Wang, J. Y. Wu, Y. X. Xu and J. M. Shen,

Appl. Therm. Eng., 2006, 26, 1218–1225.
97 M. Sadi and A. Arabkoohsar, J. Clean. Prod., 2020, 275, 124143.
98 B. Dawoud, Renew. Energy, 2007, 32, 947–964.
99 S. Rosiek, M. S. Romero-Cano, A. M. Puertas and F. J. Batlles, Renew.

Energy, 2019, 138, 697–708.
100 M. A. Aziz, M. I. H. Khan, H. M. M. Afroz, M. M. Hossain, S. Talukdar

and M. A. A. Masud, J. Clean. Prod., 2024, 434, 140394.
101 A. Munir, T. Ashraf, W. Amjad, A. Ghafoor, S. Rehman, A. U. Malik, O.

Hensel, M. Sultan and T. Morosuk, Energies, ,
DOI:10.3390/en14227633.
102 A. K. Hossain, R. Thorpe, P. Vasudevan, P. K. Sen, R. E. Critoph and P.

A. Davies, Renew. Energy, 2013, 49, 197–202.
103 S. K. Gundu, A. Joshi, G. Raj, S. Vahora, M. Dubey and M. Shyam,

2018, 211–216.
104 N. Anbazhaghan, R. Saravanan and S. Renganarayanan, Int. J. Green

Energy, 2005, 2, 325–335.
105 Y. Wang, M. Li, X. Ji, Q. Yu, G. Li and X. Ma, Appl. Energy, 2018, 224,
417–425.
203
Bibliography
106 K. Korhammer, K. Neumann, O. Opel and W. K. L. Ruck, Appl. Energy,

2018, 230, 1255–1278.
107 R. Z. Wang, Z. Y. Xu, Q. W. Pan, S. Du and Z. Z. Xia, Appl. Energy,

2016, 169, 846–856.
108 D. Wang, J. Zhang, Q. Yang, N. Li and K. Sumathy, Appl. Energy, 2014,

113, 734–741.
109 A. Myat, N. Kim Choon, K. Thu and Y. D. Kim, Appl. Energy, 2013, 102,
582–590.
110 K. Wang, J. Y. Wu, R. Z. Wang and L. W. Wang, Energy Convers.

Manag., 2006, 47, 1902–1912.
111 V. E. Sharonov and Y. I. Aristov, React. Kinet. Catal. Lett., 2005, 85,
183–188.
112 A. Frazzica, V. Palomba, B. Dawoud, G. Gullì, V. Brancato, A.

Sapienza, S. Vasta, A. Freni, F. Costa and G. Restuccia, Appl. Energy,
2016, 174, 15–24.
113 L. W. Wang, R. Z. Wang, J. Y. Wu and K. Wang, Int. J. Refrig., 2004,

27, 401–408.
114 J. A. Dopazo and J. Fernández-Seara, Int. J. Refrig., 2011, 34, 257–

267.
115 J. H. Han, K. H. Lee and H. Kim, J. Thermophys. heat Transf., 1999, 13,
481–488.
116 O. C. Iloeje, Sol. Energy, 1986, 37, 253–260.
117 New Leaf Dynamic Technologies Pvt. Ltd.,

https://newleafdynamic.com/about.php, (accessed 3 October 2022).
118 QUANTITATIVE COMPARISONS OF TREATED CaC12 ABSORBENT

FOR SOLAR REFRIGERATION, 1986, vol. 37.
119 L. Jiang, L. W. Wang and R. Z. Wang, Int. J. Therm. Sci., 2014, 81, 68–
75.
120 R. G. Oliveira and R. Z. Wang, Carbon N. Y., 2007, 45, 390–396.
121 T. Yan, T. X. Li, H. Li and R. Z. Wang, Int. J. Refrig., 2014, 46, 165–172.
122 X. Tian, J. Qiu, Z. Wang, Y. Chen, Z. Li, H. Wang, Y. Zhao and J. Wang,
Chem. Commun., 2022, 58, 1151–1154.
123 L. W. Wang, S. J. Metcalf, R. E. Critoph, R. Thorpe and Z. Tamainot-

Telto, Carbon N. Y., 2012, 50, 977–986.
204
Bibliography
124 Q. Wu, X. Yu, H. Zhang, Y. Chen, L. Liu, X. Xie, K. Tang, Y. Lu, Y.

Wang and A. P. Roskilly, Chinese J. Mech. Eng., 2016, 29, 1114–1119.
125 K. Sasujit, N. Homdoung and N. Tippayawong, Energy Eng. J. Assoc.

Energy Eng., 2022, 119, 2149–2167.
126 A. A. P. Susastriawan, Y. Purwanto and Purnomo, Int. J. Sustain. Eng.,

2021, 14, 1090–1100.
127 J. D. Martínez, K. Mahkamov, R. V. Andrade and E. E. Silva Lora,

Renew. Energy, 2012, 38, 1–9.
128 D. K. Vyas, S. S. Kapdi and M. L. Gaur, 2018, 219–234.
129 P. Punnarapong, A. Promwungkwa and N. Tippayawong, Energy

Procedia, 2017, 110, 53–58.
130 V. Kirsanovs, D. Blumberga, K. Karklina, I. Veidenbergs, C. Rochas, E.

Vigants and G. Vigants, Energy Procedia, 2017, 113, 217–223.
131 N. Tippayawong, C. Chaichana, A. Promwangkwa and P.

Rerkkriangkrai, Energy Sustain. Dev., 2011, 15, 69–72.
132 N. L. Panwara and B. L. Salvib, Int. J. Sustain. Energy, 2011, 30, 376–
384.
133 S. Dasappa, H. V. Sridhar, G. Sridhar, P. J. Paul and H. S. Mukunda,

Biomass and Bioenergy, 2003, 25, 637–649.
134 S. Kalogirou, Appl. Energy, 2003, 76, 337–361.
135 E. Alptekin, M. Canakci and H. Sanli, Fuel, 2012, 95, 214–220.
136 Y. L. Liu, R. Z. Wang and Z. Z. Xia, Int. J. Refrig., 2005, 28, 218–230.
137 D. Proctor and R. N. Morse, Sol. Energy, 1977, 19, 63–72.
138 S. Çay, A. Uyanik and A. Özaşik, Sep. Purif. Technol., 2004, 38, 273–
280.
139 T. Muneer, S. Maubleu and M. Asif, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.,

2006, 10, 1–23.
140 A. Demirbas, Fuel, 1997, 76, 431–434.
141 C. Gai and Y. Dong, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 2012, 37, 4935–4944.
142 K. B. Sutar, M. R. Ravi and S. Kohli, Energy, 2016, 116, 773–785.
143 S. Deng, X. Wang, H. Tan, Y. Li, Z. Hu and B. Niu, BioResources, 2015,

10, 4178–4190.
144 P. Punnarapong, T. Sucharitakul and N. Tippayawong, Case Stud.
205
Bibliography
Therm. Eng., 2017, 9, 40–46.
145 K. A. Al-attab, J. C. Ho and Z. A. Zainal, Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci., 2015,

62, 1–8.
147 H. Siddiqui, S. K. Thengane, S. Sharma and S. M. Mahajani, Bioresour.

Technol., 2018, 266, 220–231.
148 S. Pathgi and D. Sharma, Int. J. Agric. Eng., 2012, 5, 244–248.
149 J. Venselaar, Proj. Bandung Indones., 1982, 1–24.
150 A. K. Jain and J. R. Goss, Biomass and Bioenergy, 2000, 18, 249–256.
151 L. I. Shuixiang, Z. Jian, L. U. Peng and X. I. E. Yu, 2010, 55, 114–119.
152 A. K. Sharma, Renew. Energy, 2009, 34, 1726–1733.
153 P. Lv, Z. Yuan, L. Ma, C. Wu, Y. Chen and J. Zhu, Renew. Energy,
2007, 32, 2173–2185.
154 M. Dogru, C. R. Howarth, G. Akay, B. Keskinler and A. A. Malik, Energy,

2002, 27, 415–427.
155 T. H. Jayah, L. Aye, R. J. Fuller and D. F. Stewart, Biomass and

Bioenergy, 2003, 25, 459–469.
156 E. Natarajan, A. Nordin and A. N. Rao, Biomass and Bioenergy, 1998,

14, 533–546.
157 F. P. Incropera, T. L. Bergman, A. S. Lavine and D. P. DeWitt,

Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer, 2011.
158 2013, US 8.472,1, 1–11.
159 H. B. Awbi, H. B. Awbi, A. Hatton and A. Hatton, Energy Build., 1999,

30, 233–244.
160 ASM International, Elevated-Temperature Characteristics of

Engineering Materials, 1997.
161 J. Davis, ASM Spec. Handb. Heat-resistant Mater., 1997, 3–30.
162 C. Telmo, J. Lousada and N. Moreira, Bioresour. Technol., 2010, 101,

3808–3815.
163 D. G. Prabhanjan, G. S. V. Raghavan and T. J. Rennie, Int. Commun.

Heat Mass Transf., 2002, 29, 185–191.
164 A. Shaukat, Fluid Dyn. Res., 2001, 28, 295–310.
206
Bibliography
165 Z. S. Lu, R. Z. Wang, L. W. Wang and C. J. Chen, Carbon N. Y., 2006,

44, 747–752.
166 K. Wang, J. Y. Wu, R. Z. Wang and L. W. Wang, Int. J. Refrig., 2006,

29, 199–210.
167 M. Tokarev, L. Gordeeva, V. Romannikov, I. Glaznev and Y. Aristov, Int.

J. Therm. Sci, 2002, 41, 470–474.
168 S. L. Li, J. Y. Wu, Z. Z. Xia and R. Z. Wang, Energy Convers. Manag.,

2009, 50, 1011–1017.
169 S. L. Li, Z. Z. Xia, J. Y. Wu, J. Li, R. Z. Wang and L. W. Wang, Int. J.

Refrig., 2010, 33, 61–69.
170 Ashrae, Am. Soc. Heating, Refrig. Air-Conditioning Eng. ASHRAE.
171 M. van der Pal and R. E. Critoph, Appl. Therm. Eng., 2017, 126, 518–
524.
172 Z. S. Lu, R. Z. Wang, T. X. Li, L. W. Wang and C. J. Chen, Int. J. Refrig.,

2007, 30, 76–85.
173 A. Yasmin, J. J. Luo and I. M. Daniel, Compos. Sci. Technol., 2006, 66,
1182–1189.
174 Z. Liu, F. Pan, B. Deng, Z. Xiang and W. Lu, Carbon N. Y., 2021, 174,
59–69.
175 H. U. Rammelberg, T. Schmidt and W. Ruck, in Energy Procedia,

Elsevier Ltd, 2012, vol. 30, pp. 362–369.
176 M. Molenda, J. Stengler, M. Linder and A. Wörner, Thermochim. Acta,

2013, 560, 76–81.
177 H. W. Xiang, J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data, 2004, 33, 1005–1011.
178 Y. Zhao, X. Dong, M. Gong, H. Guo, J. Shen and J. Wu, J. Chem. Eng.
Data, 2016, 61, 3883–3889.
179 X. Y. Liu, W. W. Wang, S. T. Xie and Q. W. Pan, Sci. Rep., 2021, 11, 1–
10.
180 Sunil, R. Sinha, B. Chaitanya, B. K. Rajan, A. Agarwal, A. D. Thakur and

R. Raj, Energy, 2019, 185, 148–157.
181 T. X. Li, R. Z. Wang, L. W. Wang, Z. S. Lu and J. Y. Wu, Appl. Therm.

Eng., 2008, 28, 1638–1646.
182 R. K. Shah and A. Pignotti, J. Heat Transfer, 1993, 115, 353–359.
183 A. Pignotti and R. K. Shah, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., 1992, 35, 1275–
207
Bibliography
1291.
184 S. Karthik, A. Tawfiq and A. A. I, 2017, 11002, 6–10.
185 J. D. Domingos, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., 1969, 12, 537–548.
186 K. Silaipillayarputhur and S. Idem, Heat Transf. Eng., 2013, 34, 338–
348.
187 J. D. S. Faye C. Mcquiston, Jerald D. Parker, HEATING VENTILATION

AND AIR CONDITIONING, John Wiley & Sons, Inc..USA, Sixth Edit.,
2005, vol. 5.
188 A. Zachl, M. Buchmayr, J. Gruber, A. Anca-Couce, R. Scharler and C.

Hochenauer, Fuel, 2021, 303, 121297.
189 G. Chen, J. Andries, Z. Luo and H. Spliethoff, Energy Convers. Manag.,

2003, 44, 1875–1884.
190 A. K. Rajvanshi, Altern. Energy Agric., 1986, 2, 83–102.
191 S. X. Li, J. Zhao, P. Lu and Y. Xie, Chinese Sci. Bull., 2010, 55, 114–
119.
192 N. A. Ingle and S. S. Lakade, Energy Procedia, 2016, 90, 423–431.
193 K. Preuß, M. V. Le Lann, M. Cabassud and G. Anne-Archard, IFAC

Proc. Vol., 2002, 15, 265–270.
194 H. Li, Q. Chen, X. Zhang, K. N. Finney, V. N. Sharifi and J.

Swithenbank, Appl. Therm. Eng., 2012, 35, 71–80.
195 R. Eang and N. Tippayawong, Cogent Eng., 2018, 5, 1–13.
196 D. Proctor and R. N. Morse, Sol. Energy, 1977, 19, 63–72.
197 Y. L. Liu, R. Z. Wang and Z. Z. Xia, Int. J. Refrig., 2005, 28, 218–230.
198 K. Preuß, M. V. Le Lann, M. Cabassud and G. Anne-Archard, IFAC

Proc. Vol., 2002, 15, 265–270.
199 F. D. FAO and Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations,
Wood gas as engine fuel, 1986.
200 I. S. Antonopoulos, A. Karagiannidis, A. Gkouletsos and G. Perkoulidis,

Waste Manag., 2012, 32, 710–718.
201 E. Agbor, X. Zhang and A. Kumar, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 2014,
40, 930–943.
202 Â. Marbe, S. Harvey and T. Berntsson, Energy, 2006, 31, 1614–1631.
203 M. Rodrigues, A. P. C. Faaij and A. Walter, Energy, 2003, 28, 1229–
208
Bibliography
1258.
204 M. Rodrigues, A. Walter and A. Faaij, Energy, 2003, 28, 1115–1131.
205 S. K. Alavandi and A. K. Agrawal, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 2008, 33,

1407–1415.
206 J. J. Hernández, M. Lapuerta and J. Barba, Appl. Therm. Eng., 2013,

55, 133–139.
207 R. Navakas, A. Saliamonas, N. Striūgas, A. Džiugys, R. Paulauskas and

K. Zakarauskas, Fuel, 2018, 217, 478–489.
208 R. I. Muazu, A. L. Borrion and J. A. Stegemann, Biomass and

Bioenergy, 2017, 107, 384–397.
209 W. Stelte, A. R. Sanadi, L. Shang, J. K. Holm, J. Ahrenfeldt and U. B.

Henriksen, BioResources, 2012, 7, 4451–4490.
210 Krone UK - Premos 5000.
211 V. K. Gupta, C. K. Jain, I. Ali, M. Sharma and V. K. Saini, Water Res.,

2003, 37, 4038–4044.
212 M. J. R. Hinojosa, A. P. Galvín, F. Agrela, M. Perianes and A. Barbudo,

Fuel, 2014, 128, 248–259.
213 K. Schiemenz and B. Eichler-Löbermann, Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosystems,

2010, 87, 471–482.
214 Z. Abu El-Rub, E. A. Bramer and G. Brem, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 2004,
43, 6911–6919.
215 P. Lv, Z. Yuan, C. Wu, L. Ma, Y. Chen and N. Tsubaki, Energy Convers.
Manag., 2007, 48, 1132–1139.
216 B. Chaitanya, V. Bahadur, A. D. Thakur and R. Raj, Energy, 2018, 165,

610–621.
217 T. Dellero and P. Touzain, Appl. Therm. Eng., 1999, 19, 1001–1011.
218 Y. Sun, S. Wang, F. Xiao and D. Gao, Energy Convers. Manag., 2013,
71, 101–114.
219 X. Xu, Z. Zhong, S. Deng and X. Zhang, Energy Build., 2018, 162, 163–
176.
220 A. Y. Mutlu and O. Yucel, Energy, 2018, 165, 895–901.
221 S. Safarian, S. M. Ebrahimi Saryazdi, R. Unnthorsson and C. Richter,

Energy, 2020, 213, 118800.
222 R. Mikulandrić, D. Lončar, D. Böhning, R. Böhme and M. Beckmann,

209
Bibliography
Energy Convers. Manag., 2014, 87, 1210–1223.
223 D. Baruah, D. C. Baruah and M. K. Hazarika, Biomass and Bioenergy,

2017, 98, 264–271.
224 G. of I. Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, 2023.
225 J. J. Hernández, J. Barba and G. Aranda, Glob. Nest J., 2012, 14, 125–
132.
226 F. Vidian and A. R. Hakim, EAI Endorsed Trans. Energy Web, 2022, 9,
1–6.
227 D. G. Prabhanjan, T. J. Rennie and G. S. V. Raghavan, Int. J. Therm.

Sci., 2004, 43, 359–365.
228 L. Kumararaja, Int. J. Appl. Math. Sci., 2016, 9, 103–112.
229 A. A. P. Susastriawan, Y. Purwanto, B. W. Sidharta, G. Wahyu, T.

Trisna and R. A. Setiawan, J. King Saud Univ. - Eng. Sci., ,
DOI:10.1016/j.jksues.2021.10.009.
230 N. L. Panwar, B. L. Salvi and V. S. Reddy, Biomass and Bioenergy,

2011, 35, 1373–1377.
231 P. R. Bhoi and S. A. Channiwala, Renew. Energy, 2008, 33, 1209–1219.
232 A. K. Sharma, Renew. Energy, 2009, 34, 1726–1733.
233 A. Surjosatyo, F. Vidian and Y. S. Nugroho, J. Combust., ,

DOI:10.1155/2014/832989.
210

Full Thesis - SM6 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Full Thesis - SM6 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Full Thesis - SM6 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF A BIOMASS GASIFICATION-BASED

OFF-THE-GRID STORAGE AND PROCESSING UNIT FOR PERISHABLES

Indian Institute of Technology Patna

Copyright ©2024 by IIT PATNA WHICH ALSO INCLUDES

Dr. Rishi Raj Dr. Ajay D. Thakur

Dr. Mayank Tiwari

Doctoral Committee Chairman

Dr. Mohd. Kaleem Khan Dr. Anoop Kumar Gupta

Doctoral Committee Member Doctoral Committee Member

Date approved: April 27th, 2024

I am immensely grateful to my esteemed supervisors and research

I extend my sincere appreciation to Prof. Manabendra Pathak, Prof. Mohd.

I am indebted to the Science and Engineering Research Board (SERB),

Lastly, I am deeply thankful to my parents, brother, and Dr. JK for their

The page has been left blank intentionally.

This is to certify that the thesis entitled “DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF A

Dr. Rishi Raj

Dr. Ajay Thakur

LIST OF PUBLICATIONS FROM THE THESIS..............................................vii

1.1 Global Warming: An Environmental Threat............................................1

1.2 Biomass: A Carbon-neutral Energy Alternative......................................4

1.3 Biomass in Agricultural Fields: Issues and Opportunities.......................5

1.4 Farm Produce Wastage......................................................................8

1.5 Pathways from Biomass to Energy.........................................................9

1.6 Adsorption Refrigeration System..........................................................12

1.6.1 Types of Adsorption Processes.........................................................13

1.6.2 Basic Principle of Adsorption Refrigeration.......................................14

1.8. Research Objective..............................................................................17

1.9. Organization of the Thesis...................................................................17

2.1 Introduction to Biomass........................................................................21

2.1.1 Proximate Analysis of Biomass.........................................................24

2.1.2 Ultimate Analysis of Biomass............................................................25

2.2.1 Biomass Combustion.........................................................................26

2.2.2 Biomass Gasification.........................................................................33

2.3 Off-the-grid cold storage and processing units.....................................41

2.4 Features and Challenges with NH 3−CaCl 2 Adsorption Refrigeration

2.5 Concluding Remarks.............................................................................47

DEVELOPMENT OF A BIOMASS-GASIFICATION-BASED HOT WATER

3.1 Biomass gasifier-based hot water generator (version 1): BGHWG.......50

3.1.1 Biomass pretreatment and characterization......................................50

3.1.2 Gasifier Design..................................................................................53

3.1.3 Water Heater Design.........................................................................58

3.1.4 Performance evaluation.....................................................................59

3.2 Integrated gasifier hot water generator (version 2): IGHWG.................62

3.2.1 Design and Fabrication......................................................................63

3.2.2 Performance Evaluation....................................................................66

3.3 Concluding Remarks.............................................................................67

ASSESSMENT OF LONG-TERM VIABILITY OF NH 3−CaCl 2 COMPOSITES

4.1 Sample Preparation and Characterization............................................72

4.2 Lab-scale Sorption Test Rig..................................................................75

4.3 Long-term sorption performance and structural integrity......................80

4.4 Morphology and pore structure analysis...............................................84

4.5 Concluding Remarks.............................................................................87

5.1 Cooling Module.....................................................................................89

5.1.2 Performance Testing.........................................................................98

5.2 Heating module...................................................................................100

5.2.1 Geometry of off-the-shelf heat exchanger.......................................101

5.2.2 Heat transfer analysis......................................................................103

5.2.3 Integration and performance evaluation of the heating module.......116