Science China Technological Sciences

, Volume 61, Issue 12, pp 1788–1801 | Cite as

Radiative heat transfer and thermal characteristics of Fe-based oxides coated SiC and Alumina RPC structures as integrated solar thermochemical reactor

  • Bachirou Guene Lougou
  • Yong ShuaiEmail author
  • RuMing Pan
  • Gédéon Chaffa
  • Clément Ahouannou
  • Hao Zhang
  • HePing Tan


This paper investigated radiative heat transfer and thermal characteristics of Fe-based oxides coated SiC and Alumina reticulated porous ceramic structures as integrated solar thermochemical reactor. High-flux solar radiation absorption and axial temperature distribution in the ceramic foams reactor were analyzed by adopting surface-to-surface radiation model coupled to the P1 approximation for radiation heat transfer. The radiative heat transfer and thermal characteristics of different foam-type RPC structures, including SiC, CeO2, FeAl2O4, NiFeAlO4, Fe3O4/SiC, and NiFe2O4/SiC were evaluated. The mass flow rate and foam structural parameters, including the permeability, pore mean cell size, and extinction coefficients have significantly affected the axial temperature distribution, pressure drop, heat transfer, and fluid flow. Integrated porous structure to the solar receiver could maximize the incorporation of redox powder in the reacting medium, lower the pressure drop, and enhance the thermal performance of the thermochemical reacting system. SiC structure was the candidate materials in the case where more heat flux and high axial temperature distribution is needed. However, Fe-based oxide coated Al2O3 structure could be considered regarding the heat transfer enhancement along with the catalyst activity of oxygen carriers for solar thermochemical reacting system performance.


solar thermochemical reactor reticulated porous ceramics heat transfer and fluid flow pore mean cell size permeability and pressure drop 


  1. 1.
    Buelens L C, Galvita V V, Poelman H, et al. Super-dry reforming of methane intensifies CO2 utilization via Le Chateliers principle. Science, 2016, 354: 449–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kubicek M, Bork A H, Rupp J L M. Perovskite oxides—a review on a versatile material class for solar-to-fuel conversion processes. J Mater Chem A, 2017, 5: 11983–12000CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jang Y J, Jang J W, Lee J, et al. Selective CO production by Au coupled ZnTe/ZnO in the photoelectrochemical CO2 reduction system. Energy Environ Sci, 2015, 8: 3597–3604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Guo L J, Jin H, Ge Z W, et al. Industrialization prospects for hydrogen production by coal gasification in supercritical water and novel thermodynamic cycle power generation system with no pollution emission. Sci China Technol Sci, 2015, 58: 1989–2002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lewis N S. Research opportunities to advance solar energy utilization. Science, 2016, 351: aad1920CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jiao F, Li J, Pan X, et al. Selective conversion of syngas to light olefins. Science, 2016, 351: 1065–1068CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hildebrandt D, Glasser D, Hausberger B, et al. Chemistry: Producing transportation fuels with less work. Science, 2009, 323: 1680–1681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Asif M, Gao X, Lv H, et al. Catalytic hydrogenation of CO2 from 600 MW supercritical coal power plant to produce methanol: A technoeconomic analysis. Int J Hydrogen Energy, 2018, 43: 2726–2741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kim J, Johnson T A, Miller J E, et al. Fuel production from CO2 using solar-thermal energy: System level analysis. Energy Environ Sci, 2012, 5: 8417–8429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pan W, Liu D. Coupled chemical effects of carbon dioxide and hydrogen additions on premixed lean dimethyl ether flames. Sci China Technol Sci, 2017, 60: 102–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Valades-Pelayo P J, Villafán-Vidales H I, Romero-Paredes H, et al. Modeling of a tubular solar reactor for continuous reduction of CeO2: The effect of particle size and loading on radiative heat transfer and conversion. Chem Eng Sci, 2017, 162: 77–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wang H, Hao Y, Kong H. Thermodynamic study on solar thermochemical fuel production with oxygen permeation membrane reactors. Int J Energy Res, 2015, 39: 1790–1799CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zhang J, Haribal V, Li F. Perovskite nanocomposites as effective CO2-splitting agents in a cyclic redox scheme. Sci Adv, 2017, 3: e1701184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wheeler V M, Bader R, Kreider P B, et al. Modelling of solar thermochemical reaction systems. Sol Energy, 2017, 156: 149–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Miller J E, Ambrosini A, Coker E N, et al. Advancing oxide materials for thermochemical production of solar fuels. Energy Procedia, 2014, 49: 2019–2026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Liu A P, Dong W J. Highlights on inorganic solid state chemistry and energy materials. Sci China Technol Sci, 2012, 55: 3248–3252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Villafán-Vidales H I, Arancibia-Bulnes C A, Riveros-Rosas D, et al. An overview of the solar thermochemical processes for hydrogen and syngas production: Reactors, and facilities. Renew Sustain Energy Rev, 2017, 75: 894–908CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Valades-Pelayo P J, Romero-Paredes H, Arancibia-Bulnes C A, et al. Geometric optimization of a solar cubic-cavity multi-tubular thermochemical reactor using a Monte Carlo-finite element radiative transfer model. Appl Thermal Eng, 2016, 98: 575–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zheng Z J, Xu Y, He Y L. Thermal analysis of a solar parabolic trough receiver tube with porous insert optimized by coupling genetic algorithm and CFD. Sci China Technol Sci, 2016, 59: 1475–1485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ackermann S, Scheffe J R, Duss J, et al. Morphological characterization and effective thermal conductivity of dual-scale reticulated porous structures. Materials, 2014, 7: 7173–7195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bala Chandran R, De Smith R M, Davidson J H. Model of an integrated solar thermochemical reactor/reticulated ceramic foam heat exchanger for gas-phase heat recovery. Int J Heat Mass Transfer, 2015, 81: 404–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Agrafiotis C, Becker A, Roeb M, et al. An overview of the solar thermochemical processes for hydrogen and syngas production: Reactors, and facilities. Sol Energy, 2016, 139: 676–694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Buck R, Muir J F, Hogan R E. Carbon dioxide reforming of methane in a solar volumetric receiver/reactor: The CAESAR project. Sol Energy Mater, 1991, 24: 449–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Buck R, Abele M, Bauer H, et al. Development of a volumetric receiver- reactor for solar methane reforming. ASME J Solar Energy Eng, 1994, 116: 73–78Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wörner A, Tamme R. CO2 reforming of methane in a solar driven volumetric receiver-reactor. Catal Today, 1998, 46: 165–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Agrafiotis C, Tescari S, Roeb M, et al. Exploitation of thermochemical cycles based on solid oxide redox systems for thermochemical storage of solar heat. Part 3: Cobalt oxide monolithic porous structures as integrated thermochemical reactors/heat exchangers. Sol Energy, 2015, 114: 459–475Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Liang X, Li Y, Sang S, et al. Enhanced mechanical properties of SiC reticulated porous ceramics via adjustment of residual stress within the strut. Int J Appl Ceram Technol, 2018, 15: 28–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rannabauer S, Söffker G M, Scheunemann M, et al. Increased mechanical stability and thermal conductivity of alumina reticulated porous ceramics (RPC) by nanoparticle infiltration processing. Adv Eng Mater, 2017, 19: 1700211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Banerjee A, Bala Chandran R, Davidson J H. Experimental investigation of a reticulated porous alumina heat exchanger for high temperature gas heat recovery. Appl Thermal Eng, 2015, 75: 889–895CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wei Q, Yang G, Yoneyama Y, et al. Designing a novel Ni-Al2O3-SiC catalyst with a stereo structure for the combined methane conversion process to effectively produce syngas. Catal Today, 2016, 265: 36–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wei Q, Yang G, Gao X, et al. Ni/Silicalite-1 coating being coated on SiC foam: a tailor-made monolith catalyst for syngas production using a combined methane reforming process. Chem Eng J, 2017, 327: 465–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Chen X, Xia X L, Yan X W, et al. Heat transfer analysis of a volumetric solar receiver with composite porous structure. Energy Convers Manage, 2017, 136: 262–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Du S, Li M J, Ren Q, et al. Pore-scale numerical simulation of fully coupled heat transfer process in porous volumetric solar receiver. Energy, 2017, 140: 1267–1275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Guene Lougou B, Shuai Y, Chaffa G, et al. Analysis of CO2 utilization into synthesis gas based on solar thermochemical CH4-reforming. J Energy Chem, 2018, in pressGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Chen X, Wang F, Han Y, et al. Thermochemical storage analysis of the dry reforming of methane in foam solar reactor. Energy Convers Manage, 2018, 158: 489–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Welte M, Warren K, Scheffe J R, et al. Combined Ceria reduction and methane reforming in a solar-driven particle-transport reactor. Ind Eng Chem Res, 2017, 56: 10300–10308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Furler P, Scheffe J R, Steinfeld A. Syngas production by simultaneous splitting of H2O and CO2 via ceria redox reactions in a high-temperature solar reactor. Energy Environ Sci, 2012, 5: 6098–6103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Chen Z, Jiang Q, Tong J, et al. Enhancement effects of dopants and SiO2 support on mixed metal ferrites based two-step thermochemical water splitting. Sol Energy, 2017, 144: 643–659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Jin F, Chu P K, Tong H, et al. Improvement of surface porosity and properties of alumina films by incorporation of Fe micrograins in micro-arc oxidation. Appl Surf Sci, 2006, 253: 863–868CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Guene Lougou B, Shuai Y, Guohua Z, et al. Analysis of H2 and CO production via solar thermochemical reacting system of NiFe2O4 redox cycles combined with CH4 partial oxidation. Int J Hydrogen Energy, 2018, 43: 5996–6010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Guene Lougou B, Hong J, Shuai Y, et al. Production mechanism analysis of H2 and CO via solar thermochemical cycles based on iron oxide (Fe3O4) at high temperature. Sol Energy, 2017, 148: 117–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Bachirou G L, Shuai Y, Zhang J, et al. Syngas production by simultaneous splitting of H2O and CO2 via iron oxide (Fe3O4) redox reactions under high-pressure. Int J Hydrogen Energy, 2016, 41: 19936–19946CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Block T, Schmücker M. Metal oxides for thermochemical energy storage: A comparison of several metal oxide systems. Sol Energy, 2016, 126: 195–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kuo Y L, Huang W C, Hsu W M, et al. Use of spinel nickel aluminium ferrite as self-supported oxygen carrier for chemical looping hydrogen generation process. Aerosol Air Qual Res, 2015, 15: 2700–2708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Zhao D, Luo F, Zhou W, et al. Microwave absorption properties and complex permittivity of Fe/FeAl2O4 coatings deposited by reactive plasma spraying Al/Fe2O3 powders. Surf Coatings Tech, 2011, 205: 4254–4259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Chen J Y C, Miller J T, Gerken J B, et al. Inverse spinel NiFeAlO4 as a highly active oxygen evolution electrocatalyst: promotion of activity by a redox-inert metal ion. Energy Environ Sci, 2014, 7: 1382–1386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Guene Lougou B, Shuai Y, Xing H, et al. Thermal performance analysis of solar thermochemical reactor for syngas production. Int J Heat Mass Transfer, 2017, 111: 410–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Guene Lougou B, Shuai Y, Chen X, et al. Analysis of radiation heat transfer and temperature distributions of solar thermochemical reactor for syngas production. Front Energy, 2017, 11: 480–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Wu Z, Caliot C, Flamant G, et al. Coupled radiation and flow modeling in ceramic foam volumetric solar air receivers. Sol Energy, 2011, 85: 2374–2385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Tang Q X, Chen G F, Yang Z Q, et al. Numerical investigation on gas flow heat transfer and pressure drop in the shell side of spiral-wound heat exchangers. Sci China Technol Sci, 2018, 61: 506–515CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Science China Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bachirou Guene Lougou
    • 1
  • Yong Shuai
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • RuMing Pan
    • 1
  • Gédéon Chaffa
    • 3
  • Clément Ahouannou
    • 3
  • Hao Zhang
    • 1
  • HePing Tan
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Key Laboratory of Aerospace Thermophysics of Ministry of Industry and Information TechnologyHarbin Institute of TechnologyHarbinChina
  2. 2.School of Energy Science and EngineeringHarbin Institute of TechnologyHarbinChina
  3. 3.Laboratory of Energetics and Applied Mechanics (LEMA), Polytechnic College of Abomey-CalaviAbomey-Calavi UniversityCotonouBenin

Personalised recommendations