Numerical Study of Dry Reforming of Methane in Packed and Fluidized Beds: Effects of Key Operating Parameters
, Hongliang Xiao 1,3, Abdallah S. Berrouk 1,2,* and Kyriaki Polychronopoulou 1,2Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
1. The authors used the Eulerian-Lagrangian approach to simulate the reaction of DRM in packed and fluidized beds under different operating parameters. Although the simulation results agreed well with the available experimental data, the authors do not give any useful guidance on the experiment how to improve the performance of catalysts over DRM.
2. The meaning of contrast of packed and fluidized beds were not shown in the manuscript. Why the authors choose fluidized bed? In DRM, the reactor is usually the fixed bed.
3. The details of CFD simulation were not given in the manuscript.
4. In additional, the authors use “packed” or “fixed” in the manuscript. I suggest that the authors choose one.
Author Response
File
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments attached in a word file.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.docx
Author Response
File
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The work is very interesting but presents several limitations. The study is focused in the simulation of the dry reforming of CO2, a problem that is urgent to solve. In this way, the novelty of the work is not committed.
I suggest the modification of the following points in order to be ready to be published in this journal:
1) "Samantha conducted an economic analysis for green hydrogen". I think that is not the correct way to write a scientific article. Please change to "Samantha et al. [ref.] conducted an economic analysis for green hydrogen..."
2) Why do you use the the Euler-Lagrangian approach?
3) In the introduction section it is not understood how the formation of coke will be simulated
4) The Eqs. 6-10 must be present in the section 2.
5) As I understand it, in Figure 3 the results of this work are compared with results from another work (also simulation and some experimental points).. However, the kinetics for the different studies were different (?). In this way, the kinetics are different. Why do you compare anyway?
6) "Therefore, once the system reaches a specific temperature, it will be in a thermodynamic equilibrium condition" - this study considered the system is in equilibrium or not? In this part, I did not understand this.
7) The graphs need to be improved.
Author Response
File
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
-
I am satisfied with the revised manuscript and recommend publication in ChemEngineering.
Author Response
Thank you.
Reviewer 3 Report
-
Author Response
We have improved the methodology section as suggested by the reviewer
the text added is marked in red
Round 3
Reviewer 3 Report
-
Author Response
The yields of steam and coke were neglected as they were very negligible under the operating conditions of the simulated experiment. We corrected the title of the section of the reaction kinetics. All changes are marked in red
