Speaker
Description
The first modern pyrolysis model is attributed to Bamford, Crank, and Malan (1946), whose pioneering work introduced a heat conduction equation incorporating a sink term for the heat of pyrolysis. Since then, pyrolysis modeling has evolved into a multifaceted field, with diverse approaches emerging across disciplines and driven by applications in aerospace thermal protection systems, combustion and fire safety, and biomass valorization. To systematically integrate and combine contributions since the foundational 1946 model, we introduce a generic modeling framework. Special emphasis was placed on formulating conservation equations at the pore scale and their upscaling to clarify the assumptions underlying macroscopic (engineering) models [1]. The poster will present a comprehensive checklist, comparing 54 simulation tools through a term-by-term analysis against the generic model, along with details on their numerical frameworks, original developers, ownership, and recent updates. Across disciplines, numerical methods and code dimensionality tend to exhibit uniformity within a given time period, initially relying on unidimensional proprietary finite-difference codes and currently progressing toward advanced three-dimensional finite-volume open-source numerical frameworks. Regarding the mathematical models implemented, a historical consensus on a certain number of assumptions within each community persisted until very recently. The field is now broadly converging toward comprehensive multiphysics models that describe mass, momentum, and energy conservation in porous media for both gaseous and solid phases, aiming to integrate and contribute to current knowledge of high-temperature reacting and evolving porous media.
[1] J. Lachaud. Pyrolysis models and simulation tools: A cross-community comparative review highlighting open challenges. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 259 (2026) 128347.
| Country | France |
|---|---|
| Acceptance of the Terms & Conditions | Click here to agree |
