# Correlations to Predict Elemental Compositions and Heating Value of Torrefied Biomass

^{1}

^{2}

^{*}

## Abstract

**:**

## 1. Introduction

## 2. Methodology

#### 2.1. Biomass Samples

#### 2.2. Data Analysis

#### 2.3. Error Estimation

^{*}, y and $\overline{\mathrm{y}}$ represent the predicted, measured and average value of the dependent variables, respectively, and n is the number of data points used for the derivation of a particular correlation. The RMSE is considered as the absolute measure of the model’s fit to the data and preferred over the mean absolute error as it places more weight on the larger error terms. On the other hand, the ${\mathrm{R}}^{2}$ value is the relative measure of the model’s fit and represents the explained percentage of variability in the response variable as compared to the mean alone. RMSE is used for measuring the accuracy of the model along with the ${\mathrm{R}}^{2}$ value when the main objective of the model is prediction. Small RMSE values and high ${\mathrm{R}}^{2}$ values (between 0 and 1) imply a good fit for the model. The bias of a model measures the degree of overestimation or underestimation of the prediction as obtained from the model. Positive values of bias error suggest that the predicted values by the model will be greater than the actual values and vice versa [47].

## 3. Results

#### 3.1. Elemental Compositions

#### 3.2. Modeling of C, H and HHV

#### 3.3. Comparison with the Existing Correlations in the Literature and Experimental Data

## 4. Conclusions

## Nomenclature and Subscript

C | Carbon content (%wt.) |

O | Oxygen content (%wt.) |

HHV | Higher heating value (MJ/kg) |

VM | Volatile matter (%) |

${\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}$ | Solid mass yield (%) |

${\mathrm{y}}^{*}$ | Predicted value |

$\overline{\mathrm{y}}$ | Average value |

daf | Dry and ash free |

RMSE | Root mean square error |

H | Hydrogen content (%wt.) |

N | Nitrogen content (%wt.) |

FC | Fixed carbon (%) |

ASH | Ash content (%) |

n | Number of measurements |

y | Measured value |

N | Number of data |

ABE | Average biased error (%) |

_{o} | Raw biomass |

## Author Contributions

## Funding

## Acknowledgments

## Conflicts of Interest

## References

- Chen, W.; Peng, J.; Bi, X. A state-of-the-art review of biomass torrefation, densification and applications. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
**2015**, 44, 847–866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Mohr, S.H.; Wang, J.; Ellem, G.; Ward, J.; Giurco, D. Projection of world fossil fuels by country. Fuel
**2015**, 141, 120–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Shafiee, S.; Topal, E. When will fossil fuel reserves be diminished? Energy Policy
**2009**, 37, 181–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Madanayake, B.N.; Gan, S.; Eastwick, C.; Ng, H.K. Biomass as an energy source in coal co-firing and its feasibility enhancement via pre-treatment techniques. Fuel Process. Technol.
**2017**, 159, 287–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Herbert, G.M.J.; Krishnan, A.U. Quantifying environmental performance of biomass energy. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
**2016**, 592, 92–308. [Google Scholar] - Van der Stelt, M.J.C.; Gerhauser, H.; Kiel, J.H.A.; Ptasinski, K.J. Biomass upgrading by torrefaction for the production of biofuel: A Riview. Biomass Bioenergy
**2011**, 35, 3748–3762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Haseli, Y. Process modeling of a biomass torrefaction plant. Energy Fuels
**2018**, 32, 5611–5622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Repellin, V.; Govin, A.; Rolland, M.; Guyonnet, R. Energy requirement for fine grinding of torrefied wood. Biomass Bioenergy
**2010**, 34, 923–930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Demirbas, A. Calculation of higher heating values of biomass fuel. Fuel
**1997**, 76, 431–434. [Google Scholar] - Parikh, J.; Channiwala, S.A.; Ghosal, G.K. A correlation for calculating elemental composition from proximate analysis of biomass materials. Fuel
**2007**, 86, 1710–1719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Shen, J.; Zhu, S.; Liu, X.; Zhang, H.; Tan, J. The prediction of elemental composition of biomass based on proximate analysis. Energy Convers. Manag.
**2010**, 51, 983–987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Yin, C.Y. Prediction of higher heating values of biomass from proximate. Fuel
**2011**, 90, 1128–1132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Friedl, A.; Padouvas, E.; Rotter, H.; Varmuza, K. Prediction of heating values of biomass fuel from elemental composition. Anal. Chim. Acta
**2005**, 544, 191–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Vargas-Morenoa, J.M.; Callejón-Ferrea, A.J.; Pérez-Alonsoa, J.; Velázquez-Martí, B. A review of the mathematical models for predicting the heating value of biomass materials. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
**2012**, 16, 3065–3083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Bridgeman, T.G.; Jones, J.M.; Shield, I.; Williams, P.T. Torrefaction of reed canary grass, wheat straw and willow to enhance solid fuel qualities and combustion properties. Fuel
**2008**, 87, 844–856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Joshi, Y.; de Vries, H.; Woudstra, T.; de Jong, W. Torrefaction: Unit operation modelling and process simulation. Appl. Therm. Eng.
**2015**, 74, 83–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Nhucchen, D.R. Prediction of carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen compositions of raw and torrefied biomass using proximate analysis. Fuel
**2016**, 180, 348–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Nhuccen, D.R.; Afzal, M.T. HHV Predicting Correlations for Torrefied Biomass Using Proximate and Ultimate Analyses. Bioengineering
**2017**, 4, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - Soponpongpipat, N.; Sittikul, D.; Comsawang, P. Prediction model of higher heating value of torrefied biomass based on the kinetics of biomass decomposition. J. Energy Inst.
**2015**, 89, 425–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Sarvaramini, A.; Assima, G.P.; Larachi, F. Dry torrefaction of biomass-Torrefied products and torrefaction kinetics using the distributed activation energy model. Chem. Eng. J.
**2013**, 229, 498–507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Bach, Q.V.; Tran, K.Q.; Skreiberg, O.; Trinh, T.T. Effects of wet torrefaction on pyrolysis of woody biomass fuels. Energy
**2015**, 88, 443–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Pach, M.; Zanzi, R.; Björnbom, E. Torrefied Biomass a Substitute for Wood and Charcoal. In Proceedings of the 6th Asia-Pacific International Symposium on Combustion and Energy Utilization, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 20–22 May 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Tapasvi, D.; Khalil, R.; Tran, K.Q. Torrefaction of Norwegian Birch and Spruce: An Experimental Study Using Macro-TGA. Energy Fuels
**2012**, 26, 5232–5240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Shoulaifar, T.K.; DeMartini, N. Ash-Forming Matter in Torrefied Birch Wood: Changes in Chemical Association. Energy Fuels
**2013**, 27, 5684–5690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Arteaga-Pérez, L.E.; Segura, C. Torrefaction of Pinus radiata and Eucalyptus globulus: A combined experimental and modeling approach to process synthesis. Energy Sustain. Dev.
**2015**, 29, 13–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Phanphanich, M.; Mani, S. Impact of torrefaction on the grindability and fuel characteristics of forest biomass. Bioresour. Technol.
**2011**, 102, 1246–1253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - Li, M.F.; Chen, L.X. Evaluation of the structure and fuel properties of lignocelluloses through carbon dioxide torrefaction. Energy Convers. Manag.
**2016**, 119, 463–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Carmona, S.R.; Oerez, J.F. Effect of torrefaction temperature on properties of Patula pine. Maderas-Cienc. Tecnol.
**2017**, 19, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [Green Version] - McNamee, P.; Adams, P.W.R.; McManus, M.C. An assessment of the torrefaction of North American pine and life cycle greenhouse gas emissions. Energy Convers. Manag.
**2016**, 113, 17–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Zheng, Y.; Tao, L.; Yang, X. Effect of the torrefaction Temperature on structural properties and pyrolysis behavior of biomass. BioResource
**2017**, 12, 3425–3447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Grigiante, M.; Antolini, D. Mass yield as guide parameter of the torrefaction process. An experimental study of the solid fuel properties referred to two types of biomass. Fuel
**2015**, 153, 499–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Nanou, P.; Carbo, M.C.; Keil, J. Detailed mapping of the mass and energy balance of a continuous biomass torrefaction plant. Biomass Bioenergy
**2016**, 89, 67–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Larsson, S.H.; Rudolfsson, M. Effects of moisture content, torrefaction temperature, and die temperature in pilot scale pelletizing of torrefied Norway spruce. Appl. Energy
**2013**, 102, 827–832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ibrahim, R.H.H.; Dravell, L.I.; Jones, J.M.; Williams, A. Physicochemical characterisation of torrefied biomass. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis
**2013**, 103, 21–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Chen, W.H.; Cheng, W.Y.; Lu, K.M.; Huang, Y.P. An evaluation on improvement of pulverized biomass property for solid fuel through torrefaction. Appl. Energy
**2011**, 88, 3636–3644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Arias, B.; Pevida, C.; Fermoso, J.; Plaza, M.G.; Rubiera, F.; Pis, J.J. Influence of torrefaction on the griandability and reactivity of woody biomass. Fuel Process. Technol.
**2008**, 89, 169–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Na, B.; Ahn, B.J.; Lee, J.W. Changes in chemical and physical properties of yellow poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) during torrefaction. Wood Sci. Technol.
**2015**, 49, 257–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Gucho, E.M.; Shahzad, K.; Bramer, E.A.; Brem, G. Experimental Study on Dry Torrefaction of Beech Wood and Miscanthus. Energies
**2015**, 8, 3903–3923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Wannapeera, J.; Worasuwannarak, N. Examinations of chemical properties and pyrolysis behaviors oftorrefied woody biomass prepared at the same torrefactionmass yields. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis
**2015**, 115, 279–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Huang, Y.F.; Sung, H.T.; Chiueh, P.T.; Lo, S.L. Microwave torrefaction of sewage sludge and leucaena. J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng.
**2017**, 70, 236–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Wilk, M.; Magdziarz, A.; Kalemba, I. Characterisation of renewable fuels’ torrefaction process with different instrumental techniques. Energy
**2015**, 87, 259–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Yoo, H.S.; Choi, H.S. A study on torrefaction characteristics of waste sawdust in an auger type pyrolyzer. J. Mater. Cycles Waste Manag.
**2016**, 18, 460–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Mei, Y.; Liu, R.; Yang, Q.; Yang, H.; Shao, J.; Draper, C.; Zhang, S.; Chen, H. Torrefaction of cedarwood in a pilot scale rotary kiln and the influence of industrial flue gas. Bioresour. Technol.
**2015**, 177, 355–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - Barta-Rajnai, E.; Jakab, E.; Sebestyen, Z.; May, Z.; Barta, Z.; Wang, L.; Skreiberg, O.; Gronil, M.; Bozi, J.; Czegeny, Z. Comprehensive Compositional Study of Torrefied Wood and Herbaceous Materials by Chemical Analysis and Thermoanalytical Methods. Energy Fuels
**2016**, 30, 8019–8030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Montgomery, D.C.; Peck, E.A.; Vining, G.G. Introduction to Linear Regression Analysis, 5th ed.; John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated: New York, NY, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Comrie, A.C. Comparing Neural Networks and Regression Models for Ozone Forecasting. J. Air Waste Manag. Assoc.
**1997**, 47, 653–663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Willmott, C.J. Some Comments on the Evaluation of Model Performance. Am. Metrol. Soc.
**1982**, 63, 1309–1317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Bridgeman, T.G.; Jones, J.M.; Williams, A.; Waldron, D.J. An investigation of the grindability of two torrefied energy crops. Fuel
**2010**, 89, 3911–3918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Brostrom, M.; Nordin, A.; Pommer, L.; Branca, C.; Blasi, C.D. Influence of torrefaction on the devolatilization and oxidation kinetics of wood. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis
**2012**, 96, 100–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

**Figure 1.**Variation of (

**a**) Carbon (% wt.) (

**b**) Hydrogen (% wt.) and (

**c**) Nitrogen (% wt.) with solid yield for different types of torrefied wood.

**Figure 3.**Regression model plot for (

**a**) ${\mathrm{C}}_{r}$ (

**b**) ${\mathrm{H}}_{r}$ and (

**c**)${\mathrm{HHV}}_{\mathrm{r}}$.

**Figure 4.**Comparison of the predicted and measured values of (

**a**) Carbon content, (

**b**) Hydrogen content and (

**c**) HHV.

**Table 1.**Summary of the experimental conditions of torrefaction (categorized by the feedstock type).

Feedstock Type | Temperature (°C) | Residence Time (min) | References | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|

Minimum | Maximum | Minimum | Maximum | ||

Birch | 200 | 280 | 10 | 60 | [20,21,22,23,24] |

Pine | 200 | 300 | 15 | 60 | [22,25,26,27,28,29,30] |

Spruce | 200 | 300 | 5 | 60 | [21,23,31,32,33] |

Willow | 230 | 300 | 30 | 60 | [32,34,35] |

Eucalyptus | 240 | 290 | 15 | 60 | [25,34,36] |

Poplar | 220 | 300 | 20 | 50 | [27,37] |

Beech Wood | 240 | 300 | 15 | 60 | [38] |

Leaucaena | 240 | 300 | 5 | 40 | [39,40] |

Wood Mixture | 230 | 290 | 30 | 60 | [34,41] |

Lauan | 220 | 250 | 30 | 60 | [35] |

Sawdust | 220 | 300 | 10 | 60 | [42] |

Cedarwood | 200 | 290 | 50 | 50 | [43] |

Black Locust | 225 | 250 | 60 | 60 | [44] |

Ash | 250 | 265 | 39 | 43 | [32] |

Aspen | 240 | 280 | 15 | 60 | [20] |

Wood | Parameter | n | Min | Max | Mean | Wood | Parameter | n | Min | Max | Mean |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Birch | ${\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}$(%) | 19 | 58.01 | 97 | 76.33 | Pine | ${\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}$(%) | 24 | 65 | 95 | 80.53 |

C (% wt.) | 19 | 49.61 | 56.92 | 52.65 | C (% wt.) | 24 | 49.47 | 59.03 | 53.74 | ||

N (% wt.) | 19 | 0.06 | 0.15 | 0.12 | N (% wt.) | 24 | 0.06 | 0.55 | 0.17 | ||

H (% wt.) | 19 | 5.51 | 6.18 | 5.88 | H (% wt.) | 24 | 4.78 | 6.74 | 5.8 | ||

HHV (MJ/kg) | 19 | 18.83 | 22.93 | 20.97 | HHV (MJ/kg) | 24 | 18.07 | 25.38 | 20.96 | ||

Spruce | ${\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}$(%) | 26 | 68.40 | 97 | 81.3 | Eucalyptus | ${\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}$(%) | 13 | 58 | 86.0 | 71.64 |

C (% wt.) | 26 | 50.6 | 57.49 | 53.89 | C (% wt.) | 13 | 50.92 | 63.5 | 55.37 | ||

N (% wt.) | 26 | 0.06 | 0.21 | 0.1 | N (% wt.) | 13 | 0.00 | 0.2 | 0.1 | ||

H (% wt.) | 26 | 5.60 | 6.39 | 5.9 | H (% wt.) | 13 | 5.3 | 6.31 | 5.85 | ||

HHV (MJ/kg) | 26 | 20.46 | 22.97 | 21.6 | HHV (MJ/kg) | 13 | 19.45 | 25 | 21.9 | ||

Willow | ${\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}$(%) | 4 | 63 | 68.76 | 66.09 | Poplar | ${\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}$(%) | 7 | 73 | 95.0 | 82.14 |

C (% wt.) | 4 | 54.0 | 56.9 | 55.65 | C (% wt.) | 7 | 47.12 | 55.1 | 50.69 | ||

N (% wt.) | 4 | 0.00 | 0.42 | 0.16 | N (% wt.) | 7 | 0.2 | 0.31 | 0.24 | ||

H (% wt.) | 4 | 5.7 | 6.41 | 6.02 | H (% wt.) | 7 | 5.3 | 5.98 | 5.78 | ||

HHV (MJ/kg) | 4 | 21.3 | 23.71 | 22.5 | HHV (MJ/kg) | 7 | 18.5 | 20.8 | 19.6 | ||

Beech Wood | ${\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}$(%) | 10 | 60 | 91 | 76.35 | Leaucaena | ${\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}$(%) | 5 | 60.0 | 79.8 | 67.92 |

C (% wt.) | 10 | 48.22 | 55.86 | 50.6 | C (% wt.) | 5 | 53.2 | 60.2 | 56.59 | ||

N (% wt.) | 10 | 0.13 | 0.23 | 0.16 | N (% wt.) | 5 | 0.7 | 0.9 | 0.81 | ||

H (% wt.) | 10 | 4.9 | 5.88 | 5.46 | H (% wt.) | 5 | 5.06 | 5.9 | 5.61 | ||

HHV (MJ/kg) | 10 | 19.01 | 22.00 | 19.93 | HHV (MJ/kg) | 5 | 21.3 | 24.7 | 22.84 | ||

Lauan | ${\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}$(%) | 3 | 59.8 | 82.3 | 74.73 | Sawdust | ${\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}$(%) | 16 | 58.0 | 97 | 86.85 |

C (% wt.) | 3 | 54.33 | 64.4 | 57.88 | C (% wt.) | 16 | 46.9 | 61.0 | 51.16 | ||

N (% wt.) | 3 | 0.12 | 0.17 | 0.15 | N (% wt.) | 16 | 0.02 | 0.1 | .06 | ||

H (% wt.) | 3 | 6.37 | 6.99 | 6.73 | H (% wt.) | 16 | 5.1 | 6.0 | 5.61 | ||

HHV (MJ/kg) | 3 | 23.2 | 26.92 | 24.45 | HHV (MJ/kg) | 16 | 16.6 | 26.0 | 18.61 | ||

Wood Mixture | ${\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}$(%) | 14 | 58.8 | 90.5 | 73.07 | Cedar Wood | ${\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}$(%) | 5 | 69 | 85 | 77.9 |

C (% wt.) | 14 | 45.1 | 61.4 | 53.82 | C (% wt.) | 5 | 48.82 | 56.13 | 53.34 | ||

N (% wt.) | 14 | 0.0 | 0.21 | 0.83 | N (% wt.) | 5 | 0.48 | 0.83 | 0.61 | ||

H (% wt.) | 14 | 4.75 | 6.3 | 5.64 | H (% wt.) | 5 | 4.01 | 5.49 | 4.76 | ||

HHV (MJ/kg) | 14 | 17.8 | 24.3 | 21.34 | HHV (MJ/kg) | 5 | 19.35 | 21.25 | 20.62 | ||

Black Locust | ${\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}$(%) | 2 | 79 | 87.0 | 83 | Ash & Aspen | ${\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}$(%) | 4 | 64.5 | 86.4 | 74.23 |

C (% wt.) | 2 | 50.59 | 52.77 | 51.68 | C (% wt.) | 4 | 50.0 | 53.0 | 51.65 | ||

N (% wt.) | 2 | 0.21 | 0.23 | 0.22 | N (% wt.) | 4 | 0.02 | 0.16 | 0.08 | ||

H (% wt.) | 2 | 3.45 | 4.39 | 3.92 | H (% wt.) | 4 | 5.9 | 6.1 | 6.0 | ||

HHV (MJ/kg) | 2 | 19.35 | 20.38 | 19.86 | HHV (MJ/kg) | 4 | 20.0 | 21.1 | 20.55 |

Dependent Variable | Independent Variable(s) | RMSE | Bias | ${\mathbf{R}}^{2}(\%)$ | Eq. No. |
---|---|---|---|---|---|

${\mathrm{C}}_{\mathrm{r}}$ | ${\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}$ | 0.037 | $1.4\times {10}^{-19}$ | 81.52 | 13 |

${\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}$, C | 0.028 | $1.5\times {10}^{-19}$ | 89.86 | 14 | |

${\mathrm{H}}_{\mathrm{r}}$ | ${\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}$ | 0.059 | $3.2\times {10}^{-21}$ | 79.01 | 15 |

${\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}$, H | 0.043 | $8.4\times {10}^{-20}$ | 88.45 | 16 | |

${\mathrm{HHV}}_{\mathrm{r}}$ | ${\mathrm{C}}_{\mathrm{r}}$ | 0.023 | $-4.7\times {10}^{-19}$ | 92.80 | 17 |

Eq. No | Eq. No | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

13 | ${\mathrm{a}}_{1}$ | ${\mathrm{b}}_{1}$ | 14 | ${\mathrm{a}}_{2}$ | ${\mathrm{b}}_{2}$ | ${\mathrm{c}}_{2}$ |

0.2847 | $7.405\times {10}^{-3}$ | −0.47289 | $9.8562\times {10}^{-3}$ | $1.0633\times {10}^{-2}$ | ||

15 | ${\mathrm{a}}_{3}$ | ${\mathrm{b}}_{3}$ | 16 | ${\mathrm{a}}_{4}$ | ${\mathrm{b}}_{4}$ | ${\mathrm{c}}_{4}$ |

−0.1145 | $1.067\times {10}^{-2}$ | −0.55735 | $9.9884\times {10}^{-3}$ | $8.6329\times {10}^{-2}$ | ||

17 | ${\mathrm{a}}_{5}$ | ${\mathrm{b}}_{5}$ | ||||

$4.6508\times {10}^{-2}$ | 0.94497 |

Correlation | Reference | ABE ^{a} (%) | RMSE |
---|---|---|---|

$\frac{\mathrm{C}}{{\mathrm{C}}_{\mathrm{o}}}=0.7405+\frac{28.47}{{\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}}$ $\frac{\mathrm{C}}{{\mathrm{C}}_{\mathrm{o}}}=\frac{-0.47289+9.8562\times {10}^{-3}{\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}}{0.01{\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}-0.010633{\mathrm{C}}_{\mathrm{o}}}$ | Current Study | −2.4 4.0 | 2.12 3.30 |

$\mathrm{C}=0.637\mathrm{FC}+0.455\mathrm{VM}$ | [10] | −12.1 | 7.39 |

$\mathrm{C}=0.635\mathrm{FC}+0.460\mathrm{VM}-0.095\mathrm{ASH}$ | [11] | −11.7 | 7.23 |

$\mathrm{C}=-35.9972+0.7698\mathrm{VM}+1.3269\mathrm{FC}+0.3250\mathrm{ASH}$ | [17] | −6.1 | 3.86 |

$\frac{\mathrm{H}}{{\mathrm{H}}_{\mathrm{o}}}=1.067-\frac{11.45}{{\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}}$ $\frac{\mathrm{H}}{{\mathrm{H}}_{\mathrm{o}}}=\frac{-0.55735+9.9884\times {10}^{-3}{\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}}{0.01{\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}-0.086329{\mathrm{H}}_{\mathrm{o}}}$ | Current Study | −2.4 −4.8 | 0.24 0.88 |

$\mathrm{H}=0.052\mathrm{FC}+0.062\mathrm{VM}$ | [10] | −1.8 | 0.26 |

$\mathrm{H}=0.059\mathrm{FC}+0.060\mathrm{VM}+0.010\mathrm{ASH}$ | [11] | −1.4 | 0.26 |

$\mathrm{H}=55.3678-0.4830\mathrm{VM}-0.5319\mathrm{FC}-0.5600\mathrm{ASH}$ | [17] | 11.9 | 0.82 |

$\frac{\mathrm{HHV}}{{\mathrm{HHV}}_{\mathrm{o}}}=\frac{4.6508}{{\mathrm{Y}}_{\mathrm{s}}}+0.94497\frac{\mathrm{C}}{{\mathrm{C}}_{\mathrm{o}}}$ | Current Study | −3.1 ^{b} | 1.02 |

2.93 ^{c} | 1.24 | ||

$\mathrm{HHV}=0.1905\mathrm{VM}+0.2521\mathrm{FC}$ | [12] [12] | −8.7 | 2.32 |

$\mathrm{HHV}=0.2949\mathrm{C}+0.8250\mathrm{H}$ | −3.2 | 0.92 | |

$\mathrm{HHV}=3.55{\mathrm{C}}^{2}-232\mathrm{C}-2230\mathrm{H}+51.2\mathrm{CH}+131\mathrm{N}+20600$ | [13] | 1.3 | 0.44 |

$\mathrm{HHV}=0.1846\mathrm{VM}+0.3525\mathrm{FC}$ | [18] [18] | −0.6 | 0.78 |

$\mathrm{HHV}=32.7934+0.0053{\mathrm{C}}^{2}-0.5321\mathrm{C}-2.8769\mathrm{H}+0.0608\mathrm{CH}-0.2401\mathrm{N}$ | 2.2 | 0.55 |

^{a}$ABE=\frac{1}{n}\sum _{\mathrm{i}=1}^{\mathrm{n}}\left({\mathrm{y}}_{\mathrm{i}}^{*}-{\mathrm{y}}_{\mathrm{i}}\right)/{\mathrm{y}}_{\mathrm{i}}$,

^{b}carbon content calculated using Equation (18),

^{c}carbon content calculated using Equation (19).

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

## Share and Cite

**MDPI and ACS Style**

Hasan, M.; Haseli, Y.; Karadogan, E.
Correlations to Predict Elemental Compositions and Heating Value of Torrefied Biomass. *Energies* **2018**, *11*, 2443.
https://doi.org/10.3390/en11092443

**AMA Style**

Hasan M, Haseli Y, Karadogan E.
Correlations to Predict Elemental Compositions and Heating Value of Torrefied Biomass. *Energies*. 2018; 11(9):2443.
https://doi.org/10.3390/en11092443

**Chicago/Turabian Style**

Hasan, Mahmudul, Yousef Haseli, and Ernur Karadogan.
2018. "Correlations to Predict Elemental Compositions and Heating Value of Torrefied Biomass" *Energies* 11, no. 9: 2443.
https://doi.org/10.3390/en11092443