Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Gasification”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1980

Coal gasification systems engineering and analysis. Appendix A: Coal gasification catalog

The scope of work in preparing the Coal Gasification Data Catalog included the following subtasks: (1) candidate system subsystem definition, (2) raw materials analysis, (3) market analysis for by-products, (4) alternate products analysis, (5) preliminary integrated facility requirements. Definition of candidate systems/subsystems includes the identity of and alternates for each process unit, raw material requirements, and the cost and design drivers for each process design.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1981

Assessment of Advanced Coal Gasification Processes

This report represents a technical assessment of the following advanced coal gasification processes: AVCO High Throughput Gasification (HTG) Process; Bell Single-Stage High Mass Flux (HMF) Process; Cities Service/Rockwell (CS/R) Hydrogasification Process; Exxon Catalytic Coal Gasification (CCG) Process. Each process is evaluated for its potential to produce SNG from a bituminous coal. In addition to identifying the new technology these processes represent, key similarities/differences, strengths/weaknesses, and potential improvements to each process are identified. The AVCO HTG and the Bell HMF gasifiers share similarities with respect to: short residence time (SRT), high throughput rate, slagging and syngas as the initial raw product gas. The CS/R Hydrogasifier is also SRT but is non-slagging and produces a raw gas high in methane content. The Exxon CCG gasifier is a long residence time, catalytic, fluidbed reactor producing all of the raw product methane in the gasifier. The report makes the following assessments: 1) while each process has significant potential as coal gasifiers, the CS/R and Exxon processes are better suited for SNG production; 2) the Exxon process is the closest to a commercial level for near-term SNG production; and 3) the SRT processes require significant development including scale-up and turndown demonstration, char processing and/or utilization demonstration, and reactor control and safety features development.

coal gasification↗
NASA NTRS1978

Considerations on coal gasification

Commercial processes for the gasification of coal with oxygen are discussed. The Koppers-Totzek process for the gasification of coal dust entrained in a stream of gasifying agents is described in particular detail. The outlook for future applications of coal gasification is presented.

Franzen, J. E.↗
NASA NTRS1978

The Texaco coal gasification process for manufacture of medium BTU gas

The development of the Texaco coal gasification process is discussed with particular emphasis on its close relationship to the fully commercialized Texaco synthesis gas generation process for residual oil gasification. The end uses of the product gas are covered, with special attention to electric power generation via combined cycle technology. Control of SO2, NOx, and particulate emissions in the power generating mode is also covered. The application of this technology in a proposed Texaco-Southern California Edison demonstration project is mentioned. Investment information released for a 1000-megawatt advanced combined cycle gasification facility, is also reviewed.

Schlinger, W. G.↗
NASA NTRS1980

Coal gasification systems engineering and analysis. Volume 1: Executive summary

Feasibility analyses and systems engineering studies for a 20,000 tons per day medium Btu (MBG) coal gasification plant to be built by TVA in Northern Alabama were conducted. Major objectives were as follows: (1) provide design and cost data to support the selection of a gasifier technology and other major plant design parameters, (2) provide design and cost data to support alternate product evaluation, (3) prepare a technology development plan to address areas of high technical risk, and (4) develop schedules, PERT charts, and a work breakdown structure to aid in preliminary project planning. Volume one contains a summary of gasification system characterizations. Five gasification technologies were selected for evaluation: Koppers-Totzek, Texaco, Lurgi Dry Ash, Slagging Lurgi, and Babcock and Wilcox. A summary of the trade studies and cost sensitivity analysis is included.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1981

Conceptual design study of a coal gasification combined-cycle powerplant for industrial cogeneration

A conceptual design study was conducted to assess technical feasibility, environmental characteristics, and economics of coal gasification. The feasibility of a coal gasification combined cycle cogeneration powerplant was examined in response to energy needs and to national policy aimed at decreasing dependence on oil and natural gas. The powerplant provides the steam heating and baseload electrical requirements while serving as a prototype for industrial cogeneration and a modular building block for utility applications. The following topics are discussed: (1) screening of candidate gasification, sulfur removal and power conversion components; (2) definition of a reference system; (3) quantification of plant emissions and waste streams; (4) estimates of capital and operating costs; and (5) a procurement and construction schedule. It is concluded that the proposed powerplant is technically feasible and environmentally superior.

Bloomfield, H. S.↗
NASA NTRS1981

Assessment of advanced coal gasification processes

A technical assessment of the following advanced coal gasification processes is presented: high throughput gasification (HTG) process; single stage high mass flux (HMF) processes; (CS/R) hydrogasification process; and the catalytic coal gasification (CCG) process. Each process is evaluated for its potential to produce synthetic natural gas from a bituminous coal. Key similarities, differences, strengths, weaknesses, and potential improvements to each process are identified. The HTG and the HMF gasifiers share similarities with respect to: short residence time (SRT), high throughput rate, slagging, and syngas as the initial raw product gas. The CS/R hydrogasifier is also SRT, but is nonslagging and produces a raw gas high in methane content. The CCG gasifier is a long residence time, catalytic, fluidbed reactor producing all of the raw product methane in the gasifier.

Mccarthy, J.↗
NASA NTRS1995

Hydrodynamic Stability of Multicomponent Droplet Gasification in Reduced Gravity

This investigation addresses the problem of hydrodynamic stability of a two-component droplet undergoing spherically-symmetrical gasification. The droplet components are assumed to have characteristic liquid species diffusion times that are large relative to characteristic droplet surface regression times. The problem is formulated as a linear stability analysis, with a goal of predicting when spherically-symmetric droplet gasification can be expected to be hydrodynamically unstable from surface-tension gradients acting along the surface of a droplet which result from perturbations. It is found that for the conditions assumed in this paper (quasisteady gas phase, no initial droplet temperature gradients, diffusion-dominated gasification), surface tension gradients do not play a role in the stability characteristics. In addition, all perturbations are predicted to decay such that droplets were hydrodynamically stable. Conditions are identified, however, that deserve more analysis as they may lead to hydrodynamic instabilities driven by capillary effects.

Aharon, I.↗
NASA NTRS1976

Energy Conversion Alternatives Study (ECAS), General Electric Phase 1. Volume 3: Energy conversion subsystems and components. Part 3: Gasification, process fuels, and balance of plant

Results are presented of an investigation of gasification and clean fuels from coal. Factors discussed include: coal and coal transportation costs; clean liquid and gas fuel process efficiencies and costs; and cost, performance, and environmental intrusion elements of the integrated low-Btu coal gasification system. Cost estimates for the balance-of-plant requirements associated with advanced energy conversion systems utilizing coal or coal-derived fuels are included.

Boothe, W. A.↗
NASA NTRS1981

Solar heated fluidized bed gasification system

A solar-powered fluidized bed gasification system for gasifying carbonaceous material is presented. The system includes a solar gasifier which is heated by fluidizing gas and steam. Energy to heat the gas and steam is supplied by a high heat capacity refractory honeycomb which surrounds the fluid bed reactor zone. The high heat capacity refractory honeycomb is heated by solar energy focused on the honeycomb by solar concentrator through solar window. The fluid bed reaction zone is also heated directly and uniformly by thermal contact of the high heat capacity ceramic honeycomb with the walls of the fluidized bed reactor. Provisions are also made for recovering and recycling catalysts used in the gasification process. Back-up furnace is provided for start-up procedures and for supplying heat to the fluid bed reaction zone when adequate supplies of solar energy are not available.

Qader, S. A.↗
NASA NTRS1986

Continuous Removal of Coal-Gasification Residue

Continuous-flow hopper processes solid residue from coal gasification, converting it from ashes, cinders, and clinkers to particles size of sand granules. Unit does not require repeated depressurization of lockhopper to admit and release materials. Therefore consumes less energy. Because unit has no airlock valves opened and closed repeatedly on hot, abrasive particles, subjected to lesser wear. Coal-gasification residue flows slowly through pressure-letdown device. Material enters and leaves continuously. Cleanout door on each pressure-letdown chamber allows access for maintenance and emergencies.

Collins, Earl R., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Supercritical droplet gasification experiments with forced convection

Preliminary results of a comprehensive experimental program are presented which offer the first direct observations of suspended n-heptane droplet gasifications in pure nitrogen with forced convection without the interference to optical probing associated with a flame. Measurements show attainment of a wet-bulb temperature until reduced pressures exceed about 1.0 under supercritical gas temperatures. Thereafter, temperature measurements indicate fully transient heat-up through the critical temperature. The surface is found to regress in a continuous manner with the measured temperature approaching the critical value at the end of the droplet lifetime under supercritical conditions with very mild level of convection. At increased level of convection for the same ambient conditions, similar sized droplets will undergo significant deformation during the gasification process until partially convected away as a dense vapor cloud as the critical temperature is approached.

Litchford, Ron↗
NASA NTRS1975

Hydrogen manufacture by Lurgi gasification of Oklahoma coal

Advantages and disadvantages of using the Lurgi gasification process to produce hydrogen from Oklahoma coal are listed. Special attention was given to the production of heat for the process; heat is generated by burning part of pretreated coal in the steam generator. Overall performance of the Lurgi process is summarized in tabular form.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1977

Some studies on a solid state sulfur probe for coal gasification systems

Measurements on the solid electrolyte cell (Ar + H(2) + H(2)S/CaS + CaF(2) + (Pt)//CaF(2)//(Pt) + CaF(2) + CaS/H(2) + H(2)+Ar) show that the emf of the cell is directly related to the difference in sulfur potentials established at the Ar + H(2) + H(2)S/electrode interfaces. The electrodes convert the sulfur potential gradient across the calcium fluoride electrolyte into an equivalent fluorine potential gradient. Response time of the probe varies from approximately 9 hr at 990 K to 2.5 hr at 1225 K. The conversion of calcium sulfide and/or calcium fluoride into calcium oxide is not a problem anticipated in commercial coal gasification systems. Suggestions are presented for improving the cell for such commercial applications.

Jacob, K. T.↗
NASA NTRS1977

Lock hopper values for coal gasification plant service

Although the operating principle of the lock hopper system is extremely simple, valve applications involving this service for coal gasification plants are likewise extremely difficult. The difficulties center on the requirement of handling highly erosive pulverized coal or char (either in dry or slurry form) combined with the requirement of providing tight sealing against high-pressure (possibly very hot) gas. Operating pressures and temperatures in these applications typically range up to 1600 psi (110bar) and 600F (316C), with certain process requirements going even higher. In addition, and of primary concern, is the need for reliable operation over long service periods with the provision for practical and economical maintenance. Currently available data indicate the requirement for something in the order of 20,000 to 30,000 open-close cycles per year and a desire to operate at least that long without valve failure.

Schoeneweis, E. F.↗
NASA NTRS1978

Some studies on a solid-state sulfur probe for coal gasification systems

As a part of a program for the development of a sulfur probe for monitoring the sulfur potential in coal gasification reactors, an investigation was conducted regarding the efficiency of the solid electrolyte cell Ar+H2+H2S/CaS+CaF2+(Pt)//CaF2//Pt)+CaF2+CaS/H2S+H2+Ar. A demonstration is provided of the theory, design, and operation of a solid-state sulfur probe based on CaF2 electrolyte. It was found that the cell responds to changes in sulfur potential in a manner predicted by the Nernst equation. The response time of the cell at 1225 K, after a small change in temperature or gas composition, was 2.5 Hr, while at a lower temperature of 990 K the response time was approximately 9 hr. The cell emf was insensitive to a moderate increase in the flow rate of the test gas and/or the reference gas. The exact factors affecting the slow response time of galvanic cells based on a CaF2 electrolyte have not yet been determined. The rate-limiting steps may be either the kinetics of electrode reactions or the rate of transport through the electrolyte.

Jacob, K. T.↗