APTD0980 Evaluation of a Low NOx Burner: Final Report for the Period of July 29, 1970 thru July 28, 1971 320 1971 NEPIS online hardcopy LM 20091231 single page tiff FINAL REPORT EVALUATION OF A LOW NOX BURNER ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY image: ------- J!.1 ~ /NG. :. 840 PRODUCTION PLACE' NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660 I J EVALUATION OF A LOW NOx BURNBR FINAL REPORT For the period of June 29, 1970 thru July 28, 1971 By E.' B. Zwick T.,1<. Mills R. FioRito PAXVE REPORT USG-l The work upon which this publication is based was performed pursuant to Contract No. EHS 70-125 witl1 the Division of Advanced Automotive Power Systems Development, Office of Air Programs, Environmental Protection Agency. image: ------- SECTION I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII . APPENDICES I . I I I TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OBJECTIVES OF THE PROGRAM CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS EXPERIMENTAL METHODS A. B. C. D. Experimental Installations Instrumentation . Test Procedures and Techniques Emission Data Collection & Data Reduction EMISSIONS MEASURING TECHNIQUES A. Description & Operation of Instruments Used Instrument Calibration Emission Measuring Problems B. C. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS A. B. Experimental Data Listings 'Fuel/Air Ratio Analysis and Correlation Experimental Emissions Data Experimental Stability Data Detailed Emissions Investigation C. D. E. ANALYTICAL INVESTIGATION A. B. C. Literature Survey Burner Analysis Computer Analysis CORRELATION OF DATA WITH THEORY A. Correlation of the Experimental . Stability Data Correlation of the Oxides of Nitrogen Data Correlation of the CO Emissions Data B. C. image: ------- SECTION I Fig. 1 II 2 II 3 II 4 SECTION IV Fig. 1 II 2 II 3 " 4 II 5 II 6 " 7 " 8 II 9 " 10 " 11 " 12 " 13 " 14 v.BLJ:: S 1 2 SECTION V Fig. 1 " 2 " 3 " 4 II 5 ILLUSTRATIONS PAXVE BURNER STABILITY DATA - PROP~~E - AMBIENT PAXVE BURNER OXIDES OF NITROGEN DATA PAXV~ BURNER CARBON MONOXIDE DATA PAXVE BURNER HYDROCARBON EMISSION DATA BURNER EVALUATION .FACILITIES TEST FACILITIES BURNER TEST FACILITIES TEST FACILITY FOR GAS EMISSIONS ANALYSIS TEST STAND 1 BURNER SCHEMATIC BURNER TEST STAND 2, SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM OF FUEL &~D AIR SYSTEMS FUEL HEATER - VAPORIZER - BURNER FUEL SYSTEM ELECTRICAL FUEL VAPORIZER HURNER TEST STAND 2, SCH~~TIC DIAGRAM OF VAPOR GENERATOR. SYST~1 . BURNER VAPOR GENERATOR ASSEMBLY FUEL-AIR COMBUSTION DATA OXYGEN SYNERGISM EFFECT ON THE F~'~ IONIZA~ION DETECTOR EMisSIONS NORMALIZING FACTORS FOR PROPANE-AIR EMISSIONS NORMALIZING FACTORS FOR OCTANE-AIR BURNER STAND No.1 - TABULATION OF SUBSYSTEMS & CONTROLS BURNER STAND No.2 - TABULATION OF SUBSYSTEMS & CONTROLS BAILEY HEAT PROVER WITH OPERATING SCH~~TIC VOLUMETRIC GAS ANALYSIS APPARATUS CALIBRATION CURVE FOR DETERMINING OXIDES OF NITROGEN CONCENTRATION BY GRIESS SALTZMAN METHOD, LOW RANGE CALIBRATION CURVE FOR DETERMINING OXIDES OF NITROGEN CONCENTRATION BY GRIESS SALTZMAN ~~THOD, HIGH RANGE MODEL 8004 GAS CHROMATOGRAPH USING THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY DETECTOR DETECTING CARBON DIOXIDE & CARBON MONOXIDE image: ------- Fig. SECTION V I, . 6 7 " 8 " 9 . 10 . 11 . 12 13 . " 14 . 15 16 . " 17 . 18 19 . . 20 21 . n 22 " 23 n 24 . 25 ILLUSTRATIONS (Cont.) INTERNAL CONFIGURATIONS OF GAS CHROMATOGRAPH DETECTORS PEAK HEIGHT OPTIMIZATION FOR CO ELUTION FROM GAS CHROMATOGRAPH CALIBRATION CURVES FOR GASES USED WITH THE FLAME IONIZATION DETECTOR CARBON MONOXIDE CALIBRATION ON THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY DETECTOR GAS CHROMATOGRAPH CARBON DIOXIDE CALIBRATION ON THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY DETECTOR GAS CHROMATOGRAPH OXYGEN CALIBRATION ON THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY DETECTOR GAS CHROMATOGRAPH CALIBRATION OF SEPARATION SIDE OF FID GAS CHROMATOGRAPH SCHEI1ATIC DIAGRAM OF EXPONENTIAL DILUTION APPARATUS PEAK HEIGHT FROM CHROMATOGRAM, SCALE DIVISIONS - L-9000 SENSITIVITY TEST 3 ABOVE - T1::ST 2 CALIDRATIONOF FLAME IONIZATION DETECTOR SPAN GAS DILUTED I'lITH NITROGEN CALIBRATION OF FLAME IONIZATION DETECTOR SHOWING OXYGEN SYNE:KGISl-1 EFFECT SPAN GAS DILUTED WITII ZERO AIR COMPARISON OF INITIAL' F1NAL DATA NOx SAMPLING POSITIONS CALIBRATION OF GRIESS-SALTZMAN ABSORBING REAGENT KEROSENE DEW POINT DATA DIAPHRAGM PUMP USED TO OBTAIN HYDROCARBON DATA - BURNER EXHAUST SAMPLING SYSTEM OXYGEN SYNERGISM EFFECT ON VARIOUS HYDROCARBONS USING PURE HYDROGEN' AIR OXYGEN SYNERGISM EFFECT ON VARIOUS HYDROCARBONS USING A NITROGEN-HYDROGEN BLEND AND AIR OXYGEN SYNERGISM EFFECT ON VARIOUS HYDROCARBONS USING A HELIUM-HYDROGEN BLEND AND AIR 'I / image: ------- SECTION V TABLES 1 ~ 3 4 SECTION VI TABLES 1 - 13 14 15 16 - 23 24 25 - 32 Fig. 1 " 2 " 3 " 4 " 5 " 6 " 7 8 9 " 10-18 " 19 " 20-26 " 27-37 " 38-48 " 49-55 A 56-64 " 65-82 ILLUSTRATIONS (Cont.) CONPARISON OF NOX SAMPLING POSITIONS TE~WERATURE & AGING EFFECTS ON GRIESS-sALTZ~1 ABSORBING AGENT EFFECT OF EVACUATING PROCEDURE ON SAMPLING RESULTS FUEL SPECIFICATION - KEROSENE EXPERIMENTAL DATA FROM THE PAXVE BURNER NOMENCLATURE FOR EXPERIMENTAL DATA TABLES SIGNIFICANT TEST PROGRAM MILESTONES COMPARISON OF FUEL AIR RATIO VALUES FUEL AIR RATIO CORRECTION FACTORS FOR FLOWMETER DATA THEORETICAL FL&~ TEMPEPATURES FUEL-AIR COMBUSTION DATA VOLUMETRIC OXYGEN DATA COMPARISON OF VOLUMETRIC FUEL/AIR RATIO VALUES CARBON DIOXIDE VALUES VERSUS NOMINAL FUEL/AIR RATIO VOLUMETRIC OXYGEN DATA VERSUS NOMINAL FUEL/AIR RATIO CARBON DIOXIDE VALUES VERSUS CORRECTED FUEL/AIR RATIO CARDON DIOXIDE VALUES VERSUS FLOW METER FUEL/AIR RATIO CARBON DIOXIDE DATA FROM THE GAS CHROMATOGRAPH COMPARISON OF CARBON DIOXIDE CHROMATOGRAPH & VOLUMETRIC DATA PAXVE BURNER EMISSIONS CORRELATIONS OF OXIDES OF NITROGEN DATA PAXVE STABILITY DATA CO EMISSIONS DATA FROM THE PAXVE BURNER COG EMISSIONS DATA FROM THE PAXVE BURNER HC EMISSIONS DATA FROM THE PAXVE BURNER HCG EMISSIONS DATA FROM THE PAXVE BURNER NOX EMISSIONS DATA FROM THE PAXVE BURNER image: ------- SECTION VII Fig. 1 II 2 II 3 n 4 .. 5 II 6 II 7 .. 8 II 9 II 10 II 11 II 12 .. 13. II 14-19 .. 20 II 21 TABLES I 1-13 I I ! I SECTION VIII Fig. 1-2 II 3 n 4 II 5 II 6 II 7 ILLUSTRATIONS (Cont.) SEMENOV'S THERMAL IGNITION THEORY SI~WLIFIED COMBUSTION MODEL VULIS' COMBUSTION THEORY EFFECT OF INLET TEMPERATURE ON CRITICAL PHENmmNON EFFECT OF FLOW RATE ON CRITICAL PHENOI-1ENON COl-IBUSTION SYSTEM ~lITHOUT CRITICAL (IGNITION & l::XTIUCTION) PIIENm1ENON F~.1E STABILITY CURVE, GUTTER BURNER .. II CAN BURNEH II CAN BURNER & GUTTER BURNER CONCEPTS RECIRCULATION MODEL BURNER ANALYSIS TECHNOLOGY STABLE OPERATING HEAT BALANCE INCIPIENT BLOWOUT HEAT BALANCE THEORETICAL BURNER ANALYSIS BURNER STABILITY LIMIT ANALYSIS COMBUSTION INTENSITY PARAMETER, LOG PLOT THEORETICAL BURNER ANALYSIS BURNER STABILITY CORRELATION CORRELATION OF OXIDES OF NITROGEN DATA WITH RECIPROCAL co~mUSTION TEMPERATURE CORRELATION OF OXIDES OF NITROGEN DATA - KEROSENE - HOT - BURNER DATA CORRELATION OF BURNER OXIDES OF NITROGEN DATA COG EMISSIONS DATA FROM THE PAXVE BURNER PAXVE BURNER CARBON MONOXIDE. DATA image: ------- SECTION VIII TABLES 1 2 3-18 19-31 ILLUSTRATIONS (Cont.) PROGRAM PREDICT PROGRAM LIMIT COMPARISON OF PREDICTED & EXPERlt1ENTAL BURNER STABILITY DATA COMPARISON OF PREDICTED BURNER INEFFICIENCY' EXPERIMENTAL DATA image: ------- I 1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY A. Introduction During the past twelve months, Paxve, Inc. of Newport Beach, has been engaged in an experimental and analytical investigation of the Paxve burne~, a low emission combustion system. The Paxve Burner is a proprietary device developed by Paxve in conjunction with work on an automotive Rankine cycle engine. The burner in its present form consists of a structure embodying certain fuel injection and combustion concepts, together with a set of operating conditions which allow, low emission operation. Preliminary emission surveys conducted by Paxve during the summer and fall of 1969, showed the unusually low emission characteristics of the Paxve Burner, particularly with reference to oxides of nitrogen. Correlations of the NOx data at that time showed that the NOx emission levels could be correlated with the' operating temperature of the burner. Those preliminary results also suggested that the low NOx was a benefit derived from the wide stability limits of the burner. On June 29, 1970, Paxve entered into a contract with the Division of Advanced Automotive Power Systems Development, Office of Air Programs, Environmental Protection Agency. The purpose of that contract was to investigate the emission and stability character- istics of the paxve burner. Experimental work on the program was completed early in May, 1971. That experimental work together with analytical investigations of the burner and correlation of the experirnent~l data form the subject of this final report. ' B. Summary The ,results of the experimental and analytical invest- igation conducted herein may be summarized as follows: 1. Program Measurement of emissions from the Paxve burner including oxides of nitrogen, -carbon monoxide and unburned hydro- carbons were made as a function of burner operating conditions. Variables investigated during the program included burner air flaw rate, fuel/air ratio, air and fuel inlet temperature, and burner volume. Stability characteristics of the burner were investigated using both propane and vaporized kerosene as fuel. Emission charac- teristics of the burner were determined for both of- these fuels over a range of mixture ratios ranging from lean blowout to rich blowout. (Rich operation at high flow rates was limited by the fuel handling capability of the facility.) Emission measurements were made directly from the burner exhaust. Additional measurements were also made downstream of a vapor generator operating in conjunction with the burner. The vapor generation loop was one in which an organic working fluid was circulated through a helical coil over which the burner exhaust passed. An approximation of the influence of vapor image: ------- generator quenching on burner emissions was thus determined. " A theoretical analysis was conducted of burner operation which provided predictions of burner stabili tylimi ts and the" efficiency of the burner operation under stable operating conditions. That analysis was used as an aid in correlating the experimental data. 2. Burner Stability Stability of the burner was found to be closely within the limits predicted by the theoretical analysis. Figure 1 shows a typical set of burner stability data with the corresponding theoretical lean blowout limit. The influence of air flow rate, air temperature, and burner volume showed good agreement with the theoretical blowout limits predicted by the theory for lean operation. Some rich blowout data was obtained, the theoretical analysis did not treat this case and therefore, no comparsion with theory here is possible. " The theoretical "analysis predicted somewhat wider blowout limits at very low flow rates than were experimentally observed. This has been attributed to the failure of the theory to account" for heat loss from the burner which" can be significant at low flow rates. The Paxve burner is a very low heat 105s device and hence the deviations from theory in "this regard were not large. 3. NOx Emissions From the Burner Figure 2 shows the influence of fuel/air ratio and air flow on the oxides of nitrogen emissions from the Paxve " burner, burning vaporized kerosene wi~h an air inlet temperature of 4000F. This data is typical of the experimental NOx data taken from the burner after run 282 when a fuel injector problem was solved. The oxides of nitrogen emissions fall below the 1975 EPA goal* of 1.38 gr/Kg for fuel/air ratios less than 80% of stoichiometric (f/a = 0.051). The influence of the air flow rate on the NOx emissions is minor and tends to be obScured by scatter in the data. The influence of air inlet temperature is rather strong. When the data is plotted against combustion temperature, however, the effect of the inlet air temperature is greatly reduced. I: Oxides of nitrogen levels increase with increasing fuel/ air ratio, approaching the theoretical equilibrium values at about an equivalence ratio of 1.2 (f/a = 0.08). At low fuel/air ratios, the levels are orders of magnitude below the equilibrium values. Normal operation of the Paxve burner lies in a combustion "temperature range of 24000 to 27000F. The corresponding fuel/air range of operation the burner generally has emission levels of less than 0.2 grn/Kg. This is seven times better than the EPA goals. * See paragraph 10 below 1-2 image: ------- 4. CO Emissions From the Burner Figure 3 shows the influence of fuel/air ratio and air flow on the carbon monoxide .emissions from the paxve burner, burning kerosene. The data in this curve are typical of the experimental CO values reported here. At low fuel/air ratios carbon monoxide emissions are determined primarily by burner efficiency considerations. These in turn are quite sensitive to air flow per unit volume, fuel air ratio, and air inlet temperature. Carbon monoxide emissions at high fuel air ratios parallel the curve of theoretical equilibrium concentration of CO in the burner exhaust. CO emission levels can be kept below the 1975 goal* of 16.2 gr/Kg of fuel by providing the proper combination of fuel/air ratio, volume, air flow and air inlet temperature. In the normal operating range of the burner (between f/a = 0.033 and f/a = 0.038) carbon monoxide emissions are within acceptable range below air flow rates of 180#/hr. 5. Hydrocarbon Emissions From the Paxve Burrter Figure 4 shows hydrocarbon emissions from the burner operating with vaporized kerosene and heated inlet air. It is typical of the HC data from the burner. In the very low fuel/air range near the burner stability limit hydrocarbon emissions from the burner with kerosene as the fuel show a very strong dependence on fuel/air ratio. In this region the HC emissions with kerosene are somewhat influenced by burner efficiency considerations. A similar increase of HC emissions near the lean stability limits is observed with propane, but the hydrocarbon levels are much lower and the appearance of any hydrocarbon is generally an indication of incipient f~ame out. At high fuel/air ratios hydrocarbon emissions climb to relatively high values particularly beyond stoichiometric. Between these two extremes there is a broad range of operating conditions for which hydrocarbon emissions from the Paxve burner are essentially zero. In this range of operation the emission levels were so low that they could not be accurately measured with a flame ionization detector. '. Emission levels for hydrocarbons can be kept below the 1975 EPA goal* of 0.48 gr/Kg by the proper selection of fuel/air ratio operating range. Within the desired operating range, of f/a = 0.032 - 0.038, the burner HC emission levels were less than 1975 goal over the entire range of air flow per unit volume tested. 6. Influence of the Vapor Generator on Emission Level - Figures 2, 3, and 4 also show the comparsions between the emissions from the vapor generator exhaust and the burner. There was some reduction in the oxides of nitrogen emissions between samples drawn from the burner (bottom of the * See paragraph 10 below I-3 image: ------- stack) and samples drawn from the vapor generator exhaust (top of the stack). CO emission levels and hydrocarbon emission levels were strongly influenced by the vapor generator... The low values of. hydrocarbon and CO emissions which occur in the mid-range of fuel/ air ratios continued to occur with the vapor generator exhaust. The increase in carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons which characterize the burner exhaust at very low fuel/air ratios disappeared when samples were taken downstream of the vapor generator exhaust. In examining the CO curves, it should be noted that the limit of resolution of the gas chromatograph was 5. ppm. Almost all of the vapor generator CO data actually failed to show any measurable CO. These data points were then recorded as 5 ppm. It appears that the net influence of the vapor generator is to quench the NOx formation reaction while permitting continued oxidation. of the hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide into carbon dioxide and .water vapor. The emissions measured in the vapor generator exhaust fall below the EPA goals over a much wider range of operating conditions than the emissions from the burner. The upper limit on the allowable fuel/air ratio range in both cases is set by the oxides of nitrogen levels. Fuel/air ratios below f/a = 0.05 are necessary to keep the NOx emissions below 1.38 gm/kg. The low fuel/air ratio limit for the burn~r is set primarily by the CO and He emissions since the NOx emissions continue to fall as the fuel/air ratio is dropped. This lower limit is reduced considerably by the presence of the vapor generator. If this result persists in combin- ation with a vapor generator designed for an automobile, the Paxve burner will be capable of providing very low emission levels over an extremely wide range of ?perating conditions. 7. Effect of Non-Uniform Fuel Distribution I' . The Paxve curner described here used propane or vaporized kerosene as its fuel. The fuel and the air were premixed in the inlet pipe before entering the burner. Most of the informa- tion described in this summary is based on the behavior of the. burner with well mixed homogeneous inlet flow which was achieved after run 282. Earlier experiments with the burner included some in which there was an unsuspected maldistribution of the fuel/air mixture in the inlet pipe. With severe maldistribution of the fuel, burner emission levels of all types were found to increase signif- icantly. Most startling in this regard were the very high levels of hydrocarbons (on the order of 30 ppm) measured downstream of the vapor generator exhaust. The oxides of nitrogen and carbon monoxide emissions from both the burner and vapor generator exhaust were also higher when the improper fuel air distribution existed. All of these problems disappeared as soon as the fuel injection problem was discovered and corrected. 8. Theoretical Analysis A simplified well stirred reactor model of burner operation was used to provide estimates of burner stability limits and efficiency as a function of the operating conditions. Variables in the analysis included the volume of the burner, the air flow rate, the equivalence ratio, and the air inlet temperature. 1-4 image: ------- The anlaysis followed well established lines of theoretical burner analysis. It was found. that the burner stability data correlated very well with the blowout limits predicted by the burner theory. It was further found that the carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emission levels were considerably below those predicted by the theoretical analysis, but they followed the same trends and were influenced by the expected variables. Oxides of-nitrogen emission show a strong correlation with temperature, and are less influenced by air flow levels than had been expected. Efforts to provide a theoretical model for correlating the oxides of nitrogen data have been only partially successful. 9. Problems of Emissions Measurement . Problem areas were encountered in all of the emission measurements, including oxides of nitrogen, carbon' monoxide, and hydrocarbons. All of these problems were resolved and satisfactory data obtained which is reported herein. Some of the problems encountered deserve special recognition and more investi- gation. . Oxides of nitrogen data include both N02 and NO. The N02 is highly soluable in water. The NO is unstable and readily oxidizes to N02. At very low NOx emission levels, it is important not to lose the N02. This in turn requires special care in handling the water vapor whicft is produced by the combustion process. Many of the presently accepted standard techniques involve separation of the water in a fashion which can trap the N02 before it is measured. This may mean a loss of as much as 50% of the total NOx in a lean operating, low emission mode. Carbon monoxide data from the Paxve burner was frequently below 5 ppm, this was the lower limit of resolution of the gas chromatograph which was used for this purpose. There are instru- ments available which will read to lower levels, but these are not common in the automotive research field. . . The measurement of hydrocarbons with a flame ionization detector proved generally- satisfactory after a heated sample line and heated sampling pump were installed. Two problems remained. The first of these is the so called oxygen synergism effect. The change in sensitivity of the instrument with varying oxygen content in the exhaust stream was not only a nuisance in data reduction, but is a potential source of error. The magnitude of the effect is a f~~ction of the compositon of the stream, and hence the appropriate correction can only be made if an accurate hydrocarbon analysis is available. Most of those using these instruments are unable to make such an anlaysis, or to use it properly since the magnitude of the effect is not readily available for all of the combinations of hydrocarbons which one might expect to encounter. The most severe problem found in hydrocarbon emission I-5 image: ------- measurement was closely related to the unusually low levels of hydrocarbons which are found in the Paxve burner exhaust. We frequently observed negative output from the recorder which was. monitoring the signal from the F1D. The negative values were on the order of -0.5 ppm expressed as hexane. These were not spurious readings caused by drift in the instrument or recorder zero setting. An extensive investigation of this problem showed that it might be caused by the presence of water vapor in the burner exhaust gas stream. Addition of 10% water vapor to a stream of "zero" air caused a similar negative zero shift. This of course represents the lower limit of resolution of the hydrocarbon measurement capability of the F1D used in this program. This zero shift deserves further investigation. We have not seen it reported elsewhere. Combustion of hydrocarbon fuels with air can be achieved with emission levels substantially below the goals set by the EPA for 1975 automotive standards. Experiments with the Paxve burner indicate that this burner is a device which is capable of achieving these low emission levels. 10. 1975 EPA Emission Goals I The Division of Advanced Automotive Power Systems Development, EPA, has established certain vehicle emission goals to be met for hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, and oxides of nitrogen. These goals expressed in grams per mile ~re: 0.14 glmi of HC, 4.7 glmi of CO and 0.4 glmi of NOx expressed as N02. Using an assumed average fuel economy of 10 milgal over the .Federal Driving Cycle, we can derive emission goals based on grams of pollutant per kilogram of fuel. The resulting values are: 0.48 g/Kg of HC, 16.2 g/Kg of CO and 1.38 g/Kg of NOx. While these values of grams of pollutant pe~ kilogram of fuel are only approxi- mations to what is needed for an automobile, they provide a conven- ient means of comparing burner emission performance with the 1975 vehicle standards. The phrases "EPA Goals" and "1975 . standards" which are used extensively in this report refers to these derived g/Kg values. I I 1-6 ) image: ------- ~AY.Vt BURN~ S!AaILITY DATA Propane Ambient 200 150 o o - Stable /::}. - Limit o - Goes Out BURHER VOUJHE = 33 in2. '" 0 x t1' ..... ..I( '" '- ,.., " 0 tJ> '" 100 0 0 cPO .. .: < <11 0.1 '" tJ> :k 0 C ,.. ,.., ... ... .r< '" z ..... [] 0 ..... < 0 < U! .. :k 'tJ [J 0 0 8 .r< :< ;:) 50 0 0 0 0.U1 o Theoretical Stabili tY Limit 70' A 0 0 0 0.0 0.02 0.03 0.04 rUEL AIR RATIO - f/a 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 "I1UI V ALEIlCE PATI 11 - cp Figure 1-1. 0.05 0.OU1 0.02 0.8 1U BUIUI1.:R . I : j 11 J i! I : I.. .' . .. . : I: ... . .. . .. . '! ; 1.0 :. , ::; i :!; 1 ::: I ::" : j t !! i! . . .. . KEROSENE DATA' Li;::' VOLUME 52.3 cuin.' c., ,+ ~. AIR TEMP. OVER" . 250 or 0.03 o .U4 0.05 0.06 o .07 Fuel Air Ratio-f/a Figure 1-2 image: ------- 10 .. ... ..... Ii. ~ .... )C 0 :z i :z ~ < u 1.0 PAlM: BURlIER CAI!BO. !I).OXIDE DATA KEROSDl!: DATA VOLUIE 52.3 cu ill AIR TEll!' OYER 250 of 100 AIR FLOW '/Hr. + o t::. o o Plag indicate. run. frOl1l No. 282 ON 0.1 0.02 0.03 0.0" 0.05 0.06 NOMINAL FUEL AIR RATIO FAR Figure 1-3 .0.07 .. ... ~ (J) rs ::J < u ~ '" ... '" ryA:!'," ;..I,?..~r. IP'!)f"1r.t.f'~.:".t ~:''!''-;~~T: rr'l;-' 1r.~ .! . i ;- . -----.. - . -- . .. . . . . . --:- : I FLAG AIR FUEL TEI.u> . TEMP . lO AIR FLOW '/Hr. -i- Under 40 -'-:+ ~~ :l~~ 120 -150 OVer 150 PROP. KER. ! : ..- . . . . + o t:. o o t:. ~ Cold Hot Cold Hot Cold Cold Hot Hot . . :: II r~ 1 ;,t . . 1.0 .. . '. I! . , : I, ., , . i . . . 0.1 !. -i ~ ! :!; : : i j: , . , . . , ., . ,. . .. . .. . . ,. ~. . .... . . 0.°1 0.02 0.01'. O. ~" o. ~~, 0.03 0.04 FUEL AIR RATIO - f/a figure 1-4 image: ------- '- II. OBJECTIVES OF THE PROGRAM The objectives of the research program described in this report were to obtain data on the characteristics of the Paxve burner, a low emissions burner. The characteristics to be evaluated were the exhaust emissions and the stability limits of the burner. These data were to be combined with a theoretical analysis of burner stability and operating characteristics in order to provide a thorough evaluation' of this burner concept. A. Experimental Investigation The experimental investigation was designed to determine (1) the lean and rich blowout limits (stability- limi ts) of the burner, and (2) the emissions characteristics of the burner over a wide range of operating conditions. 1. Stabi Ii ty Limi ts The lean and rich blowout limits for the burner were determined for a wide variety of operating conditions. The variables tested included 'fuel ~nd air temperatures, fuel and air flow rates, and fuel types. . a. Fuel Type The stability limits were determined for propane and kerosene. b. Air Temperature The air temperature was varied from ambient to 400°F. c. Fuel Temperature The fuel temperature was varied from ambient to 800°F. d. Air Flow Rate The air flow rate was varied from 15 to 150 lbs/hr. Sufficient data were taken near each blowout limit so that gross extrapolations were avoided. 2. Emissions Characteristics Burner emission measurements were made over the range of operating conditions used in the stability limits study. Measurements on the burn~r exhaust were made over a fuel/ air ratio range from the lean blowout limit to the rich blowout limit. Exhaust gas measurements included (1) total unburned image: ------- hydrocarbons, (2) oxides of nitrogen, (3) carbon monoxide, (4) carbon dioxide, and (5) oxygen. A closed circulating working fluid loop was constructed to permit burner operation in combination with a vapor generator. The effect of the vapor generator quenching on emissions was determined by sampling the burner gases as they were exhausted from the vapor generator stack. B. Analytical Effort 1. Literature Survey mance and assist in istics of A literature survey was made of burner perfor- stability analyses. Background data was gathered to making an analysis of stability and emission character- burners. 2. Analytical Study The literature survey provided the basis for an analysis of the stability and emissions characteristics of the burner under study. The analysis investigated the effects of various parameters on the stability limits and performance charac- . teristics of the burner. The burner was modeled using a simplified stirred reactor concept. . . 3. Data Analysis The experimental data on stability limits and emissions were correlated with the results of the analytical study. Additional semi-empirical correlation of data not treated by the burner analysis, was conducted. ! I i, " II-2 image: ------- III. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Conclusions The results of the experimental and analytical program discussed in this report show that for the size burner tested (approximately 100,000 BTU/HR), the Paxve burner is capable of low emission operation. If these favorable emission char- acteristics can be retained as the size is increased to a value of heat release rate and turn down ratio that would be required by a practical automotive propulsion system (approximately 2,500,000 BTU/HR, and at least 20:1), then the Paxve burner should be capable of substantially bettering the goals for pollutants expressed in grams/kilogram established for burners by the Division of Advanced Automotive Propulsion System . Development, EPA. The results of the analytical investigation and the correlation of that analysis with the experimental data permit a fairly accurate prediction of burner stability and emission levels. Some correlation has been achieved for emission levels of oxides of nitrogen which are not treated directly by the burner theory. In addition to these conclusions with regard to the characteristics of the paxve burner, we must also make some observations about the problem of emission measurements. It was clear that emission measurement is a difficult task and that much remains to be done in order to establish emission measurement procedures which give reliable and consistent data. During the course of this program Paxve uncovered problem areas in emission measurement which we have not seen treated in the literature. . Conclusions from t~e program are presented below. subdivisions are as follows: The 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Characteristics of the Paxve Burner Influence of the Vapor Generator On Burner Influence of Non-uniform Flow Distribution Emissions Theoretical Analysis Data Correlation Emission Measurement Problems Summary Emissions on 1. Characteristics of the Paxve Burner The characteristics of the Paxve burner as investigated in the experimental program described here fall into two general categories: the stability characteristics of the burner, and the emission characteristics of the burner. a. Burner Stability Characteristics The experimentally determined stab~lity charac~eristics of the paxve burner are presented in Sect10n VI of th1S report. The burner exhibits more or less image: ------- .conventional lean blowout and rich blowout behavior. Lean blowout occurs at a fuel air ratio which depends on air flow rate and air inlet temperature. At an air flow rate of 100 Ibs/hr and ambient inlet temperatures lean blowout occurs at approximately 50% of stoichiometric mixture ratio (f/a = 0.032 for propane). With increasing inlet temperature the blowout inlet decreases. At 400°F inlet temperature the stability limit for propane at 100 Ibs/hr of air flow is approximately 43% of stoichiometric (f/a = 0.028). In both cases, lean blowout occurs at a combustion temperaure of approximately 2150oF. Rich blowout was more difficult to determine because of the limited fuel flow capabilities of the Paxve test facility. At 50 Ib/hr of air flow rich blowout occurs at approximately 0.17 fuel/air ratio which corresponds to about 2.7 times stoichiometric. Stability data with kerosene shows blowout occuring at slightly higher fuel/air ratios then with propane, but at about the same equivalence ratio. The emission behavior of the burner near the stability limit is different from the two fuels. With propane, lean blowout is characterized by relativly high carbon monoxide emissions, but almost no unburned hydrocarbons are detectable. 'r.hen the blowout limit is finally reached, the hydrocarbon emissions start to appear and begin to climb. Eventually the burner goes out without a change in the operating conditions. Burning flame out under these conditions can take as long as ten to twelve minutes .to occur. I: With kerosene, hydrocarbon emission begins to appear .before the lean limit is reached. There are essentiallly no hydrocarbon emissions from the burner down to about f/a = 0.038 with hot air and kerosene. As the fuel/air ratios are reduced further, hydrocarbon emissions start to appear, but reach steady values which remain constant while the burner continues to operate stably. A further reduction in fuel/air ratio causes another climb in the emissions which again stabilize at some value. Finally as the blowout condition is reached hydrocarbon emissions climb without leveling off and gradually the burner temperature falls, the oxygen content in the exhaust increases, and the burner goes out. I, The presence of a significant amount of hydrocarbon emissions at lean operating points close to the lean blowout limit is a major difference between the behavior of the burner with kerosene near the lean limit and the behavior of the burner with propane .under similar cond.i tions. . . . Near rich blowout the burner emits carbons both with propane and with kerosene, emissions seem to be generally higher at the conditions. considerable hydro- although the kerosene rich operating b. Oxides of Nitrogen Emissions Characteristics Oxides of nitrogen' emissions from the 1II-2 image: ------- Paxve burner show a very distinct correl~tion with fuel/air r~tio. This can of course, be interpreted as be1ng a strong c~rrelat10p. with burner combustion temperature. The influence of 1nlet temperature is very nearly what one might expect if a true correlation with burner temperature were to apply. In the data which is plotted in the ppm mode it is difficult to see any pattern showing an influence of flow rate on the burner emissions because of the data scatter. In general it appears that lower flow ratios give somewhat higher emissions at a given fuel/air ratio. For both kerosene and propane with ambient fuel and air we can keep the emissions of oxides of nitrogen below 10 ppm by maintaining the fuel/air ratio of the burner below 0.045 (approximately 70% of stoichiometric). At 4000F inlet temperature, the 10 ppm value is reached at about f/a = 0.04 (0.625 equivalence ratio) . The oxides of nitrogen data from the burner in lean combustion fall far below the equilibrium NO concentrations which would exist in equilibrium at the burner operating conditions. . At rich operating conditions of approximately 1.3 equivalence ratio and higher (fuel/air ratio of = 0.08) the burner emissions are approximately equal to the equilibrium values. In terms of the emissions goals of 0.4 grams of N02 per Kg of fuel, we find that the burner shows emission characteristics below this level up to mixture ratios of approximately 70% of stoichiometric. Maximum oxides of nitrogen measurements from the Paxve burner were on the order of 110 ppm or 2.6 grams per Kg of fuel. Under these conditions, the burner was operating at or near stoichiometric mixture ratio, an operating point which the burner is not designed for and at which only very limited burner life could be achieved", At its nominal operating condition of 2500°F flame temp~rature the Paxve burner shows emissions levels on the order of 0.1 gm/Kg of oxides of nitrogen. This is a significant improvement over the stated emissions goals of EPA. c. Carbon Monoxides Emissions Data Emissions of carbon 'monoxide from the Paxve burner show two distinct trends. For mixture ratios above f/a = 0,05 the carbon monoxide emissions are characterized by a line of rapidly increasing emissions with increasing mixture ratio which follows the equilibrium carbon monoxide concentration in the burner exhaust. At mixture ratios below f/a = 0.035 the carbon monoxide concentration in the exhaust follows a character- istic of increasing CO emissions with decreasing mixture ratio. The nature of these curves suggest a falling burner efficiency with decreasing mixture ratio. Both families of curves show some dependence on flow rate and a strong correlation with fuel/air ratio. Increasing flow velocity increases the CO emissions in both cases. We can maintain carbon monoxide emissions in the burner exhaust below 16 gr/Kg of fuel, by providing an appropriate combination of fuel/air ratio, air flow rate, and air inlet temperature. III-3 image: ------- At ambient inlet temperature, a flow rate of 50 lb/hr will give less than 16 gr/Kg of CO at a fuel/air ratio above 0.036. Increasing the inlet temperature to 400°F decreases the fuel/air requirement to 0.030 and 0.032 at 50 lbs/hr and 100 lb/hr respectively. . d. Hydrocarbon Emissions From the Paxve Burner Hydrocarbon emissions from the Paxve burner exhibit some of the same characteristics as the carbon monoxide emissions. At mixture ratios above about f/a = 0.050 hydrocarbon emissions increase with increasing mixture ratio, increasing rapidly above stoichiometric. There is a wide range of operating conditions for the burner between approximately 0.032 mixture ratio up to approximately 0.050 mixture ratio within which the hydrocarbon emissions from the burner are zero .to within the limits of our measurement capability. At mixture ratios below. approximately 50% stoichiometric, hydrocarbon emissions again appear at ambient inlet temperatures. With elevated temperatures, the mixture ratio at which hydrocarbon emissions begin to appear from the burner is somewhat lower. i. The marked increase in hydrocarbon emissions at very. lean mixtures approaching lean blowout is characteristic of the kerosene combustion data. With propane only minor hydrocarbon emissions were observed as lean limit was approached until a limit point had actually been reached. For propane combustion the first significant appearance of hydrocarbons'in the exhaust was a sensitive indication of incipient lean blowout. . Hydrocarbon emissions can be kept within the nominal limits assigned by EPA <.0.48 gm/Kg) by an appropriate choice of operating fuel/air range, at a given flow rate and inlet temperature. At ambient inlet temperature and 50 lb/hr, hydrocarbon emissions from the burner will be below 0.048 gm/Kg above f/a = 0.035 with kerosene as the fuel. At 100 lb/hr a slightly higher f/a value is required. When the inlet temperature is increased to 400°F, the required minimum f/a for satisfactory HC levels is about f/a = 0.032 at 50 lb/hr and 0.035 at 100 lb/hr. The fuel/air limits necessary to meet the EPA hydrocarbon limita- tions are wider than the f/a limits for satisfactory CO levels. I. 2. Influence of the Vapor Generator on Burner Emissions The vapor generator appears to have a major effect on the CO and HC emission levels in the exhaust stream. Oxides of nitrogen measurements downstream of the vapor generator were in substantial agreement with the oxides of nitrogen measurements upstream of the vapor generator. The influence of the vapor generator on the CO and HC emissions is inferred primarily from the plots of emissions versus fuel/air ratio. Simultaneous measurements of CO were taken on only a few runs. No simultaneous measurements of hydrocarbon emissions from the vapor generator and burner were taken. III-4 image: ------- a. Effect on NOx Emissions NOx was measured in both locations for a wide variety of runs. On some runs there appeared to be a slight increase in the NOx at the top of the stack compared to the burner, while on other runs there appeared to be a slight decrease. The decrease was frequently associated with conditions where the vapor generator had not yet warmed up and some of "the water vapor in the burner exhaust was condensing on the vapor generator coils. Previous experience with NOx measurements showed that N02 dissolves in condensed water from the exhaust, leading to a reduction in the NOx level in the exhaust stream. The increased residence time of the gases as they flow through the vapor generator does not appear to significantly alter the NOx exhaust concentration. b. Effect on CO Emissions Carbon monoxide emissions in the exhaust from the vapor generator are generally much lower than the emissions measured from the burner. We did not in general make simultaneous measurements of these parameters hence it is difficult to establish one'to one correspondence between the levels. An examination of the CO emissions as a function of mixture ratio, however, and specific point by point comparisons indicate the extent of this reduction. At the lean operating points where the CO emissions tend to become excessive, the measurements in the vapor generator exhaust were generally below the limit of the measuring instrument. . Part of the difficulty in assessing the influence of the vapor generator on the carbon monoxide emissions lies in the very low levels of CO which are found in the Paxve burner exhaust under normal operating conditions. These normal operating conditions correspond to mixture ratios which give combustion temperatures in the range of 24000F to 2700oF. Testing outside this range was limited to the burner alone. The structural capabilities of the burner made it possible to do .this. Testing with the vapor generator loop in place, however, required limitation of the combustion temperature range to avoid damage to the working fluid passing the vapor generator loop. Within this somewhat narrower temperature range, the CO emissions were usually quite low, frequently below the ability of the chromatograph to read, which was about 5 ppm. We have generally identified the low levels of CO in our data which were otherwise unreadable as being 5 ppm. Many of the CO values undoubtedly were below this level. It would require sensitive instrumentation to accurately establish the influence of the vapor generator on the OC emission levels. It is reasonable to suppose, however, that the reduction in temperature of the gases as they pass through the burner is gradual enough to permit some recombination of the CO with the available oxygen. c.' Effect on HC Emissions III-S image: ------- The influence of the va~or generator on hydrocarbon emissions was more difficult to determl.ne than its influence on carbon monoxide. The restricted operating range of the burner when the vapor generator was in place resulted almost entirely in zero or negative hydrocarbon readings, from the top of the stack. Negative readings were obtained at conditions which gave positive readings from the burner alone. The negative readings, as explained elsewhere, are probably due to the presence of water vapor in the exhaust which causes a zero shift in the flame ionization detector. With zero or negative readings, one has no reliable values that he can use as a basis for an exact comparsion. We can say, however, that the effect of the vapor generator loop was to eliminate hydrocarbon emissions under conditions where there were some measurable emissions. This effect is undoubtedly attributable to increased residence time and gradual quenching. 3. Influence of Non-Uniform Flow Distribution on Emissions During the course of the experimental work performed here, a number of modifications were made in the test set up and instrumentation as it became evident that a problem existed in one or the other of these. The problems involved in the measurements of emissions are discussed elsewhere. There was, however, a problem involved in the hydrocarbon emissions which sheds some interesting light on the problems of emission control. The early vapor generator exhaust data showed large quantities of hydrocarbons in the vapor generator exhaust which were not found in measurements made directly from the burner. This peculiar behavior suggesting that a source of hydrocarbons existed between the burner and the top of the exhaust stack was investigated extensively. I I [ I An examination of the flame from the burner inlet showed that there was a substantial maldistribution of fuel in the inlet stream, causing rich mixtures to occur in some portions of the burner with lean mixtures in the other portions. When the improper fuel injection pattern was modified to provide a uniform mixture, the anamolous hydrocarbon reading in the vapor generator exhaust immediately disappeared. Correction of the fuel injection pattern was made between runs 279 and 282. i I I ' The maldistribution of flow from the fuel injector influenced all of the emission levels, not just that of hydrocarbon data. Examination of NOx data from the burner after the fuel injector was corrected show a reduction in NOx as a function of mixture ratio. This suggests that the local mixture ratio and local temperature are the principal factors in the formation of oxides of nitrogen, arid that the uniform mixture which yields the lowest maximum temperature in the burner also provides the lowest overall emission levels. 4. Theoretical Analyses III-6 II image: ------- Theoretical analysis of the burner performance has been conducted using the heat balance theory described by Vulis, Longwell and others. The theory permits an analysis of several interesting parameters in the burner operation. These include burner stability limits, and the prediction of burner emissions in the. form of unburnt material as a function of burner design and operating conditions. The theoretical analysis was conducted to determine the influence of the burner volume, air flow rate, ambient pressure and inlet temperature on burner stability, burner efficiency and combustion temperature. Only lean burning cases were treated. Prediction of lean blowout limits and burner emissions due to incomplete combustion were made for each lean operating point for comparsion with the experimental data. An interesting feature of the analysis is the prediction that at elevated inlet temperatures, on the order of 16000F and higher, the burner will no longer show critical burner character- istics at very lean mixture ratios. Thus at high inlet temperature and low combustion temperature it appears that the burner will ignite and burn independently of the air flow. Under these conditions the burner will not exhibit blowout character- istics, but the efficiency of combustion will still be strongly dependent on the flow rate.and other factors. 5. Data Correlation The theoretical analyses conducted as a part of this program were used to assist in the correlation of experimental data from the Paxye burner. a. Correlation of Stability Data Stability data from the Paxve Burner shows very good correlation with the blowout predictions based on the burner theory. At very low flow rates, the burner seems to be somewhat less stable than the theory would predict. This lessened stability has not been examined in detail but is probably attributable to heat loss from the burner. The theory appears to account properly for the influence of air flow, inlet temperature and burner volume. b. Correlation of Carbon Monoxide and Hydrocarbons Emissions Data . The carbon monoxides emission data has been examined in the light of the combustion theory outlined in this report. What we expect is that as we approach the lean stability limit, the efficiency will decrease, and this inefficiency will show up as either unburned hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, or both. Experimentally, we find that with propane cOmbusiton there are virtually no unburned hydrocarbons in the exhaust as the lean limit is approached, but there is a relatively large amount of carbon monoxide. The shape of the carbon monoxide emission curves is 1II-7 image: ------- I, substantially the same as that predicted by the theoretical analysis. The influence of the flow rate and temperature on the carbon monoxide emissions is also in the direction we would expect based on the experimental data and the theoretical analysis. This is probably due to the simplifications used in the burner analysis. Heat release associated with partial combustion of the fuel to water vapor and carbon monoxide was ignored. This tends to underestimate the efficiency as lean blowout is approached, and to overestimate the emissions. A more exact expression for the heat release could probably yield still closer agreement with experimental data. The present analysis is useful, however, for obtaining a conservative estimate of burner CO emissions. The influence of flow rate, inlet temperature and mixture ratio on the hydrocarbon emissions near lean blowout with kerosene, shows similar characteristics to those obtained for the carbon monoxide. The effect of fuel/air ratio, flow rate, and inlet temperature are along the lines predicted by the theory. The emissions of both CO and He are greatly diminished by passage through the vapor generator. This is probably due in part to continued oxidatiori as gases cool off. The lower co values at fuel/air ratios approaching stoichiometric is also attributable in part to shifting equilibrium in the flow through the heat exchanger. . . We have not attempted to correlate the reductions in CO arising from passage through the vapor generator. By using the predicted unreactedness to estimate the CO, we thus have an even more conservative estimate for a burner/heat exchanger installation. c. Correlation of the NOx Data We do not have a theoretical basis for correlating the oxides of nitrogen data which is totally in agree- ment with the experimentally determined values. It appears that the oxides of nitrogen data can be correlated as a function of the. combustion temperature. If one writes an equation of the form: [NO] = Ke-E/RT I I and use this as a basis for correlation of the experimental data we find that: K = 4.38 X 105 ppm E = 36.8 K cal/mole seems to give a fair fit to the data. The empirical correlation produced here is of value since it permits a relatively accurate prediction of the oxides of nitrogen content in the burner exhaust as a function of operating conditions. III-8 I' image: ------- 6. Emission Measurement Problems A number of emission measurement problems were covered during the course of the experimental investigation reported here. The most important of these dealt with erroneous measurements which can be made in the measurement of oxides of nitrogen due to improper technique. It appears that some of these improper techniques are widespread. Additional discoveries deal with the problems of measuring hydrocarbons at very low levels. a. Oxides of Nitrogen Measurement Problems Difficulties experienced in measurement of oxides of nitrogen by the Griess-Saltzman method during the .course of this program are discussed in some detail in this report. These problems included saturation of the dye caused by using too small a quantity of reagent for the volume of the gas being sampled, and failure to detect NO in rich mixtures due to the lack of oxygen in the flask to oxidize the NO into N02. Those errors on our part were avoidable. Someone who was more familiar with Saltzman's work and with the standard measurement procedures used in the automotive field would probably not have experienced those difficulties. An additional problem was discovered, however, which to the best of our knowledge is not discussed elsewhere. At low levels of concentration in the exhaust from our burner, N02 appears to form a substantial portion of the total NOx. It further appears that the N02 which is highly soluble in water, can be readily lost prior to analysis'by improper sampling. The use of a sampling procedure which permits or encourages the water formed during the combustion process to be removed from the flow before analysis, can be expected to give erroneous results at low NOx concentrations due to the loss of N02. It is probable that other forms of water removal equipment, such as desiccants and absorbers will also tend to trap N02. Removal of water vapor from the exhaust stream prior to analysis is a common procedure in NOx emissions measurements. In the case of NDIR analyzers which have been widely used in the past, for NO measurement, water vapor must be removed because it interferes with the detection of the NO. It is our conclusion, based on the work done at Paxve, that every effort should be made to eliminate water dropout if all of the oxides of nitrogen are to be detected in a low NOx stream. b. Problems in the Detection of Hydrocarbon Emissions Difficulties experienced at Paxve in the detection of hydrocarbon emissions were of three types. These included the oxygen synergism effect on the flame ionization detector, the problem of inaccurate measurement due to use of a cold sampling line, and the problem of zero shift of the instrument, apparently due to water vapor in the exhaust. III-9 image: ------- Oxygen synergism is a name given to the change in sensitivity of the flame ionization detector to hydrocarbon in the presence of oxygen. The change in sensitivity depends on both the oxygen concentration and on the hydrocarbon being detected.. For hydrocarbons of interest to the analy~is being conducted by Paxve this effect was on the order of 25% reduction in sensitivity at 10% oxygen concentration. The oxygen synergism effect could have been minimized by the use of a nitrogen hydrogen mixture as the combustible gas in the flame. The manufacturer who supplied the flame ionization detector which was used did not advise us in this regard. We discovered the problem during instrument calibrations. Heating of the hydrocarbon sampling line and pumping equipment is necessary to obtain accurate measurement of hydrocarbon emissions. There seems to be some misconception as to why this heating is desirable. It was suggested to us that heating of the lines was an effective means for preventing condensation of higher hydrocarbons. While this is true, the concentration of hydrocarbons necessary to actually permit condensation even at ambient temperatures is quite high. That concentration is unlikely to occur in the exhaust from a clean burner such as the Paxve burner. The problem which does arise in this regard is not one of true condensation, but rather psuedo-condensation caused by the adsorption of the hydrocarbons in the surface of the sampling line. Heating of the sampling line and pump undoubtedly serves to eliminate adsorption of higher hydrocarbon in the same fashion. I, Perhaps the most vexing problem which arose in the measurement of hydrocarbons during the course of this program, was the repeated observation of negative values of hydrocarbon emissions from the burner and the vapor generator exhaust. Negative readings of as much as 0.5 ppm expressed as hexane were common place. Efforts to attribute this to a drift in the instrument were in vain. Preliminary experiments with zero air into which 10% water vapor was evaporated showed a zero shift of about 0.5 ppm. This was a zero shift as opposed to a change in sensitivity of the sort associated with oxygen synergism. I, Thiz zero shift presents somewhat of a dilemma. On the one hand, we would like to remove the water vapor from the flow so as to avoid the zero shift. On the other hand, .all methods for eliminating the water vapor from the flow that we have been able to think of would simultaneously influence the measurement of the hydrocarbon content. It appears that the only practical method for taking this into account is to measure the water vapor content and use this together with known calibrations of zero shift to correct the data. We used pure hydrogen in our FID. We do not know whether the zero shift would be as pronounced with some other gas mixture. A 40/60 hydrogen-helium mixture is commonly used in FIDs to minimize the oxygen synergism effect. This might also influence the zero shift. III-10 image: ------- c. Carbon Monoxide Measurement Problems , Most of the CO data from the vapor generator exhaust showed levels which were well below the detection limit of our equipment. We were delighted and somewhat surprised with the low CO emission levels from our burner. It would have been nice to be able to measure them more accurately. The equipment which we used permitted us to make carbon monoxide measurements down to about 5 ppm. Obtaining lower readings through ordinary gas chromatography is quite difficult since the carbon monoxide separation from nitrogen on the molecular sieve is not as complete as one might like. More sensitive techniques for measurement of carbon monoxide have been devised. These include a. method for converting carbon monoxide into methane and then measuring the methane in a flame ionization detector, and highly sensitive NDIR instruments. . 7. Summary . In its normal mode of operation, the Paxve combustion process is capable of very low emission operation. Oxides of nitrogen on the order of 0.1 gm/Kg are achieved simultan- eously with carbon monoxid~ levels of less than 1.0 gm/Kg and hydrocarbon readings which are so low as to be undetectable. The Paxve combustion process appears to be one which requires more sophisticated measurement devices than those currently available for testing vehicle emissions. . B. Rec'ommendations 1. Prototype Burner Development A program should be funded to support the development of the Paxveburner into a prototype unit suitable for incorporation into a Rankine Cycle Engine. a. Burner A prototype burner vapor generator assembly would be a desirable line of approach. b. Fuel Vaporizer In conjunction with this type of prototype development, a fuel vaporizer development program should also be funded. The fuel vaporizer which was used in conjunction with the kerosene burner data reported here, should serve as the basis for development of a practical prototype. 2. Liquid Injection Investigation Further reasearch should be conducted into the factors affecting the emissions characteristics of the Paxve burner. Limited data on liquid kerosene injection shows that under some conditions the burner seemed to operate with low emissions III-ll image: ------- using very poorly atomizing liquid injection. This should be explored further to determine whether fuel vaporization is a necessary feature in the development of this burner. This program should not take precedence however, over the prototype development suggested as recommendation 1 above. It is important that practical application of this promising low emission technology be made, with product improvement of somewhat less priority. 3. Transient Effects on the Paxve Burner Further research on the Paxve burner is desirable to investigate the effect of transient operation on burner emissions. Transient changes in flow rate through the burner were not examined during the course of the program discussed here. Such measurements would be highly desirable. This work might proceed in parallel with the prototype development suggested above. 4. Influence of Vapor Generator Additional research on the influence of the vapor generator on the Paxve burner emissions, particularly on the carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions would be desirable. Continuous measurement equipment is mandatory if this type of development supporting research. is to be conducted in an efficient manner. The grab sample techniques utilized by Paxve during the course of the program described here were selected because of their availability and accuracy. The advent of the chemiluminescent NOx technique and high sensitivity NDIR for carbon monoxide should permit continuous flow instrumentation for these parameters. Continuous flow instrumentation.for the hydrocarbons is already available and was found to be quite adequate for the program. Carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions improve greatly in passage through the vapor generator under lean operating conditions. It would be desirable to determine the extent to which this is the case, since it is the balance between the carbon monoxide and the oxides of nitrogen emissions which limit the operating range of the burner otherwise. 5. Elevated Pressure and Temperature Effects Further research into the influence of pressure and temperature on the Paxve burner should be funded. The Paxve burner may be applicable not only to Rankine cycle engines, but also other forms of combustion equipment, including gas turbine engines. If a Paxve burner is to be used as an element in an automotive or stationary.gas turbine, it will have to operate under conditions of elevated inlet pressure and temperature which are considerably outside the range of the testing accomplished to date. The influence of elevated pressure and temperature are to some extent predicted by the theoretical analysis conducted here. Only experimental investigation of th~se phenomena will verify the validity of that analysis. A preliminary examination of this III-l2 image: ------- problem suggests that full scale testing of burners of a size suitable for gas turbine application would be the most feasible approach to conducting research in this area. 6. Extended Burner Analysis Including Heat Loss and NOx Correlation Additional analysis should be funded to extend the theoretical investigations discussed here and to improve the experimental correlation with theory. a. Burn~r Theory The burner theory discussed here showed excellent agreement with the experimental blowout data at high flow rates. At lower flows there was some deviation. Improve- ment in the theory to account for heat loss from the burner would undoubtedly resolve this discrepancy. It would also show whether or not other types of burners which are more susceptible to heat. loss can be expected to achieve the same excellent results that we have achieved with the Paxve burner. The burner heat ~elease equations should also be modified to account for some heat release when partial oxidation of the fuel to water vapor and carbon monoxide takes place. This should improve the accuracy of the CO emission predictions. b. NOx Correlation 11 I' Additional correlation of the oxides of nitrogen data obtained during this program would be highly desirable. . The fact that the oxides of nitrogen do not appear to be strongly influenced by the air flow rate suggests that combustion related atomic oxygen may be a significant factor. This should be investigat~d analytically. III-13 image: ------- IV. EXPERIMENTAL METHODS This section covers a description of the experimental apparatus, critical instrumentation, and test procedures used in obtaining the experimental data. Special test facilities were designed and fabricated to permit testing the Paxve burner under controlled conditions of inlet fuel and air temperature and pressure for the evaluation ?f emissions and stability. A. Experimental Installations 1. General Description All of the burner emission and stability testing report~d here was accomplished in the Paxve combustion laboratories. These include two primary combustion test facilities: Stand I and St'and 2 ("The Blockhouse"). A schematic diagram of the overall burner test facilities incorporating burner test stands No. I and 2 as well as the auxiliary instrumentation and gas analysis facilities is shown in Figure 1. The two burner test stands are nearly equivalent in terms of burner testing capacity, instrumentation, and test fuels. The major dif'ference is that test stand 2 contains a working fluid vapor generator loop. This allows study of the effect of burner gas quenching on emissions. . As indicated in the diagram of Figure 1, the two test stands are self contained for individual burner testing. They consist of a burner control console, an enclosure in which the burner is installed, an air system which supplies combustion air to the burner, a fuel system supplying the particular fuel under test, an instrumentation system which provides direct readout for control of burner operating conditions, and instrumentation for measurement of the burner exhaust gas emissions. External view photographs of burner test stand No. 1 and control console for test stand 2 are shown in Figure 2. Test stand No.2 is constructed to perform the same functions as burner test stand No. 1 with the additional feature that a vapor generator system has been added to the burner. The burner and vapor generator systems are totally enclosed in a well ventilated blockhouse for, safety reasons. Photographs of burner test stand No.2 showing the interior view of the blockhouse ~re shown in Figure 3. The two burner test facilities are served by a common gas sampling instrumentation center. This instrumentation center contains theinstrwnentationfor the measurement of exhaust gas emissions which include CO, C02, unburned hydrocarbons, and oxygen. In addition, gas analysis equipment is provided for the colorimetric evaluation of oxides of nitrogen in the exhaust. The instrumentation and emissions measurement techniques are described in detail later in this report. Photographs of the emissions instrumentation center are presented in Figure 4. image: ------- 2. Air Flow Subsystems A schematic diagram of the air and fuel system for burner stand No. I is shown in Figure No.5. The schematic diagram for Stand No.2, is shown in Figure 6. The air system consists of two variable speed air blowers connected in parallel, capable of providing up to 250 lb/hr of air. The blowers are controlled by a variac to set blower speed and consequently air mass flow. Air flow is measured through a rotameter. The air temperature is varied by means of a nichrome wire air heater immersed in the air flow. Air temperatures of up to 500°F can be obtained. Current flow in the nichrome wire is regulated by a variac auto transformer. The thermally conditioned air flow is discharged coaxially with the injected fuel flow into the burner for ignition and combustion. 3. Fuel Flow Subsystems The fuel systems consist of two parallel storage and control systems, one to handle propane, the other for diesel/ kerosene fuels. A major element of the fuel system is the fuel heater vaporizer. The heater/vaporizer for Stand 2 is shown in the photograph of Figure 7. Figure 8 shows a drawing of the unit which was designed and fabricated to meet the specific requirements of this burner evaluation program. It consists of a high thermal conductivity core section containing an encapsulated electrical heating element. Helical grooves are machined on the outside of the core which provide a vaporization passage for the fuel flow. The encapsulation of the electrical heating element in a high thermal conductivity aluminum core mass provides isothermal heat transfer at the helical fuel heating passages. Maintaining uniform wall temperatures through mixed phase flow eliminates "hot spots" which could lead to therm~l decomposition (carburization) of the hydrocarbon fuels. I I The outside case of the heater consists of a tube with a side wall inlet to the spiral fuel grooves and an outlet thro~gh a domed end piece. During operation, the fuel enters through the case and travels up the spiral path to the dome and cap. The end cap is designed so that liquid vapor separation is achieved with the vapor leaving through a centrally located port. Unvaporized droplets are retained by the dome to fall back onto the heated core for further vaporization. The unit is thermostatically controlled to achieve the desired vaporization for various fuel flow rates. Ii Figure 7 shows the disassembled vaporizer after operation on kerosene. More than 20 gallons of kerosene and 1000 lbs of . propane have flowed through the heater unit. The core operated at approximately 900°F at a flow rate of approximately 7 lb/hr. Examination of the vaporizer shows only a thin powdery layer of black carbon covered the top of the core where the flow could stagnate. The helical flow passages discolored but were free from any carbon deposit. As shown in Figure 6 a line heater is also installed between the fuel vaporizer and the burner fuel injector to maintain IV-2 image: ------- fuel temperature at the desired value after vaporization. The line heater consists of a resistance heated length of quarter inch stainless steel tubing. Electrical control is achieve~ through a current transformer and control Variac. The line is insulated to minimize the convection losses. This fuel conditioning system has demonstrated good performance. Vaporized fuel or hot propane can be delivered to the burner at any desired temperature up to 800°F over a flow range from less than 1 lb/hr to more than 12 lb/hr. 4. Vapor Generator System The system which is unique to Stand 2 is the vapor generator system, a schematic of which is shown in Figure 9. The purpose of this installation is to study the effects of quenching by cold surfaces on burner emissions. The vapor generator itself is a counter flow heat exchanger in which the working fluid circulates through a 6 foot tall coil of 3/8 in. D.D. tubing. The coil dimensions after winding were 2 in. I.D. x 2 5/8 in. D.D. . The coil is surrounded on the outside by 3 in. I.D. ceramic tubing and is bordered on the inside by a 1.5 in. D.D. air tube leading to the burner. The working fluid runs counter flow in the. coil to the hot burner gases which rise in the annular area between the center air tube and the ceramic wall. Figure 3a is a photograph of the vapor generator stack. Figure 10 shows a drawing of the unit. The working fluid is circulated by a geroter pump which is driven by an air cooled Volkswagon Automotive engine. The pump can provide outlet pressures of up to 1500 psi at flow rates of 7.8 gpm at 1200 rpm. The automotive drive engine is provided with remote control ignition, starting, throttling and clutching capability to vary pump speed and circulating flow rate. The initial design of the vapor generator loop included a jet pump at the inlet to the gerotor pump to prevent cavitation. It was found that this did not permit the system to start flowing properly. The jet pump must have a supply of high pressure fluid in order to provide the desired characteristics. . For our case a startup problem results since the pump cannot supply high pressure unless it has full flow at the inlet. In a future automotive system, this difficulty could be overcome by the slow cranking of the pump during initial system starting. It was beyond the scope of the present test facility installation to provide this necessary flexibility, and the jet pump was removed. The cavitation problem was circumvented by installing a. low pressure accumulator pressurized with N2 at the pump inlet to set the minimum pressure level in the system. This provided adequate cavitation supression and also a reserve fluid supply. . The system also includes a high pressure accumulator at the pump outlet to minimize water hammer effects. For additional flow control, a pump bypass line is provided which is manually operated and set at a given condition which is normally unchanged during testing. Provisions are made for filling the system at the low and high pressure accumulators while bleeding gas at a high IV-3 image: ------- point bleed. A filter at the pump inlet is provided to protect the close tolerance of the pump rotor. The vapor generator system has been operated in conjunc- tion with the burner to working fluid outlet temperatures of 500°F and flow rates of 2.0 GPM through the vapor generator coil. The vapor generator system also includes a condenser coil which is cooled in a water bath and returns the working fluid temperature to approximately 2l2°F before entering the pump. S. Control Consoles Each test stand is provided with a control console which incorporates all necessary operating controls and visual monitoring instrumentation. The operating controls include: switches for the blowers, heaters, igniter, and fuel flow solenoids: Variacs (autotransformers) to control air flow rate and electrical power to the air heater and the fuel line heaters: needle valves for control of fuel flow and nitrogen pressurizing and purge flows: and a thermostatic controller for the fuel heater/ vaporizer. Instrumentation includes: flow meters (rotameters) for fuel and air flow rate: pressure gages for fuel supply and delivery, burner air supply pressure, pressure at the rotameters, and pressure levels throughout the. vapor generator loop: and tempera- tures in the burner, at the vapor generator coil exhaust, in the fuel and air streams both at the flow meters and at the burner inlet, and throughout the vapor generator loop. A table of all control and measurement functions on the two operating consoles is presented in Tables land 2. . B. Instrumentation The burner test stands are provided with pressure, temperature and flow instrumentation. These instruments permit the test operator to set and hold a desired test condition. The instruments together with the corresponding controls (described in A-S above) are tabulated in Tables land 2. In addition to the test operation instruments, Paxve has provided emissions measuring equipment which incorporates measure- ments for CO, C02, 02, HC, and NOx. I, 1. Pressure Measurements All pressure measurements involved in the research program were made with conventional Bourdon tube or diaphragm (Magnehelic) pressure gages. Pressure measurements made for several purposes: burner were I ~ I 11 a. The pressure level of each fuel tank was monitored to help set up repeatable test points. b. The pressure level at the propane flow meters was used to correct propane flow rate for density. c. Pressure drop across the fuel vaporizer IV-4 image: ------- was monitored to see if the vaporizer was loading up with carbon deposits. d. Pressure levels throughout the working fluid loop were monitored to ensure that the working fluid was above its critical pressure in the vapor generator and also to avoid cavita- tion problems in the gerotor pump. Pressure drop across the filter was also monitored. e. Pressure loss through the burner was measured. f. Pressure level at the FID input was measured to control the flow rate through that instrument. 2. Temperature Measurements All temperature measurements were made with bare junction thermocouples and microammeter type readouts (Assembly Products, Inc. "Simplytrol" Heters). .Iron-constantan and chromel- alumel couples were used for low temperatures. Platinum vs . platinum-l3% rhodium couples were used to measure the burner temperature. Temperature measurements were made for the following purposes: a. The air temperature was measured at the air flow meter to permit correction of flow rate for air density. Although the air flow was measured before the air was heated, there was significant heating of the air by the air blowers. b. The fuel temperature at the flow meter was measured to permit density correction. c. Air temperature was measured downstream of the air heater. d. Fuel temperature was measured downstream of the fuel/vaporizer and also downstream of the heated fuel line. e. The temperature of the fuel heater/vaporizer was measured by a thermocouple buried in the aluminum core. The thermocouple was connected to an automatic controller which kept the core temperature within a few degrees of a set point. f. The temperature in the burner was measured by a ceramic encased pt-pt 13% Rh thermocouple inserted through the walls of the burner. Early tests in Stand No.1 used a movable probe which could be inserted into the burner through the air intake pipe. It was found that this sometimes interfered with . the normal combustion process and was discontinued. Measurements of the gas temperature in the burner exhaust was substantially the same as the measurement made inside the burner. . Burner temperature measurements were made primarily to tell if the burner was lit and/or operating stably. Flame out could be detected IV-S image: ------- almost immediately, but incipient flame out was difficult to detect. Because the burner temperature probe was not shielded, it suffered from inaccuracy due to radiant heat loss. This generally resulted in a 200°F to 300°F difference between the burner temperature reading and the theoretical' flame temperature. g. The temperature of the burner exhaust gases was measured downstream of the vapor generator stack. h. The temperature of the fluid within the vapor generator loop was measured at several points including upstream and downstream of the "condenser". i. The temperature of the pump and line used for hydrocarbon sampling were monitored to be sure that these components were above 300°F. 3. Flow Measurements Flow measurements for the experimental program reported here were made with the variable area flow meters commonly referred to as"rotameters". All flow meters were calibrated throughout their range at ambient pressure and temperature, with appropriate corrections for ga~ density as necessary. The propane flow meters were also calibrated at elevated pressures to verify the density correction technique. Flow measurements included: a. Air flow to the burner, increased upstream of the air heater. Air temPerature at the flow meter was measured for density correction. : I b. Fuel flow into the burner, measured upstream of the fuel heater/vaporizer. Both high and low range rotarneters were used for propane flow. Pressure and temperature at the flow meter exit were measured for density correction. One wide range flow meter was sufficient for kerosene flow measurements on Stand 2. Kerosene flow on Stand 1 was measured with a low flow rotameter and one of the propane meters, recalibratedfor the liquid fuel. ' II c. Flow of working fluid through loop, measured upstream of the pump inlet. the liquid at the flowmeter was measured to correction. the vapor generator The temperature of allow density " I I, d. Flow of sample gas through the Flame Ionization Detector Hydrocarbon Analyzer. This was not measured directly, but was maintained at a constant value by heating any gas flow through the instrument to the temperature of the sample line, and by holding a fixed pressure ahead of the capillary line restriction at the instrument inlet. e. Flow of helilum through the thermal conductivity, detector gas chromatograpn. This was measured by using a "soap IV-6 image: ------- bubble flow meter". The helium flow rate was set to 15 cc/min each time the instrument was used. 4. Emissions Measurements Heasurements of the burner exhaust gas were made for oxides of nitrogen (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), unburned hydrocarbons (HC), carbon dioxide (C02) and oxygen (02). The instruments and techniques used are. described in detail in section V of this report. Briefly they were: a. Griess-Saltzman method for NOx. This is a wet chemistry method that requires drawing a sample into a container that contains a chemical solution which turns a reddish purple color in the presence of N02. b. Thermal conductivity detector gas chroma- tograph for CO and C02. This instrument permitted analysis of discrete samples of burner exhaust which were supplied by a sampling pump. c. Flame Ionization for hydrocarbons. This instrument permitted continuous analysis for total hydrocarbons. It required a heated sampling line and heated sample pump. The FID is part of a chromatograph which can be used for hydrocarbon . separations and analysis. d. Bailey Heat Prover for 02 and combustibles (CO and H2). This instrument draws a sample from the burner flow providing continuous analysis. This instrument was the principal means used for setting the burner fuel/air mixture ratio. It provides an oxygen reading which was in close agreement with the more accurate values obtained by volumetric analysis. 3. Volumetric gas analyzer for C02, 02, and co. This instrument, commonly referred to as an "Orsat" apparatus was in fact manuf~ctured by the Burrell Corporation. It provides an accurate analysis of a gas sample drawn into the instrument. Volumetric analysis is obtained for C02, 02, and CO to an accuracy of about 0.1%. . C. Test Procedures and Techniques Testing was conducted for the general purpose of investigating and documenting the emissions characteristics and the stability characteristics (rich and lean blowout limits), of the Paxve burner. Testing was conducted in burner test stands 1 and 2. Test stand 1 was used primarily for stability testing and burner emissions with propane. Stand 2 was utilized for the detailed investigation of the influence of the vapor generator system on burner emissions and for kerosene stability testing. 1. Burner Operation The general burner test procedure was to ignite the burner and bring it to the desired combination of air mass flow, IV-7 image: ------- air and fuel inlet temperature and fuel/air ratio. Ignition of the burner with propane was accomplished by setting a low airflow, turning on the igniter and bringing in ~he fuel so. as to. approach ignition from the lean ignition limit. Ignition in this case was always smooth and continuous. Once the burner was ignited, air flow and fuel flow were increased simultaneously to the desired. total mass flow and fuel/air ratio setting. In the case of kerosene combustion a burner warmup period was usually allowed during which the burner was ignited an~ operated with propane. Then after the burner and lines were hot the kerosene was brought in and propane flow reduced until kerosene combustion was self sustaining. The burner test condition was established by visual readout of the console pressure, temperature, and flow meters, and the Bailey Heat Prover. The latter instrument gives continuous reading of the percent oxygen and percent combustibles in the exhaust gas. The combustion data of Figure 11 shows the variation of the percent oxygen and combustibles with fuel/air ratio for operation with propane and octane. It should be noted that the combustibles reading on the Bailey is a combination of the CO and H2 content in the gas. Once a stablized operation test point is established readings are taken of all the operational instruments. Chromato- graph records are taken and identified on the strip chart. In the case of the 9000 instrument (FID), the continuous level of total hydrocarbons is identified with a run number. The recorder is then switched to the left channel of 8004 instrument to measure carbon monoxide and oxygen using the left hand column. The right channel and column are then used to measure carbon dioxide. Burner gas samples are collected in flasks for Greiss-Saltzman analysis of N02. Concurrently, a gas sample is drawn into the Burell volumetric analyzer and is. then analyzed for C02, oxygen, and CO. After all data has been recorded and spot checks made to establish consis- tency, a new operational test point is established by adjusting the air flow, or an inlet temperature. Testing of the burner was conducted over a wide range of fuel/air ratios, ranging from the lean limit to the rich limit of burner operation. At times these tests were destructive to the burner or portions of test apparatus. This was particularly. true at stoichiometric and rich burning operation. Stoichiometric combus- tion of propane or kerosene with air leads to combustion tempera- tures on the order of 35000F to 4000oF. 'Such temperatures are well in excess of the structural capabilities of any of the materials. used for the fabrication of the Paxve burner. Fortunately, the burner materials do not reach the theoretical flame temperature, and therefore the burner is capable of surviving periods of stoichiometric operation. The ceramic portions of the paxve burner can withstand temperatures on the order of 3300oF, but the metallic portions of the structure do not have these capabilities and hence destruction of various metallic sections such as inlet pipes or external supports sometimes occurred. IV-8 image: ------- When rich combustion was being investigated, there were in general two combustion processes going on. Combustion within the burner was taking place using the burner air supplied through the inlet pipe. This internal combustion during rich operation might involve combustion temperatures on the order of 25000F to 3000oF, well within the burner capabilities. Simultaneously, however, after-burning was taking place outside the burner where the burner exhaust mixed with ambient air. That external combustion process impinged directly on some portions of the test stand or inlet tubing. Protection of these elements was therefore necessary. Potential destruction of the test stand sometimes limited the capability for extensive stoichiometric or rich testing. Attempts were made early in the program to make measure- ments of the combustion air and burner temperatures by means of probes extending through the air inlet pipe. It was found that these probes sometime interfered with the operation of the burner causing flash back or flame holding on the probe. This was in general accompanied by rapid deterioration of the inlet pipe. Inlet pipe probing was. discontinued in order to avoid this type of problem. . During some tests near stoichiometric operating conditions, combustion within the burner inlet pipe would occur, particularly at low flows with high inlet temperatures. Data were gathered under these difficult conditions to the fullest extent possible. This type of phenomenon did, however, restrict the range of burner operating conditions we could conveniently explore. 2. Vapor Loop Operation For those tests in which measurements were made downstream of the working fluid vapor generator, it was necessary to start the working fluid system before igniting the burner. This avoided problems of overheating the fluid in the coils which could otherwise have taken place. Once the vapor loop system was circulating working fluid at an acceptable rate, the burner was ignited and the usual procedures previously described for burner operation and data measurement were followed. Start up of the vapor generating loop was initiated by pressurizing the low pressure reservoir to about 30 psi. This eliminated problems of pump cavitation during start up and operation of the system. The pump drive was then started and the loop brought up to an acceptable operating condition. Early in the program, a remotely actuated clutch between the engine and the working fluid pump was disengaged when starting the motor. The clutch was then engaged in order to drive the pump. It was found that this disengagement and re-engagement of the clutch was unnecessary and in later stages of the program the clutch was left permanently engaged. Operation of the vapor loop was generally uneventful unless the nitrogen gas bubble at the top of the high pressure IV-9 image: ------- i ' accumulator had been lost. When there was no gas bubble in the high pressure accumulator, the pump pulsations were fed to the pressure gauges resulting in physical damage to those gauges. All of the operating parameters of the vapor generator system were monitored including the working fluid flow rate and the liquid and burner exhaust inlet and exit temperatures. No funds were provided in the contract to investigate the performance of the vapor generator from an efficiency point of view and therefore this data has not been reduced. Exposure of the working fluid to excessively high temperatures in the presence of even small amounts of oxygen causes thermal degradation of the working fluid. The nitrogen utilized for the low pressure reservoir pressurization system and the high pressure accumulator contained small but nevertheless significant quantities of oxygen. Care was taken, therefore, to avoid excessive vapor generator tube wall temperatures. Vapor outlet temperatures as high as 600°F were occasionally permitted, but in general the vapor loop exit temperature was kept below 400°F. Since the purpose of the vapor loop was to quench reactions in the burner exhaust it was not felt necessary to permit higher working fluid temperatures. Operation of the burner in connection with the vapor generator loop was restricted to a fairly narrow range of burner operating conditions as a further step towards avoiding problems with the working fluid. The burner itself will. operate from an oxygen concentration near the lean limit of about 12% through stoichiometric to a qombustible concentration at the rich limit of over 20%. Unfortunately the operation of the burner at oxygen concentrations of less than about 6% to 8% yields gas temperatures which are too hot for safe operation of the vapor generator loop. The policy, therefore, was to operate the burner in connection with the vapor generator from its lean limit up to a maximum combustion temperature of about 2700°F. This corresponds with ambient inlet temperature to about 6% oxygen concentration. With an elevated inlet temperature (T air 400°F), the oxygen concentration in the burner exhaust was not allowed to . fall below 8%. I, Operation of the vapor generator in connection with the burner required special system shut down procedures. The burner was shut off by cutting the fuel flow with the air blower still operating, the blower was then continued in operation until the gas temperature level leaving the burner was below 500°F. Working fluid circulation was maintained during this time. This precaution during shutdown was necessary to avoid overheating the working fluid in the coils. I I: Instrumentation for monitoring the burner operating point, specifi~ally the Bailey Heat Prover and the volumetric gas analysis equipment, were set up to draw their ,gas samples from the exit to the burner, ahead of the vapor generator loop. This permitted rapid II IV-IO image: ------- response of the system also avoided questions with ambient air which improperly set up. to changes in burner input variables. It of inadvertent dilution of the burner exhaust occasionally arose when the system was The exit temperature of the gases from the vapor generator exhaust were monitored as well as the temperature of the gases in the burner. Vapor generator air exhaust temperature was frequently in the range of 200°F or less. During start up it was common to see water condensing on the vapor generator coils. This condition persisted until the. working fluid became hot enough to cause evaporation. It was found that the presence of water on the vapor generator coil and air intake tube surfaces influenced the oxides of nitrogen readings from the top of the vapor generator stack. This influence was duly noted during the course of the program. 3. Blowout Test Procedure I I Lean and rich blowout limits are defined as the demarcation between the burner's ability to burn or not burn due to a change in fuel or air flow. It is not actually possible to operate at the blowout limit. The blowout limits are found by showing that a burner will stay lit at a particular set of conditions (a specific fuel/air ratio) but not stay lit at another set of conditions (another fuel/air ration) not far removed from the first set of conditions. Further, it is not sufficient that the burner merely operate for a short period of time at a set of conditions, but is required that sustained (steady state) operation be evident so that an equilibrium condition exists within the burner. . Determining blowout conditions, then, requires that the burner operate for a sustained period of time while being observed to see whether the operation is steady or if the burner is going out. Determining blowout limits with propane or kerosene involves substantially the same operation, so that a description of one will characterize the other. The determination of lean limits is somewhat different than determining rich limits. Both methods will be described. The emission measurement equipment needed for the tests are (1) the Bailey Heat Prover, (2) the FID hydrocarbon detector, and (3) the volumetric gas analyzer. The gas chromatograph (thermal conductivity detector) may be used, but it was not essential for these tests. a. Lean Blowout Using Propane A burner is set up and ignited, as previously described in the burner operation procedure. The air flow rate is se~ at the desired value. The fuel flow rate is set to obtairi a reasonably hot burner (f/a ~ 0.04 to 0.05) to heat up the burner and system. After a period of warm up, the fuel flow rate is reduced substantially (f/a ~ 0.03). The continuous emissions measuring equipment (Bailey and FID) are continuously monitored to determine when steady state is reached. The IV-ll image: ------- thermocouple reading inside the burner is also helpful in this regard. It generally takes several minutes for most traces of burner variation to disappear. Steady state is characterized by a relatively unchanging reading on the aforementioned instruments (Bailey, FID and burner thermocouple). The most sensitive instrument for this purpose is usually the FID. It will detect small changes in burner operation near blowout well in advance of the other instruments. When a steady. state burning condition has been reached, the fuel flow rate is decreased in increasingly smaller increments with allowances made between each change for the burner to come to a steady state condition. As lean blowout is approached, it will be noticed that unburned.hydrocarbon output begins to increase as a result of incomplete burning in the burner. However, as long as the blowout limit is not exceeded the unburned hydrocarbon output will attain a steady value when steady state conditions exist. After the unburned hydrocarbon output first indicates that lean blowout is being approached, the Bailey Heat Prover begins to show an increase in oxygen content and a measurable reading of combustibles. This indicates an increase in hydrogen and carbon monoxide output due to inefficient combustion. The thermocouple for burner temperature starts to drop. When the Bailey first begins output, a volumetric analysis is taken (or the gas chromatograph may be used) of the exhaust stre~. to show a combustibles at each .fuel flow setting to determine the composition As fuel flow is gradually reduced, a point will be reached when the burner will eventually go out. This condition is charac- terized by a gradually accelerating increase in unburned hydro- carbon output, which never steadies out. When this condition is noted, a volumetric analysis is rapidly made. The fuel/air ratio previous to the blowout point is termed incipient blowout and' represents the last steady state burning condition on the rich side of lean blowout. The lean blowout condition is now straddled by two points, one on either side of the lean blowout limit. The air flow rate or inlet temperature is now changed and the process repeated until the lean blowout limit has been characterized as a function of the burner inlet condition. b. Rich Blowout Using Propane Rich blowout limits are somewhat more difficult to determine since burning will continue to occur outside the burner even though the blowout limit has been exceeded within the burner. The Bailey Heat Power is not used for these tests since the combustible output is beyond the range of the meter. Some of the combustibles produced have carbon chains longer than 2 which gives erroneous results on the Bailey and can coat the detector with carbon. The FID's use is also limited by the high unburned hydrocarbon output under these test conditions. IV-12 I. image: ------- Rich operation is. characterized by stable but incomplete combustion within the burner and a large flame outside the burner. combustion with insufficient air within the burner pro~uces large amounts of hydrogen, and carbon monoxide (see Figure 11). There is usually some hydrocarbon content to the rich exhaust stream in addition to the H2 and co. The products of incomplete combustion burn outside the burner as they mix with the ambient air, producing a large yellowish luminous flame. Detecting rich blowout limits requires some art. It involves (1) watching combustible temperature in the burner via the burner thermocouple, and (2) determining whether the burner responds to reignition at a leaner condition than a suspected rich blowout condition. The burner is set up similar to determining lean limits. When the system is hot the fuel is increased until rich burning occurs outside the burner as described above. The fuel flow rate is gradually increa~ed. At each fuel setting, a fuel/air ratio is determined by taking a volumetric analysis. Instead of increasing the fuel flow in a straightforward manner, after each fuel setting the fuel flow is first decreased to the previous setting then increased to another setting. If the burner has not gone out at a particular setting decreasing the fuel flow should show an increase in the burner temperature when the burner is leaned out. If the burner has gone out at a particular condition, leaning the burner should show no effect on the indicated burner temperature. Also if the igniter is initiated at the leaner condition the burner will reignite (as evidenced by the burner thermocouple output). The rich blowo~t limit is thus spanned by a condition where it is shown that the burner is still lit and a condition where it has gone out. Visual observations of burning in the burner and audible sounds of burner operation are also helpful for absolute assurance of blowout. D. Emission Data Collection and Data Reduction The procedures used to obtain and reduce emission data will be discussed here. Familiarity with Section V is helpful in understanding the operation of the equipment discussed. Reference will be made to Section V when a specific point must be made. Numerical determination of emission concentration is either in parts per million (ppm) or grams per kilogram (gm/Kg or mg/g). PPM data refers to the concentration of pollutants in the exhaust gas expressed as volume of pollutant per volume of total flow. This data is most useful in considering emissions from stationary sources. Gm/Kg data refers to grams of pollutant per kilogram of fuel. This data is the most significant for mobile emission sources. Emission data in gm/Kg is necessary to determine grams of emission per mile. IV-13 image: ------- 1. Oxides of Nitrogen a. Collection Procedure The oxides of nitrogen concentration was determined by the Greiss-Saltzman method which is explained in Section V and Appendix A. Data collection involves evacuating a flask and then drawing the gas to be analyzed into the evacuated flask. For the tests, a quartz tube, close coupled to the flask was inserted directly into the point being sampled; the stack and/or the burner exhaust. The flask is then sealed. When a sample is being taken during rich operation, the evacuated flask is first 1/2 filled with air by connecting it to a flask of equal size at atmospheric pressure. The sample is then drawn into the half empty flask. To analyze the gas in the flask for NOx, Saltzman reagent is added, the flask is resealed and shaken for I hour to ensure contact of the gas sample with solution. The solution is then poured into a cuvette and its optical density at 5500 Angstrom units is determined, using a colorimeter. Early in the program, the Saltzman solution was placed in the flasks before they were evacuated. The sample was then drawn and the flask resealed and shaken. This procedure produced identical results to the method previously described. . When a NOx sample after being shaken in the flask for 1 hour produces a very intense color which is known to be saturated, an additional amount ,of Saltzman solution is added to the flask and the shaking period is extended to provide additional dilution and produce a readable transmission value. b. Data Reduction, I, . Calibration of the absorbing solution, explained in Section V and Appendix A, produces calibration curves shown in Figures V3 and V4. The best fit through the experimental calibration data is a family of straight lines on semi-log paper. The data reduction has usually been done by hand using the curves. When the computer has been used to reduce the Saltzman data,. the following formula is used. In (C".R".) N02 = 5 (l+D) In(Rs) In (I/In) NOx = S(l+D) In image: ------- 10 = reading The data obtained by is ppm by volume. with pure Saltzman reagent the data reduction procedures outlined above 2. Hydrocarbons a. Collection Procedure Gas was pumped through a heated pump and sample line to a flame ionization detector used to detect total hydrocarbons. The sample gas passes directly through the detector without going through a packed column, as explained in Section V. b. Reference Gases The instrument was calibrated with zero air and span gas. The zero is adjusted while zero air is flowing through the instrument. "Zero air" is not truly free from hydrocarbons, although every effort is made by the company which distributes the gas to achieve this result. The degree of impurity is evident to some extent when the flow rate through the instrument is changed. Very pure "zero air" shows almost no response on the FID to a change in flow rate. Zero gases are generally guaranteed to have less than 0.5 ppm of methane which is equivalent to 0.08 ppm of hexane. It is conceivable that a really pure gas flowing through the FID will read less than zero. During the course of the tests conducted here, zero or slightly negative values were obtained frequently for hydrocarbon emissions. The zero to the instrument was then cQecked for drift by immediately running a "zero air" sample before the next test point. \Vhenever drift occurred, an appropriate correction was made in the data. There were, neverthe- less, a number of points which gave zeros that could not be distinguished from the "zero air" setting and this "zero air" was usually pure. c. Sensitivity and. Data Reduction The sensitivity is adjusted while the span gas is flowing through the instrument. The current practice is to adjust the instrument flow rates so that a full scale reading at the most sensitive position corresponds to 10 ppm of hydrocarbon expressed as hexane. The span gas used normally contains about 200 - 250 ppm hexane equivalent. With this adjustment, the scale factor for the FID becomes S(FID) = 0.1 ppm/division. The response of the FID is sensitive to the amount of oxygen present in the gas stream. This is called the oxygen synergism effect. With the FID used by Paxve, oxygen decreases the sensitivity of the instrument to the propane-butane mixture used for span gas. Figure 12 shows the reduction in sensitivity of the FID. The attenuation factor is fitted very closely by Att = 1 - 0.32 tanh (&) IV-IS image: ------- where 02 = oxygen concentration in percent Final data reducton was accomplished by taking into account the presence of oxygen in the sampled mixture. This problem is discussed further iri Section V. 3. Carbon Monoxide and Carbon Dioxide a. Collection Procedure Carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide were measured by a gas chromatograph using a thermal conductivity detector, as explained in Section V. Carbon dioxide was measured. by volumetric analysis, also described in Section V. Since the use of the volumetric analysis is straightforward and was adequately covered in Section V it will not be discussed here. Gas samples were pumped from the burner exhaust to a common manifold and valved from the manifold to each side of the chromatograph. The sample pump supplies a maximum pressure of 14 psig. During burner operation, sample gas is continuously being pumped from the burner through the sample manifold, through the gas sample valve, through the sample loop (see Section V, Fig. 6a) a~d is finally vented to atmosphere. During sampling the gas sample valve 1S switched so that the sample loop is now ported on one side to the carrier gas and on the other side to the column inlet. The carrier gas now flows through the sample loop, pushing the gas sample into the instrument. . I ' Due to the common manifolding in the instrument to the column inlets for carrier gas, it is necessary that the sample gas not enter the instrument at a higher pressure than the carrier gas pressure. If the pressure in the sample loop is much higher than ambient, when the gas sample value is switched some of the sample gas can enter the instrument and travel to the wrong column inlet (see Figure V-6a). This condition will give erroneous results. To eliminate this condition the valve on the sample manifold leading to the sample valve is first closed, so that the gas in the sample loop returns to atmospheric pressure. Then the sample valve is switched. b. Reference Gases and Data Reduction I' I, I" I Calibrations and zero conditions are obtained similar to those obtained when detecting hydrocarbons. No correction must be applied to the data since both sides of the instrument are linear within the range of interest. . 4. Conversion of Volumetric Data to Gravimetric Data (ppm to gm!Kg) It is desirable particularly in the case of pollutants to express the emission levels in terms of the grams of pollutant per Kg of fuel. In order to do this we must account IV-16 image: ------- for the difference between the molecular weight of the pollutant and the molecular weight of the exhaust gas. We must also correct for the water vapor which is formed during the combustion process but then condenses in the sampling line. before the gas sample is anal- yzed. An analysis of this problem has been conducted. The result can be expressed as: Wp = K image: ------- II Ii I, I I ! &MISSIOlfS SAMPLING IHSTHUMENTATION CO. COf.0;2. HC BURNiR - - - - - - - - -1- - - - OXWI!:S Of' NITROGiN AlfALYSIS BURN&R TiST STAlfJJ 1 CONSOlE AIR SYSTEM FIGURE J FUEL SYSTEM JO'IGURE S . IGNITJ2!uiP? IIISTRUMDTATIO, ;t~" jo'IGURi5 ~;~. S - - - BLOCKHOUSJi; r-- I , I I I I .A.. - VAPOR Gt-;NI!:RATOH BURNI!:H BURN~ TI!:S'f STANu 2 CONSOU!: AIR SYSTr;f'1 jo'IGURE f, ji'UEL SYST!!:'" FIGURI!: 6 IGNITION SY3T!!:M jo'IGURI!: 6 INSTRU~TATION SYSTI!:I'I jo'IGUfU!;S 2,4,6 VAPOR. G~gRATOR ~jYST~h Jo'lC~URI!:.') ?, R FIGURi IV - 1 BURNER EVALUATION FACILITD:S image: ------- ~ A. Console for Burner and Component Test Facility (Test Stand Two) B. Console for Subscale Burn.r Test Facility' (Test Stand One) TEST FACILITIES Figure IV 2 image: ------- I I' Vapor Generator (Stack) Burner a. Burner/Vapor Generator Installation In Stand No 2 , I ( .-. 0 \"=:1 I "'i .. .~ , b. Burner and Vapor Generator System Assembled in Blockhouse Burner Test Stand No.2 BURNER TEST FACILITIES Figure IV - :3 image: ------- A. Overall View of Facility B. View of Emission's Sampling and Analysis Equipment TEST FACILITY FOR GAS EMISSIONS ANALYSIS FilUN IV-It image: ------- [ I I. I' PURGE 220 V FLOW METER AIR FLOW METER I: AIR BLOWERS TEST STAND 1 BURNER SCHEMATIC I [ FUEL HEATER SECONDARY FUEL INJECTOR J f~s SAf.fPLE ~ROBE ~ IGNITER T,. twJ c . BURNER FIGURE IV-S a image: ------- . ~N LINE. \-\E."'iE...iI. 7\1 "Ic FUE..L NOZL. Lt:.. N2 WO~\I..\NG fLUIt> OU\' n-- G~';) 5~""PL£.. . P~O~E. BU~Ne..\\ ~ FLOW ME.. IE." \(:)N\\ER AIR BLOWERS BURN E.R \'t..S\ oS, "Nt:> 2. Schematic Diagram of Fuel & Air Systems Figure IV- 6 image: ------- A. Assembled and Insulated Fuel Heater - Vaporizer B. Disassembled Fuel Heater Vaporizer After Testing FUEL HEATER - VAPORIZER BURNER FUEL SYSTEM Figure IV -7 image: ------- LIQUID FUEL IN t ~ rLOW PASSAGE INNER STEEL SHELL ELECTRICAL rUEL VA?ORIZER FIG. IV 8 image: ------- "':I .... .... ~~ <0;1 c;.\.." ~ "'...... , 0 '" (.0 ~DE!\&E" C. 0 \\.. p w..."'~.. FLOW ML~U\ , F\ L -tE.." .y,~ \.,\KIE \.0 "" ''''~!I6U''E "c.c.uMV\.,A.'T0'" M2, "2. p DGL:~~O:N::: 0\\\ VE. &URME.R "E.~" 5i~"~t) 2- 5C.H~t'1....\\C. D\""~"M'\ Of: VAPO,," c.i..NE.~~O" !::.V5"Te..M image: ------- "'\~ \~ FUE.L. \~ .]) ~', ~ 6 . ~' . .. ~, . . " ~ . . ' ) ~ ~ . , ~ ~,'. ~ #> ". . '6 . "'. .p ~. .. I> . ~. ~ .1> ~ . ... .1> I> 1>. . . '1> ~ c.' .oS ~. .~ .,. ~. .~ ";U'\.'-/ ,..\~ . ~ 1>', ""\"'iU~~ \~ '/>. 6". H />. 2..62.50.D. 2.000 1.0. .3.000 \.D, \.500 O,D, I. qo,o 0, D. ?v~",a,"'" 'i.'I."""''.J!::,\ OI.J'\ P"'~'i~' t!>U"'~~" \~N.\~~'" I I I BURNER VAPOR GENERATOR ASSEMBLY FIGURE IV-10 image: ------- I I I FUE.L - A\R - -- oc. T""'~ - P"OP"~£. COMBU5TION O,..",p.... "000 20 I I I , , I \ 'NO I I I TO,. A.\..*' C.OM~U&"It>LL~ I 1'000 115 i w Do 1 tj i It. . ! t a= ~ ~ ~. ~ o .. u ~ 2000 en ~10 t:! ! ~ < i w I, 1000 I I / I I ~2. I / / ..,. 1!IfIo,.\ \"L'( "'..""'~ ",,0""'" / "L""'\)!t'. 0.. . c.O+~.1L ~'L ""'& "TO",,\. c:.O"'~U~,\~\.~~ ,/ 1\ I ' , I , I I 1 I I ) \ , , "- .... ..... '- ~ S7rJleN "oIfPAO'tfN4o.DUo ~ !S7'OiC,f( ,'0" "erA'" aD'" o 0.02 0.0" 0.06 ,0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 FUEL AIR RATIO~f/a Ref.renc.. CoIIbuation of Hydl"Ocarbon.-- 'Prop.rty Tabl.. PurdU8 Unlv8l'81ty, Eng. Ext. 8.2:'1122, Hay 61i Fi~ure IV-ll image: ------- OXYGEN SYNERGISM ~FFE'T ON THE FLAME IONIZATION DETECTOR OXYGEN CONCENTRATION IN THE GAS STREAM 02 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 PERCENT 25.00 0.10 I I I I I 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 OXYGEN CONCENT~ATION IN THE GAS STREAM 02 PERCENT 1.0 I \ ! . 0.9 Att = 1-0.32 tanh(~~~ 0.8 . 0.7 . 0.6 :II; 0 H ~ 0.5 ;j ~ ~ ~ 0.3 .., f .... < . .... '» image: ------- '100 ~OO 90 - . :~,;.::: "1 90 80 80 70 , . 70 ,- 60 60 50 50 110 1i0 30 30 20 20 -2 2f' ~ 0 ti -2 10 < 10 9 10. 2f' t!J 9' 8 z 8 . 7 .... D: t'I 7 0 .... ... 6 ...:I () ;! 6 ~ 5 D: 0 5 t!J Z Z .... II t'I Ii .... ...:I ! 3 3 0 z 2 2 1 0.01 0.02 0.2 1 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.011 0.06 0.08 0.1 FUEL AIR RATIO, fla o .2 0.03 0.011 0.06 0.08 0.1 FUEL AIR RATIO, f/- EMISSIONS NORMALIZING FACTORS FOR PROPANE-AIR EMISSIONS NORMALIZING FACTORS FOR OCTANE-AIR ii'~ IV-13 ~'1,!"re iV-14 image: ------- SUBS YSTEM Air supply system Propane supply system Kerosene supply syat.e. Fuel thermal conditioning TAh...;. ... BlJlU(~R STAND NO.1 TABULATION C# SUBSYSTEK3 AND CONTROlB PRl~ MOVKR CONTROL (2) Klectrle&lly driven centrifugal blowem in parallel Self pressurized propane tank and electrical heater 1. Kerosene tank 2, Nitrogen supply pressure cylinder I, Primary heater- electric immersion heating element 2, Secondary heater exte.- nal re8istance heated tubing 1. On-off switch to variac 2, Indicator Lamp 3. Variac-variable voltage to air blower motors 1, Propane tank pressure regulator 2, Re80te solenoid valve on-off switch 3, IndlMtor la.p 4, Flow control needle valve 1, N2 pressure regulator 2, Remote solenoid valve on-off swi tch 3, Indicator lamp 4, ~low control needle valve 5, Kerosene tank N2 pressuriza- tion valve 6, Kerosene tank N2 pressure vent valve 1, hi mary heater a, On-off switch b. Ind tca tor Lamp c, Temperature adjusting variac 2. Secondary heater a, On-off switch t-, Ind1catm.' le.lII}) , C, Temperature adjlL''It1ner variac VISUAL MEASUREMENTS 1. ~lowmeter 0-250 pph 2. Jo'lowmeter inlet tempera- ture -750 to +225010' 3. Air temperature to burner 0 to 1000oji' 1, Propane Regulated pressure 0-6 psig 2, Propane flowmeter 0-8 pph J, Propane pressure at injector O-JO psig I, Kerosene tank regulator pressure 0-60 psig,. 2, Kerosene flowmeter 0-8 pph I, Temperature at primary heater outlet O-lOOOo~ 2, Temperature at secondary heater outlet O-lOOOoF ':'ah1e 1'/-1 image: ------- SUBS!S'!D Air t.b8nal COld 1 tlaa1q ~ 1p1t8r ~ T8ble 1 «aR) .' sum 10.. l. T~ a1 SU8S!S'!.IIE AID ~ (cm8T) n:rJ8 .... 8lectrl.c:al 1.-..'8181 ...U~ 81_" (~) 111 1188 lI1&f1 YOlt818 tallllfGr88r 20 n/J/18, h81/an/1tJdWr 8",.u. c:arlWJL 1. 1IIa'-...-aff lllfitch 2. 1IIa~ 1JIi1c8tor Lup J. ~ I .&tIme caetrol ~ I, ~ 881teb 2. IlIIIt-t8r la8p 1. ~ 8f1ta Z. '''I-~),up VISUAL ~~ I, Air UIIpI'Z8'tun at 1D.l8't to f1.oIr8t.er -75 to 22f'r 2, Air t.aapnoature at 1D.le't to bun8r 0 to lQOC)Ct' 1, Ca8b8t1aa d8aI8r ~, o-~ Table IV-l-a image: ------- TABLE 2 BURNER STAND NO.2 TABULATION OF SUBSYSTEKS AND CONTROLS SUBSYSTEM PRIME MOVER CONTRO~' 1, On-off switch to variac 2, Indicator lamp 3, Variac-variable voltage to air blower motors VISUAL Mli:ASUftl!;M!!:NT~; Air supply system 2. Electrically driven centrifugal blowers in pa.re.l.lel I, Flow meter 0-250 ~PH 2. Flow meter inlet temp- erature 0-)000 10' Propane Self pressurized 1, Propane tank I, Propane regula.ted supply propane tank and pressure regu- pressure 0-100 PSIG electrical heater lator 2, Propane flow meter 2, Remote solenoid 0-8 PPH valve on-off switch 3. Indicator lamp 4. Flow control needle valve Kerosene 1. Kerosene tank 1. N~ pressure re- 1. Kerosene tank regulator supply 2. Nitrogen supply gulator pressure 0-200 PSIG 8ystea press\U'imed 2. Remote solenoid 2. Kerosene flow meter cylinder valve on-off 0-8 PPH switch J. Indicator lamp 4, Flow control needle valve 5, Kerosene tank N2 pressuriz&"'. tion valve 6. Kerosene tank N2 pressure vent valve Air thana], Air heater unit. 1. Remote power 1. Temperature at heater concii tioning 220 Y I AD-20 AMP contactor outlet 0-5000 Io' I-.ersion heating 2. Variac (220 v/~ 2AMP variable voltage control to heater J. Indica tor la.p . Fuel ther8l 1. Fuel vaporizer unit la Power switch and 1. Surface temperature conditioning (Paxve isother.I rellOte contactor Paxve vaporizer heater unit b Indicator lamp heating unit O-IOOOoF 220 v/AC 40 AMP c Wheelco pyro-- 2. Fuel temperature at ~ Line heater unit tric temperature burner inlet O-IOOOoF (paxve resistance controller heating flow element 2a Multiple col1 . current transfor- mer 7.5 v/AC 70AMP b On-off power switch c Indicator lamp d Variac voltage con- trol to trans- former 0-12 v/~ Table IV-2 image: ------- SUBSYSTEM BUftler 1~1ter Burner Vapor ~n.rator syat.. I II Table 2 (cont) BURNER STAND NO.2 TABULATION Ct' SUBSYSTEt6:: AND CONTROLS (CONTINUE!)) PRIME II)VER CONTROL High vol taR" transforJl\8r 1. Power sd tch 20 KY/JO -. 2; Ind1cator lamp Fuel, a1r, 19n1 ter IIUb8ystelll8 1. Work1ng fluid pump 2. Pu8p driven 34 HP VW air cooled engine J. Fuel conden.er 4. H,traulic surse suppressors a. Accaulator pap inlet b. Resel'Yoir puap outlet 5. Vapor 88nerator heat exch&n~ Fuel, air, igniter subeystems Valve pump bypass Valve drain or vent upper Valve drain lower Filter total flow working fluid 2a IGN switch and lamp b Cranking switch and lamp c ~ectrica1 control to throttle (incr.- de~r.) with lamp d Pn8U8tic valve to engage clutch .8 PneU8tic valve to disengage clutch Valve nitrogen 8upply 1. to reservoir Valve reservoir pres- 2. sure vent Valve res8l'Yoir isola- tion Valve surge chaMber isolation Valve flow liaiting VISUAL Hl!:AS UR1!;Ml!;NTS 1. Combustion chamber temperature 0-30000~ 2. 1!:xhaust gas (stack) . temperature 0-14000ji' 1. Pump outlet pressure ~ side 0-3000 PSIG 2. Pump bypass pressure 0-400 PSIG (pump side of valve) J. Working fluid flow meter 0-3.5 GPM 1. Condenser inlet preS8ure o - ')000 PSIG 2. Condenser outlet pre88ure -15 + 60 PSIG 3. Condenser outlet temp. 00 - 3000 jo' Reservoir pressure -15 + 60 PSIG Surge chaaber pressur. o - ')000 1. Vapor generator inlet pressure . 2.. Vapor generator outlet pressure 0-200 PSIG 3. Vapor generator inlet temperature O-')OO~ 4. Vapor generator outlet temperature O-lOOOoF Table IV-2 image: ------- EMISSIONS MEASURING TECHNIQUES V. Description and Operation of Instruments Used During the testing phase of this contract, emission measurements were made on the burner to determine: (1) the unburned hydrocarbons, (2) the oxides of nitrogen, (3) the carbon monoxide, (4) the carbon dioxide, and (5) the oxygen content of the burner exhaust. The instruments used to determine these emissions are as follows: A. 1. Bailey Heat Prover detected oxygen (02) and combus- tibles (a combination of CO and H2). 2. Volumetric gas absorption analysis detected oxygen (02)' carbon dioxide (C02), and on some occasions carbon monoxide (CO) . 3. Griess-Saltzman method detected oxides of'nitrogen (NO and N02) as equivalent nitrogen dioxide (N02). 4. Gas Chromatography using a thermal conductivity detector with thermistor elements detected oxygen (02)' carbon dioxide (C02) and carbon monoxide (CO). 5. hydrocarbons. A flame ionization detector detected total unburned The description, operation, and use of these instruments will be discussed in this section along with the need and use of auxiliary equipment and calibration techniques. 1. Bailey Heat Prover The Bailey Heat Prover (Figure 1) is a portable gas analysis instrument requiring only a source of 105-130 volt ac, 50-60 cycle power. It is otherwise self cont~ined. It is a continuous reading device which measures oxygen and combustibles. The instrument is 8.25" deep, 11" wide and 11.25" tall when closed and 16.5" tall when open and operating. During operation the instrument must be level, in an area free from drafts and sudden temperature changes, and provided with an auxiliary filter to eliminate water and particulate matter which could harm the instrument. . The instrument has two operating ranges for both the oxygen and combustibles side: 4% and 20%. t~en properly calibrated, the instrument should be accurate to within +0.5% of the oxygen or combustibles content when on the 20% range-and +0.1% when on the 4% range. These accuracies should not be expected in the upper or lower 10% of either range. Gas analysis is performed within the instrument as follows (see Figure I-b): A rotary pump having multiple pumping image: ------- chambers draws in air and sample gas at a rate of approximately 100 in3/min. A large portion of the sample gas is discharged to atmosphere through a blowoff port. Hydrogen is generated in a hydrogen cell by the electrolysis of a 10% sodium hydroxide" solution. Hydrogen from the cell passes through the valve block where it is mixed with a portion of the sample gas and then passes to the oxygen analysis cell. Another portion of the sample gas is mixed with air in the pump and then flows to the combustibles analysis cell. Analysis in each cell is done having the gas mixture pass over a noble-metal catalyst which is one leg of a Wheatstone bridge circuit. The reaction which occurs on the catalyst causes the temperature to change which in turn unbalances the bridge circuit. The output of each bridge is proportional to the heat released on the catalyst and is read out on meters in terms of oxygen and combustibles. When properly calibrated, the instrument measures combustibles directly only when measuring one part hydrogen to two parts carbon monoxide in nitrogen. Other combustible mixtures may be determined using the correction curves provided by Bailey. Large quantities of hydrocarbons with carbon chains longer than C2 do not give accurate readings and will deposit carbon on the detector which requires a few minutes of lean operation to burn off and return the instrument to accurate operation. During operation, the instrument is plugged into the appropriate power, the hydrogen generator checked for liquid level and tightness, the sample jar checked for air tightness, and the filter checked for cleanliness and dryness. The instrument is turned on approximately 30 minutes ahead of analysis by turning the center lever to "check zeros" to- allow for warm-up and to fill the appropriate manifolds with hydrogen. Before making a test each meter is zeroed and the center lever turned to "check cell" to determine if the instrument is . reacting properly. At "check cell" the oxygen meter should swing past the red portion of the meter and then fall back into the red space. Correct operation is achieved with and the cell adjuster. After the instrument is operating correctly the center lever is turned to read the desired analysis position. . II During operation, care should be taken to prevent the " meters from remaining in a "pegged" full scale position since this may overheat and burn out the detectors. Extended continuous operation should be avoided due to heat build up in some components. 2. Volumetric Gas Analysis I [ I The volumetric gas analysis apparatus shown in Figure 2 is a cabinet model manufactured by Burrell for flue gas analysis. The cabinet measures 10.5" wide, 5.75" deep, by 21.25" high. It is completely portable and self-contained. This model is set up to detect and absorb, in the following sequence, carbon dioxide (C02) in the contact pipette, oxygen (02) in the first V-2 image: ------- bubbler pipette, and carbon monoxide (CO) in the second bubbler pipette. The liquids contained in each pipette are specifically compounded to completely absorb only the gas for which ,it was designed, i.e. oxygen, carbon dioxide, or carbon monoxide. They all have low vapor pressures, form stable compounds with the absorbed gas, and do not outgas other gases. Operation of this instrument is straight fo~~ard. It requires some manual dexterity and only a little practice to become proficient with its use. It is necessary to run the analysis in the proper sequence since the oxygen absorber slowly removes carbon dioxide and the carbon monoxide absorber slowly absorbs oxygen. The flushing manifold is provided in the event any of the solution should enter the manifold. Flushing is achieved by turning the stopcocks to a through position on the manifold and flushing it with a %5 sulfuric acid solution. The stopcocks should be periodically cleaned and greased to prevent gas flowby through dry or solid build up areas which may develop on the sealing surfaces. 3. Griess-Saltzman !1ethod The Griess-Saltzman method is a wet chemistry technique for detecting the oxides of nitrogen. Paxve followed the prepartion and analytical procedures, described in Appendix A which are recommended by the Air Pollution Control District, County of Los Angeles. The gas sample collection procedure was somewhat modified as directed by Truesdail Laboratories and will be described in this section. The essential equipment necessary for this method is listed below: l. 2. 3. 4. 5. Spectrophotometer (used as a colorimeter) Vacuum pump Wrist Action Shaker Analytical balance Glassware a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. Brown ground glass bottles (500 and 250 ml) 1000 ml graduated cylinder 100 ml graduated cylinder 1 liter volumetric flask 50 ml volumetric flask 25 ml volumetric flasks (4 or 5) 10 ml volumetric pipettes 10 ml measuring pipettes 1 ml measuring pipette cuvettes for spectrophotometer collection bottles (1) 1000 - ml (2) 300 - ml (3) 100 - ml j. k. V-3 image: ------- 6. Chemicals a. N - (I-naphthyl) ethylenediamine chloride . b. Sulfanilic Acid c.. Glacial acetic acid d. Sodium nitrite Tubing for coilection bottles Screw clamps for collection bottles di!:tydro- 7. 8. , I The sample flasks used are ordinary round bottom flasks with the neck tapered and attached to a glass tube over which a tygon tube and screw clamp may be attached. Gas sampling procedure for NOx varied somewhat during the test program. A discussion of the problems of NOx measurement is presented in Section V B below. . The final procedure adopted is as follows: A short L shaped length of quartz tube is inserted into the flask's tygon tube and then the quartz tube in inserted into an appropriat~ location of the burner. The gas sample is obtained by opening the screw clamp and allowing the gas to enter the evacuated flask. The screw clamp is then retightened and the quartz tube removed. When the analysis is to be made, an appropriate amount of Saltzman reagent is added to the flask and the flask is shaken for an hour to absorb the gas and. develop the color in the dye. After an hour the now colored absorbing reagent is poured into a cuvette and read on the spectrophotometer at a wavelength of 550 m~. The spectrophotometer instrument is first spanned by setting 100% transmission with a . cuvette of distilled water. The oxides of nitrogen is read directly from either Figure 3 or 4 by entering the appropriate curve (volume of flask and volume of absorbing reagent used) at the transmission read. If it is found that the colored absorbing reagent is too dark to get an accurate reading on the spectro- photometer (transmission below 10%) and the reagent is not color saturated, then it may be diluted with distilled water and then read. The oxides of nitrogen concentration resulting from this light transmission reading must be multiplied by a suitable factor to correct for the dilution. I, I I 4. Gas Chromatograph Using a Thermal Conductivity Detector a. The Instruments I, I, Carbon dioxide and carbon monxide were separated and detected by using a gas chromatograph using a thermal conductivity detector. This instrument is manufactured by Carle Instruments and is designated as Model 8004, Figure 5. It measures 18.5" deep by 13" wide by 4.75" high with the lid on and ~6" deep by 13" wide by 6.5" high wi th the lid removed and with a thermometer installed in the column oven block. Power requirements are 115 volts ac, 60 H. For maximum stability the line voltage to the instrument should fie steady, between 100 volts and 125 volts, and not subject to fluctuation. If the voltage exceeds 125 volts, a regulating transformer should be used. In use, the instrument requires, in addition to power, a carrier gas for sweeping the gas V-4 I, image: ------- sample through the columns. Helium is normally used as the carrier gas due to the large difference between its thermal conductivity and that of most other gases or liquid vapors. Any cylinder of convenient size having a regulator capable of delivering gas at a pressure between 0 and 60 psig is suitable. The Model 8004 Gas Chromatograph is a dual column, dual inlet instrument. There are septum covered inlets which allow samples to be deposited directly at the head of each chromatographic column. There are also two sample loops which permit a 2 ml gas sample to be injected into each column by turning a valve. The left column is a 6 foot long molecular sieve column which is used to separate 02' N2, and CO. The right column is a 3 foot long silica gel column which is used to separate carbon dioxide. Under optimum operating conditions of column temperature and carrier gas flow rate, this instrument is capable of resolving 5 parts per million of C02. To obtain the optimum separation, it is necessary to systematically vary the operating conditions (column temperature and carrier gas flow rate) and examine the output signal from the instrument. The columns are packed 1/8" stainless steel tubes mounted in contact on either side 'of an aluminum heater plate which serves as the column oven and is designed to minimize thermal gradients. The column oven temperature is adjustable up to 200°C. It is heated independently of the detector oven. The detector oven is maintained at a fixed elevated temperature by a constant voltage sU9ply. The inlet block temperature is controlled by the column temperature adjustment but is maintained a few degrees above the column temperature. The detector is a matched pair of glass coated thermistors having 100 K impedance that serve as two legs of a Wheatstone bridge circuit. The thermistors are mounted in 100~ liter chambers to maintain high resolution and response, in keeping with the small diameter, low-loaded columns. (Figure 6a). "- The output from t.he instrument is usually fed to a pen recorder, in this cas.e a Westronics Hodel SSE recorder having 6" wide chart paper traveling at one inch per minute. The response time is 0.5 seconds full scale. 0.1% full scale resolution is provided. Helium carrier gas enters the instrument through a Nupro metering valve, which is used for fine flow adjustments, and then flows into the heated inlet block. The column inlets (see Figure 6a) are designed so that the carrier gases fl~sh th~ a~nul~~ spate surrounding the column head eliminating unswept dead spaces. The helium then flows through the gas sampling valve, and then flows through the packed column, through the detector, and then exhausts through 1/8" tubes on either side of the instrument name- plate. Two position, six port sample valves are located ahead of each column. T~ey are designed wi~h minimum va~ve body volume and .have an optically flat ported stainless steel fixed body that V-5 image: ------- . s-eals against a rotating Teflon coated body. The nects to the chromatograph and the sample loop by stainless steel tubes. . . " fixed body con- means of 1/16" When the valve is in the "load" position (Figure 6c): a. Gas to be analyzed flows into the valve from the sample pump and is ported through a 2 ml sample loop. The exit flow from the sample loop returns to another valve port and is vented to the atmosphere. b. Helium flows into the valve from a regulated source and is ported into the inlet to the column. It passes through the column and then to the detector. After flowing through the detector, the helium carrier gas is vented to the atmosphere. When the sample valve is switched to the "inject" position (Figure 6d): a. The gas from the sample pump flows into the valve and is immediately vented to the atmosphere. There is thus no interruption in sample gas flow through the sampling pump. . b. Helium flows into the valve and is ported into the sample loop. The return from the sample loop is ported to the inlet to the column. The sample of gas which was trapped in the sample loop is thus swept into the column by the helium flow. Flow through the column is not interrupted, but the 2 ml plug of gas to be anlayzed is carried in a "sandwich" of helium into the column inlet. b. Principle of Operation. I : Separation of gases in a chromatograph column is a result of the distribution of the gas between two phases. One of these phases is a stationary bed of large surface area (the packed column) "and the other phase is a gas (carrier gas) which percolates through the bed. Gas-solid chromatography, the technique employed here, involves a solid column packing which separates the gaseous constituents based on their differential absorption on the column packing. Common packings are silica gel, molecular sieve, and charcoal. As gases pass through the column the sample gas mixture is partitioned between the carrier gas and the solid stationary phase. The solid phase selectivity retards the sample components according to their distribution coefficient until they form separate bands in the carrier gas. These component bands leave the column in the gas stream and produce an output signal from the detector based on each components thermal conductivity. The fluctuation in" the output signal produces a series of peaks on the recorder paper according to component bands of gases leaving the column. The record of the output signal is termed a chromatogram, and the time from the start of the analysis to the time any gas component is eluted is called the retention time. The area under each peak on the chromatogram is proportional to the ~oncentration V-6 image: ------- of the corresponding gas in the sample mixture. The area may be determined by any number of methods. The peak height gives a good indication of the area when the peak is symmetrical, tall, and thin and produces good results when the instrument has been 'calibrated in terms of peak height. The majority of chromatographers use peak height methods in preference to any other integration technique (Reference 1) even though it is not the most basic method. To maximize the peak height for a particular gaseous component, a gas mixture having the component in the concentration desired is run through the instrument while the column temperature and carrier gas flow rate is systematically varied. The carrier gas flow rate is accurately determined by attaching a soap bubble flow meter to the tube leading from the detector. The meter consists of a vertical tube with etched marks 10 ml apart and a reservoir of soap at the bottom. The carrier gas is bubbled through the soap and the flow rate of the gas is measured by timing the passage of the bubble between the two marks. Figure 7 shows the results of such an optimization procedure. From this figure the instrument was operated with a column temperature of 100°C and a carrier gas flow rate of 15 cc/minute. c. Operating Procedure Emissions measurements procedures with the thermal conductivity gas chromatograph for carbon dioxide and for carbon monoxide are substantially the same. To put the instrument into operation, the Helium carrier gas flow is first started to prevent oxidization of the column material. The electrical power,to the instrument is then turned on and the column oven temperature control adjusted to obtain 100°C. The instrument is allowed to warm up for at least one half hour before further adjustments are made. The instrument is operated at 100°C because, when combined with an appropriate carrier gas flow this produces an optimum carbon monoxide separation and peak height. A thermocouple is fitted into the column head to monitor its temperature. After the instrument is up to temperature, the chromatograph attenuation switch is put on "test" and the recorder is zeroed. The attenuation switch is then put on "1" and the recorder is zeroed by adjusting the coarse and fine zero adjustment potentiometers on the instrument body. The instrument is now ready for use. During use, samples are pumped to a common ,manifold and are valved from the manifold to each side of the chromatograph. The sample pump supplies a maximum pressure of 14 psig. During burner operation, sample gas is continuous ly being pumped from the burne'r through the sample manifold, through the gas sample valves, through the chromatograph sample loops. In order to take a reading, the sample flow from the manifold is shut off, and the gas in the sample loop of the chromatograph is allowed to blow down to atmospheric pressure. V-7 image: ------- The gas sample valve then is switched so that sample loop is ported on one side to the carrier gas and on the other side to the column inlets. The carrier gas now flows through the sample loop, pushing the gas sample into the instrumenL The blow down of pressure in the sample loop is required in part by the design of the dual column chromatograph. Due to the common manifolding in the instrument column inlets for carrier gas, it is necessary that the sample gas not enter the instrument at a higher pressure.than the carrier gas pressure. If the pressure in the sample loop is higher than the carrier gas pressure when the gas sample valve is switched, some of the sample gas will blow back through the carrier gas line to the wrong column inlet (see Figure V6a). This condition gives erroneous results. To eliminate this condition the valve on the manifold leading to the sample valve is . first closed, so that the gas in the sample loop returns to atmospheric pressure. Then the sample valve is switched. 5. Hydrocarbon Analysis Using a Flame Ionization Detector a. The Instrument Total hydrocarbon emissions were determined using a flame ionization detector. The instrument used for this purpose was a gas chromatograph manufactured by Carle Instruments designated the tiodel 9000. The instrument measures 9" high by 19.875" deep by 16" wide with the lid on, and 6.5" high by 18.75" deep by 16" wide with the lid removed and the instrument in use. PbWer requirements are similar. to those of the thermal conductivity gas chromatograph. In addition, however, two polarizing batteries, each 300 volts must be used. These need to be replaced approximately once a year. This chromatograph is normally used as a dual flame, dual column FID gas chromatograph instrument with the dual-inlets extending into the columns. The columns are heated by a central, alumimun plate, sandwich-type heater designed to minimize gradients in the column. The column temperature can be varied between ambient and 200°C. The detector oven is heated separately by a small cartridge heater maintained a few degrees above the column temperature by a common variable transformer setting. The instrument used by Paxve used only one column. It is set up to measure total hydrocarbons in the left hand detector and to separate and identify hydrocarbons in the right hand detector. Gas samples entering the total hydrocarbon side of the instrument pass continuously through a flow restrictor (needed to balance the restriction due to the column on the other side of the instrument) and then to the detector. When using the instrument as a total hydrocarbon analyzer, emission data is obtained continu- ously, as opposed to the sampling techniques needed for CO, C02 and hydrocarbon separation. Gas samples entering the separation side of the instrument pass through a gas sample valve where the gas is continuously v-a image: ------- ~--~-- flushed through a sample loop. For a gas analysis, the valve is switched so that carrier gas is flushed through the loop and the sample gas is sent through the column for separation and finally to the detector for readout. The column used in this instrument is a 24 foot, 1/8" OD stainless steel tube packed with DC 200, a material chosen for separating saturated hydrocarbons (although equally efficient for aromatic and olefinic hydrocarbons). The Model 9000 FID chromatograph requires three gases for operation; a carrier gas for flushing the sample gas through the column, and hydrogen and air for the flame ionization detector. When the instrument is used as a total hydrocarbon detector, the carrier gas is only needed to prevent air from entering the separation column and oxidizing its surface. b. Principle of Operation The detector consists of dual hydrogen flames enclosed in a teflon and metal walled chamber (Figure 6b). Sample gases continuously pass through the hydrogen flame, and produce ions. The electrical conductivity of a hydrocarbon free hydrogen flame is very small. When hydrocarbons in the sample gas pass through the flame the conductivity of the flame rises due to the creation of charged particles (electrons and negative and positive ions) with the result that a current will flow from the charged plates to the input electrodes. To achieve a low background level, it is necessary to supply the instrument with so called "zero gases" which are virtually free of hydrocarbons. The current which flows across the charged plates produces a voltage drop across a resistor in an electrometer (a portion of the electronic circuitry) which is amplified and then fed into a recorder. "The detector operates in the same way regardless of whether the instrument is being used to record continuous data or sampling data. Operating Procedure During hydrocarbon emissions testing the instrument was operated at 200°C in keeping with the heated sampling line leading to the instrument. A thermometer fitted into the column head is used to determine the instrument temperature. c. To operate the total hydrocarbon side of the instrument, carrier gas flow is started to prevent oxidization of the column. The instrument is turned on and the temperature adjusted until the thermometer reads 200°C. Air flow is turned on and adjusted to about 800 ml/min (excess air flow). The hydrogen is now turned on and adjusted to about 20 ml/min with the bubbler flow meter. The hydrogen is now lit and the detector housing returned in place and allowed to come to temperature equilibrium. Optimum hydrogen flow is related to flow of gas to be analyzed. Optimum conditions exist when hydrogen flow rate = 1.1 x sample flow rate. Since the flow restrictors are located in the oven, all gaseous flow rates are temperature dependent. Figure 8 V-9 image: ------- shows the calibration curves which were determined for this instrument and were used to determine the appropriate flow rates. The instrument is 'adjusted by first balancing the amplifier for zero output. The instrument is then zeroed by running "zero air" through the instrument at the same rate as the sampling rate. The instrument is then spanned by passing a hydrocarbon mixture of known concentration through the instrument. The sample flow rate was set at this point by adjusting the flow rate of span gas mixture (containing 239 ppm of HC expressed as hexane), so that the output of the recorder is 2390 scale divisions. The recorder now will register 10 scale divisions for every ppm of hexane in the sample gas. The sampling pump bypass is then adjusted so that it delivers the same flpw rate as the span gas. B. Instrument Calibration 1. Bailey Heat Prover The Bailey Heat Prover reads both oxygen and combustibles. The oxygen calibration is built into the instrument. Adjustments for both the 4% and 20% full scale settings are provided together with a built in zero adjustment. II The Bailey Heat Prover combustibles meter is factory calibrated. A calibration may be made using a Heat Prover Checker. In essence, the calibration consists of flowing a gas of known. composition through the instrument and adjusting. calibration. resistors so that the instrument reads the given g~s composition. The calibration technique results in producing a one to one relationship between the indicated combustibles and the actual combustibles when the ratio of carbon monoxide to hydrogen is 2 to 1. Other carbon monoxide to hydrogen ratios and other combus- tibles will not produce a one to one ratio of indicated to actual combustibles. Curves giving correction for other combustibles are given by Bailey for various gases and mixtures. These curves were used when the theoretical total indicated combustibles data shown in Figure IV-II was plotted. Periodic factory calibrations for combustibles were performed during the testing period. Frequent checks for proper o~gen calibration were made during ea~h day. Daily minor adjustments as indicated in Secion V-A-l are. necessary to keep the instrument in factory calibration. Other adjustments may be needed as the instrument is used. The procedure for the many other adjustments may be found in the operation manual E65-l5. 2. Volumetric Gas Analysis The volumetric gas analysis equipment requires no calibration. periodic checks are sometimes run when it is suspected that one of the fluids has ~eached its saturation. To obtain complete absorption of a particular gas component, it I ! I V-lO image: ------- is usually necessary to make two or three passes through a gas absorption pipette. If more than three passes are required for complete absorption, the reagent is becoming saturated, Once a particular reagent becomes saturated, it is necessary to replace it. 3. Oxides of Nitrogen The absorbing reagent is prepared per the procedure outlined in Appendix A. According to Saltzman (Appendix A) and the ASTM procedure D 1607 "Nitric Dioxide of the Atmosphere", the absorbing reagent is stable for several months if kept refriger- ated and well stoppered in brown bottles. The absorbing reagent is calibrated with a standard sodium nitrite solution. Sodium nitrite solution is added to the absorbing. reagent so as to make a total mixture of 25 ml. This is then shaken and allowed to stand for 15 minutes. The N02 in the NaN02 reacts with the chemicals in the solution to produce a dye which is reddish purple in color. The dye has a strong light absorption peak at 550 m~. Increasing the amount of sodium nitrite added caused increasing dye intensity until a maximum is reached when all of the dye has been used up. This condition is known as 'saturation' of the Saltzman absorbing reagent. Further addition of NaN02 causes the light .absorption to decrease due to dilution. A curve of light transmission versus equivalent concentration of nitrogen dioxide in micrograms per 10 ml of absorbing reagent is obtained from the NaN02 data. This curve is then used to draw curves for determining the concentration of N02 in the gas samples. It is also used to determine the point at which the absorbing reagent becomes saturated with regard to the maximum amount of nitrogen dioxide it can detect. The NaN02 light transmission curve and formula (1) from Appendix A, are used to draw families of curves for various flask sizes and reagent quantities from which the nitrogen oxides concentration in ppm may be read directly as a function of light transmission (Figures 3 and 4). Flask sizes were chosen so that it was possible to detect nitrogen oxides from 0.1 ppm up to 200 ppm, with a reasonable range of sample flask size and volume of absorbing reagent required. 4. Gas Chromatograph Using a Thermal Conductivity Detector This instrument is used to separate and measure carbon dioxide (on the right side of the instrument) and carbon monoxide (on the left side of the instrument). Since both sides of the instrument are similar in operation, only the calibration of the carbon monoxide side of the instrument will be described in detail. a. Zero and Span Gas Calibration After the instrument is set up V-ll image: ------- according to the directions in Section V-A-4, it is zeroed by setting the attenuation to 1 and zeroing the recorder pen with the zero controls. A span value is now obtained by introducing. into the instrument through the sample loop, a span gas mixture having a known concentration of carbon monoxide. The span gas is a mixture of gases designed to permit calibration of all of the chromatographic equipment with the same gas. The span gas mixture used for this purpose by Paxve has the following nominal compostion 200 ppm-propane 200 ppm-n-butane 300 ppm-carbon monoxide 5% -carbon dioxide balance-nitrogen' The span gas produces a scale reading on the chroma- tograph recorder when the gas in question is eluted from the column. Dividing the known carbon monoxide concentration by the recorder deflection produces a scale factor. This scale factor is then used to multiply all subsequent scale deflections to obtain carbon monoxide concentration of any unknown sample gas being analyzed. The scale factor may change due to internal changes in the chromatograph during testing. For this reason, span calibrations are made frequently during the course of testing and the scale factor noted. b. Linearity of the Instrument The use of a scale factor as described above assumes that the instrument is linear over the operating range of interest. This question, the linearity of the thermal conduct- ivity gas chromatographs, was investigated by means of a dilution test procedure which is described in Section 6 below. That test procedure allowed us to put known concentrations of gases to be anlayzed through the chromoatograph and to observe the resulting output signal as read on the recorder. We were able to explore the entire range from a pure gas down to the lowest concentration that could be distinguished on the chromatogram. I, Figures 9 thru 11 show the re~ults of the dilution tests for carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and oxygen. It was found that both the carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide peak heights were in . fact linear with concentration over most of the range, to within the accuracy of the experiment. Oxygen concentration was not linear with peak height, showing an increasing sensitivity as the concen- tration was reduced. Since the chromatograph was not used to analyze for oxygen, this nonlinearity was not significant for the work reported here. I, 5. Hydrocarbon Analyzer Using Flame Ionization Detector The Carle Model 9000 gas chromatograph is used to detect and measure total hydrocarbons by passing the sample gas V-12 image: ------- directly into the detector, without going through a packed column, as explained in Section V-A. Calibration of this instrument is virtually the same as calibrating the thermal conductiyity gas chromatograph with the following exceptions: (1) (2 ) The FID gas chromatograph is a continuous reading instrument so that gas samples are not injected directly into a column with a valve, and The response of the instrument's output to a particular gas concentration can be varied by adjusting the delivery pressure and hence the flow rate of the unknown gas into the detector. a. Zero and Span Gas Calibration After the instrument is set up, zero air is flowed through the detector with the attenuator settings both on 1. The recorder pen is zeroed by adjusting the coarse and fine suppression controls. It may be necessary to adjust the polarity of the suppression controls to obtain a zero. The instrument was then spanned by running a span gas mixture through the instrument and adjusting the delivery pre.ssure so that 1 scale division was equivalent to 0.1 ppm hydrocarbon expressed as hexane. The zero and span are now re-adjusted if necessary to obtain consistent values. "Zero air" is not truly free from hydrocarbons, although every effort is made by the company which distributes the gas to achieve this result. The degree of impurity is evident to some extent when the flow rate of zero air through the instrument is changed. Very pure "zero air" shows almost no response on the FID to a change in flow rate. The gas is generally guaranteed to have less than 0.5 ppm of methane which is equivalent to 0.08 ppm of hexane. It is conceivable therefore that a really pure gas flowing through the FID will read slightly less than zero. During the course of the tests conducted by Paxve, zero or slightly negative values were obtained frequently for hydrocarbon emissions. The zero .of the instrument was then checked for drift by immediately running a "zero air" sample before the next test point. If drift had occurred, an appropriate correction was made in the data. There were, nevertheless, a number of points which gave zeros that could not be distinguished from the "zero air" setting. There were also many readings which were definitely negati ve. . b. Linearity of the Instrument Dilution calibrations described in Section 6 were run for the FID gas chromatograph. These were run for both the left hand and the right hand sides of the Model 9000. Dilution by both air and nitrogen were used. It was found from the data for the right hand side of the Model 9000 (which separates the gases with a column) that the V-13 image: ------- detector itself is linear with concentration for both propane and butane over the entire range of the instrument. This is shown in Figure 12. ,. I Flow through the left hand side of the Model 9000 FID showed that the detector was sensitive to the presence of oxygen. tihen N2 was used to dilute the span gas, the response of the totals side of the instrument was linear with the span gas content. When zero air was used as the diluent, the response of the ~nstrument was not linear. There is a reduction in sensitivity of the instrument with increasing oxygen concentration. The apparent nonlinearity of the FID with 02 present is in fact not a nonlinear response to hydrocarbons. Rather, 'it is a suppression of FID sensitivity to hydrocarbons in the presence of oxygen. This suppression is called oxygen synergism. It is discussed in more detail in Secion V-C-2-c of this report. Of particular interest here is the magnitude of the suppression as a function of oxygen content. Figure IV-12 shows the ratio of the FID response with air dilution versus its response with N2 dilu~ion, plotted against 02 concentration. We see that for 02 of approximately 10%, the ratio is 0.76. c. Zero Shi ft The negative readings of the hydro- carbons emissions from the burner was a continual problem area during burner emissions testing. After the fuel injector problems on Stand 2 were cleared up (Runs 282 and later), almost all normal runs showed hydrocarbon emissions which were in the range from +0.5 ppm to -0.5 ppm HC ,(5 scale divisions on the recorder) expressed as hexane. I The possibility that water vapor was the cause of this problem was investigated. It was found that water vapor at about 10% concentration in air did not influence the span gas reading of the instrument. It was also found that 10% water vapor did produce about a -5 scale division shift in the recorder output, equivalent to -0.5 ppm of hexane. i I Paxve has not made a systematic investigation of the influence of water vapor on the FID. We believe that the zero shift which we observed is the probable explanation for the negative, readings which were obtained during burner operation. We did not devise or employ any calibration technique in this regard, but we feel that this is an important area for further work. This becomes increasingly desirable with the development of unusually low emission burners such as the Paxve burner being reported on here. 6. Dilution Calibrations In using a scale factor we have assumed that the response of the chromatograph is linear with concentration. Thus we assume that a CO concentration of '300 ppm will give twice the recorder deflection as a CO concentration of 150 ppm. In order \: "., V-14 "~~'i} . ,'. . ~;::~i" :~,:: image: ------- to investigate the linearity of the instrument, a range of known mixtures must be analyzed. Two dilution techniques were used to achieve this information: (1) (2 ) a dynamic dilution technique using an "exponential dilution flask". A static dilution technique where a gas mixture of known concentration was repeatedly diluted in a determinable fashion. In each case the resulting mixtures were then fed to the instrument whose linearity was being examined. a. Dynamic Dilution The dynamic dilution tests were conducted using an "exponential dilution flask" of known volume in which a gas of known composition was diluted continuosly by a measured flow of a diluting gas. The exponentially varying. concentration of the resulting mixture was then analyzed measured by the instrument at measured time intervals. The change in concentration of the calibrating gas being drawn from the dilution flask with time is given by -tw C = Co e v where time from start of run - sec concentration at time t - ppm concentration at time t = 0 - ppm volume of the mixing flask - cc flow rate of diluent - ££- sec. A schematic diagram of the exponential dilution test apparatus is shown in Figure 13. As shown in this schematic diagram the typical calibrating gas storage bottles consisting of span gas, zero air, pure nitrogen, carbon monoxide, and carbon dioxide are connected by appropriate valving to a supply manifold which can be individually valved to the exponential dilution flask. A given calibrating gas can be locked into the flask through an appropriate set of valves. The diluting gas flow may then be set and the apparatus connected to the particular chromatrographchannel under evaluation. t = C = Co = v = w = At the start of the test, the diluting gas is switched into the flask at a known flow rate and an exponential dilution of the calibrating gas in the flask then takes place which is analyzed at timed intervals by the chromatograph. In this manner a continuously decreasing concentration of the original gas in the flask can be evaluated over the full range of the instrument. It was found that heat must be added to the flask as the dilution process proceeded in order to maintain a constant stirring of the V-IS image: ------- I' gas molecules and to prevent surface ads~rption of the gas molecules on flask walls. Results of the dilution sensitivity test of the Carle 9000 FID gas chromatograph are shown in Figure 14. This test was conducted with span gas diluted with zero air using a heated flask. The effect of an unheated flask is shown in Figure 15. It is evident from Figure 15 that deviations in linearity were appreciable at both the extreme limits of the span when no heating was provided. This was not the case, as shown in Figure 14, when the flask was heated. b. Static Dilution The static dilution technique involved filling a sample cylinder with span gas or with pure gas (carbon monoxide or carbon dioxide), depending on which instrument is to be calibrated, repeatedly diluting the sample, and then analyzing the cylinder contents. The procedure was initially started with the. flame ionization chro~atograph. Flasks were filled with samples of span gas and accurately diluted with nitrogen or zero air to obtain several different known span gas mixtures. These mixtures were then run through both the totals (left side) side and the separation (right side) of the r~odel 9000 FID chromatograph. , I' The resulting curves Figures 16 and 17, show that when nitrogen is used as a diluent, both sides of the instrument are linear with concentration. When air is used as. a dilutent, the right hand side of the instrument (separations side) remains linear (Figure 12), while tne left side of the instrument shows a. nonlinearity. Since the right side sees the constituents separately, it -is clear that the nonlinearity on the left hand side is due to the simultaneous presence of 02 and hydrocarbons. This is the oxygen synergism effect discussed in Section V-C-2. A similar dilution procedure was followed to obtain gas mixtures for the thermal conductivity gas chromatograph. The proven linearity of the FID right side was used to assist in the analysis. Gas compositions having concentrations less than 300 ppm for carbon monoxide and 5% for carbon dioxide were obtained by diluting span gas with zero air or nitrogen. Gas compositions having higher concentrations of CO and C02 were obtained by diluting pure carbon monoxide or carbon dioxide with span gas. In either case, the concentration of the di.luted gas mixture was determined from the concentration of the hydrocarbon in the mixture. This was in turn obtained from the FID. I An oxygen calibration for the left side of the. thermal conductivity gas chromatograph was accomplished using the static dilution technique. Zero air diluted with span gas was found to be unsatisfactory for this purpose because the high concentrations of nitrogen caused the leading edge of the nitrogen peak to overlap the oxygen peak in the chromatogram. This in turn gave rise to an apparent nonlinearity in the o~ygen calibration. To avoid this problem, a 50/50 mixture of air and span gas was diluted with carbon dioxide. The hydrocarbons in the span gas were used to V-16 image: ------- establish the composition of the mixture. This technique yielded satisfactory separation of the oxygen and nitrogen peaks. Figures 9, 10 and 11, show the results of the Model 8004 gas chromatograph linearity investigations. The CO and C02 responses are seen to be linear. The oxygen response shows nonlinearity of peak height at high concentrations. c. Emission I-1easuring Problems During the course of this program many unforeseen problems arose in connection with the emission measuring equipment and the sampling techniques used in conjunction with that equipment. Some of these problem areas are treated in the technical literature, but they were unknown to us at the beginning of the program and were not brought to our attention by the manufacturers of the emission equipment we purchased. Other problem areas are either unknown to workers in this field or are merely considered part of the "art". They are not discussed in any available literature. These problems and our solutions to them are reported here in the hope that others may profit from the work. In addition, data reduction techniques not discussed elsewhere have been included here as an aid in understanding the reduced data presented in Section VI. 1. Oxides of Nitrogen The oxides of nitrogen are determined by a wet chemistry method'known as the Griess-Saltzman method. This method is described in Section V, A3, B3 and Appendix A. During the course of the program the testing procedures were modified as new knowledge was gained. Initial NOx data was gathered by sampling from a manifold (Figure IV-4 B) used to feed the TC gas chromatograph. This manifold was the terminal end of a 52 foot sample line carrying gases from the burner on stand 1 to the chromatograph (see Figure 19). The initial NOx results using gas from this sampling point collected in 1000 ml sampling flasks wi th 10 ml of absorbing reagent are shown in Figure 18 labeled "Initial Data". The highest NOx values obtained during these tests were 17 ppm. Suspicion was raised about the flat top and overall shape of the curve of NOx compared to the equilibrium NO values shown. As a result, some studies were initiated which revealed three problem areas in NOx measurement. These problems are indicated by a, b, and c in Figure 18. They are discussed below. a. Absorption of NOx by Condensed Water - As explained earlier, NOx data gathered from a remote sampling point was considered suspicious. was initially thought that the hot tip of the metal sample line might be catalyzing a reaction which the N02 or NO was breaking It V-17 image: ------- \ down to form compounds which were undetectable by the absorhing reagent. A test was run where gas samples for BOx annJ.ysis 'Jlere taken from several points (labeled #1, 2, 3, ana 4 in FirJure 19) using 2 sample probe materials." . , Gas samples were taken from the burner directly (point 1) using a 1 foot length of stainless steel line for n snnple prohe an~ a 1 foot quartz tube sample probe. For the same set of burner operating conditions, samples were taken from the sa~~le line at points, #2, #3, and #4. This last location was the sample point at the manifold which was used to gather the nox data in the earlier test runs. Table 1 shows the results of th~qp tests. It is seen that there is virtually no ~iffercncein the rlOx for the two sampling materials when samplen at point #1. 'i'he ide", that stainless steel destroys or othervTlse alters the no or N02 to produce low readinqs is clearly not supported by this data. As the sampling point was moved away from the burner the measured NOx concentration decreased. This reduction in detectable N02 can be attributed to the absorption of N02 in the condensed water vapor which drops out in the sampl0. line. Nitrogen dioxide (N02) oissociates in water i'\ccording to 2 N02 + H20 -+ HIm3 + HN02 (cold) 3 N02 + H20 -+ 2HN03 + NO (warm) I, Nitric acid is infinitely soluble in water and therefore remains in solution. Nitric oxide (NO) is only slightly soluble in '.-later (.0059 gms NO dissolve in 1 gm water at 23°C and 760 mm Hg) so that some of it will become dissolven in the water and some of it will come out of solution and enter the flowing gas stream. In the gas stream nitric oxide (NO) is slo\-,ly oxidized by the available oxygen to nitrogen dioxide which is further trapped in the water as explained above. Except for being slowly oxidized to nitrogen dioxide, as e~plained above', nitric oxine is recovered in the sample gas and detected by the Griess.'Saltzman method. , The loss of N02 as opposed to NO in the long sanple line could be readily observed when the sample flasks were developed on the shaker. When samples were taken from the long stainless steel line a considerable period of time (about 15-30 minutes) was required before any color developed in the absorbing reagent. This time period was a result of the NO being slowly oxidized to N02' When samples were taken'with the short quartz tube, color began to develop almost immediately due to the presence of N02' I, As further substantiation of the absorption of NOx by condensed water, a sample of the condensed water was analyzed by the Griess-Saltzman method and was found to contain l8~ grams of equivalent N02/l0 ml of absorbing reagent. Although nitric acid is not supposed to produce a positive response with the absorbing reagent (See Saltzman, Appendix A), nitric ~cid is, unstable and breaks down under sunlight and also heat accord1ng to: V-18 I I image: ------- 4 HN03 ~ 2 H20 + 4 N02 + 02t Nitric acid is a powerful oxidizing agent and decomposes in the presence of a reducing material according to: 2 HN03 ~ H20 + 2 NOt + 102t 2 In any event a compound which is detected by the absorbing reagent (N02) or readily converted to such a compound (NO) is formed. A simple analysis was also performed to show the equilibrium concentrations of the various species of nitrogen oxides with water. let a = solubility of NO in water gm/gm Atm [NO]1 = concentration of NO in water gm/gm [NO]g = concentration of NO in gas gm/gm PNOG = Partial pressure of NO in gas Atm MWW = Molecular weight of water MWNO = Molecular weight of NO MWEX = The molecular weight of exhaust gas WI = Weight of NO in liguid per pound of exhaust WG = Weight of NO in gas per pound of exhaust gas XW = The mole fraction of the exhaust gas which is water XNO = The mole fraction of the exhaust gas which is NO Then if most of the NO is in the gas PNO = XNO [NO] I = PNO a MWNO [NO]G = PNO MWEX The weight of No in the water per pound of exhaust will be MWW WL' = [NO]1 X W MWEX The weight of NO in the gaseous phase per pound of exhaust will be Wg = [NO]g V-19 image: ------- I I I I I The fraction of the NO in the liquid phase is then ~ a ~MW Wg = 0 II I I Substituting a = 5.6 x 10-5 gm/gm Xw =0.10 MWW = 18 MWNO = 28 we obtain W ' ~ ::: 3.6 X 10-6 g thus the amount of NO which is lost to the water which condenses in the line is negligible. Our interpretation of' the experiments and the analysis was that we were losing the N02 in the line, but not the NO. This of course did not consider the possiblity that some of the NO was converting to N02 in the line. The residence time in the line, however, did not seem sufficient for that reaction to proceed. I II As a result'of the tests described above~ the sampling procedure for oxides of nitrogen was modified. All test data for oxides of n~trogen taken after run 103 used a short quartz tube which drew the sample to be analyzed directly into an evacuated flask. Some of the early data gathered using this procedure was plotted in Figure 18. The comparsion between the new data and the old data is clear. The new data still shows the flat top exhib- ited by the old data (peak values of NO always less than or equal to 17 ppm). It did, however, show larger values of NOx at low fuel air values. I I I Superimposed on Fig. 18 is a curve of the theoretical N02 which exists in equilibrium in the exhaust as a function of the fuel air ratio. We see that the difference between the new NOx values and the old NOx values is approximately the same as the theoretical N02. From this we might infer that the N02 in the burner is approximately in equilibrium, and that when we lost it in the lines, we were losing NOx of at most 3 ppm. For most burners, a combustion exhaust gas analyses which failed to find a 3 ppm of NOx would not b~ considered a serious problem. In the case of the paxve burner at low fuel air ratios, however, this may represent 50% or more of the entire NOx in the exhaust. I: , I I b. Saturation of the Absorbing Reagent' It was apparent from the flat top of V-20 image: ------- the NOx data curve that some type of saturation phenomenon might be occurring. Another possibility that was considered was that the Saltzman solution responds differently to NO or N02 gas than it does to the NaN02 calibrating solution. This latter idea was not considered too seriously, since it was precisely this problem which Saltzman investigated. Nevertheless, we decided to attempt a direct NO or N02 calibration of the Saltzman reagent, in spite of the considerable difficulties involved. Mixtures of NO (which contained some N02) in dry N2 were prepared which should have been about 100 ppm. The Saltzman reagent only indicated 23 ppm. When a similar mixture was prepared by collecting the gases over water, the Saltzman reagent showed almost no color. Finally mixtures of N02 in air were prepared. A mixture which contained approximately 5 ppm indicated 5 ppm in the Saltzman reagent, but a 1~0 ppm mixture only indicated 19 ppm. It was clear that saturation of the reagent was occurring. It was also clear that the reagent was sensitive to N02, but did not respond to NO. The saturation phenomena was further investigated by means of the NaN02 solution. The standard procedure for calibrating the Saltzman solution involves making up a mixture of Saltzman reagent and NaN02 standard solution of total volume 25 mI. We normally use from 0.2 ml to 6 ml of the NaN02 with the balance made up of Saltzman reagent. The optical transmission of the resulting solution plots as a straight line on semi-log graph paper, indicating that the transmissibility is given by I In IO = KI P = K2 [N02] Where: I = light transmission at 550 m 10 = transmission through clear reagent a = the concentration of the dye in the liquid mixture [N02] = the concentration of N02 in the mixture Kl K2 = appropriate constants As long as there is enough dye to indicate all of the N02 that is present, we should expect In (h) = K3[N02] VN = -K4VN+VS = ~ 25' VN V-21 image: ------- Where VN = volume of NaN02 solution.. Vs = volume of Saltzman reagent If however, we continue to increase the proportion of NaN02 solution until there is an excess of N02 and insufficient dye available, we would then expect the transmission to be given by: I . In 10 = KlPD Vs = K4 VS+VN = - (*) = - (M) Vs ( 25-VN) I' Figure 20 shows the ~ight transmission data obtained by varying the amount of NaN02 solution from .2 ml to 20 mI. The data is well fitted by two straight lines on semi-log paper. The left hand line represents the usual calibration curve for the Saltzman solution. In this region, there is an excess of dye and all of the N02 present is indicated. ' The right hand line represents the saturation region. In this region, there is a deficiency of dye and only the amount of dye present is indicated. This behavior is exactly that predicted by the above analysis. I' By finding the slope of the saturation line in the graph, the maximum dye concentration at saturation can be found. From this we can deduce what concentration of N02 will yield saturation. In the case shown here, the dye saturates if it is exposed t02l~g per 10 ml of N02. This is equivalent to approximately 19 ppm of N02 in a 1 liter flask containing 10 ml of reagent. liuch of our early data showed values which were between 12 ppm and 17 ppm at conditions where higher values were expected. We therefore decided to disregard any early data over 10 ppm as possibly saturated. We also decided to change our procedure to avoid saturation. . From Figure 20 it was found that the absorbing reagent saturates at approximately 2l~ gms of N02/l0 ml of absorbing reagent. If this number is substitutec:'l into formula (1) ,of the procedure for preparing the absorbing reagent.. (Oxides of Nitrogen, Appendix A} the following results: . . (0.532)(21 gm/lOml) Vc Concentration (in ppm) = This is rearranged to give: 11.2 . Vc = concentration , I V-22 II image: ------- Thus to detect 100 ppm of N02 with 10 ml of absorbing reagent without saturating the reagent, a gas sample having a volume 11. 2 of approximately 112 ml as needed, or Vc = IOO = .112 titers. The sample flask must allow an additional 10 ml for the volume occupied by the absorbing reagent. The effective range of this method can also be extended by increasing the volume of absorbing reagent used in a sample flask. For example, if 20 ml of the absorbing reagent is saturated, 42 gms of N02 will have reacted with the absorbing reagent. If 112 ml of sample gas resulted in saturating these 20 ml of reagent, the N02 concentration would be: (.532) (42 grn/20 ml) .112 = 200 ppm. Concentration (in ppm) = By varying the sample flask size (100 ml, 300ml, and 1000 ml flasks were used) and the amount of absorbing reagent used (10 ml, 20 ml, and 30 ml were used) we were able to extend the effective range of this method without approaching absorbing reagent saturation. ' Families of calibration curves were generated for the various flask sizes and various amounts of absorbing reagents used (See Figures 3 and 4). To verify the validity of this approach, several tests were run with the burner. In test No. 218 and again in test No. 219, three N02 samples were collected in 1000 rnl flasks containing 10, 20, and 50 ml of Saltzman reagent. The results are shown in the following table Indicated NOx ppm Test No. f/a 10/1000 20/1000 50/1000 ,-- ~'---,.,-- ~..-_.- - ., .. 218 .0311 2.5 1.9 2.6 219 .046 19.2 32.6 33.2 ----.-- It is clear that, except for some scatter in the data, the first run, *218, was not saturated, and gave substantially the same result in all three flasks. Run #219, on the other hand, saturated the 10/1000 flask, but gave comparable results for both the 20/1000 and the 50/1000 flasks. All testing from run 218 on used adequate amounts of Saltzman solution to avoid saturation effects. c. Detection of NO in 'Gases Which are LO\" in Oxygen As mentioned in the previous section, when the nitrogen oxides were mixed with nitrogen by collecting ov~r water and then analyzed for NOx virtually no color was obtained in the Saltzman reagent: Nitric oxide is apparently not detected by the Griess-Saltzman method but N02 is. This agrees V-23 image: ------- with Saltzman's observations (App. A). Therefore if NO cannot be oxidized to N02 in the flask, it will not be detected. The lack of oxygen and the presence of water in the experiment cited previously virtually eliminated any N02from the NO-N02 ~ixture. For detection of nitric oxide, Truesdail Laboratories recommends that the gas sample and reagent be shaken in the sampling flask for at least an hour before the dye intensity is measured. This allows the NO to be oxidized to N02. If there is not sufficient oxygen in the flask, it must be added. Figure 16 shows the region where there is insufficent oxygen in an equilibrium propane/air combustion mixture to adequately oxidize NO to N02. In this region oxygen must be introduced into the sample to detect nitric oxide. The procedure used here to achieve this was to partially evacuate the flask. This was done by evacuating a flask fully and connecting it to another unevacuated flask of equal size. and allowing the two to equilibrate. The sample was then drawn in this partially evacuated flask. The oxides of nitrogen concentration level read from Figures 3 or 4 must be doubled to account for the flask being half evacuated (in effect only half of the flask volume was used to take the gas sample). When these two final procedures were adopted: (1) using smaller size sampling flasks and/or larger amounts of absorbing reagent, and (2) introducing air (oxygen) into samples when there is insufficient air to oxidi~e the NO to N02 the final data curve seen in Figure 18 resulted. d. Effect of Absorbing Reagent Temperature on Sensitivity I During the course of testing, a question was raised regarding the storage and use of the absorbing reagent. ASTM procedures (Nitrogen Dioxide Content of the Atmosphere, (D 1607) pg 455 personnel at Truesdail . Laboratories, and Saltzman ( Appendix A) all contend that the absorbing reagent will remain stable for several months if refrigerated in well stoppered brown bottles. The ASTH procedure further contends that the absorbing reagent should be allowed to warm to room temperature before use. Other. workers in the field, however, feel that the absorbing reagent should be made fresh (as close to the time of use as possible) and should be kept cold until immediately before use. To investigate the effect of age and temperature of the absorbing reagent on its reactivity, a series of tests were conducted. I' I Newly prepared absorbing reagent (less than 5 days old) and older reagent (approximately one month old) were co~pared at room temperature (approximately 70°F) and also at refrigerated temperatures (approximately. 35°F). Some of the older reagent had, in fact, been stored at room temperature for approximately one month before the test. The cold sample of older reagent had been previously stored in a refrigerator for the same period of time. The cold new V-24 . ! image: ------- reagent had been kept refrigerated since it had been made. The warmed new reagent was removed from the refrigerator just long enough to corne to room temperature before being tested. Each batch of reagent was tested with the standard calibrating solution and by introducing it into previously sampled flasks containing the same concentration of oxides of nitrogen. Table 2 shows the results of these tests. It is seen that there are no significant differences between the results from these variable conditions. e. Effect of Evacuating Procedure on Sampling Results Saltzman (Appendix A), the APCD . procedure (Appendix A) and the ASTM procedure referred to on the previous page, all indicate that an appropriate sampling procedure is to put the absorbing reagent in the sample flask, evacuate the sample flask to the vapor pressure of the reagent . and then obtain the gas sample. Other workers in this field believe that the sample flask should be evacuated first, the qas sample obtained, and then the absorbing reagent added to the flask. This procedure is in keeping with. the idea of using only fresh cold absorbing reagent. . A test was made to investigate the effect of evacuating the sample flask before or after the addition of the absorbing reagent. In this case a gas sample was used to test this effect. Table 3 shows the results of this test. Again no significant differences are seen between these two procedures. Addition after sampling was adopted as a standard procedure, however, because it was generaLly more convenient. 2. Hydrocarbon a. Heated Sample Line In obtaining valid emissions data, the FID sample line has corne under close scrutiny in two respects. First, there has been. some difficulty in maintaining a clean line. This has been a result of the unexpected introduction of hydro- carbons into the line from valves and other component fittings. It can also be caused by hydrocarbons brought in from a burner during blowout testing. The second consideration has been the problem of avoiding condensation of hydrocarbons from the sample in the line. It has been suggested that a heated line with a temperature on the order of 3000F would avoid this problem. The diesel and kerosene fuel which were used in this program have a final boiling point on the order of 5500F to 625°F as shown in the chart of Table 4. It has an approximate molecular weight of 170 corresponding to dodecane (C12H26). To avoid condensation of the pure vapor in the line it would be necesssary to maintain the line above this temperature. When a gas sample consisting of several.constituents is under consider- ation, however, only the partial pressure of the hydrocarbon V-25 image: ------- concerns us. This in turn depends on its volumetric concentration. The dew point characteristic pfa gas mixture containing dodecane is shown in Figure 21. The ordinate of Figure 21 is concentration of hydrocarbons in ppm by volume. The abcissa'is temperature in degrees F. Since the Paxve FID chromatograph is calibrated for hydrocarbons expressed as hexane, it will read twice the true concentrations of dodecane. This FID reading is shown by the middle line in Figure 21. It is seen that a sampling line at ambient temperature 70°F will not have condensation if the indicated hydrocarbon concentra- tion is less than approximately 1000 ppm. All of the measurements to date on the Paxve burner in normal operation indicate hydrocarbon readings of much less than this value. Therefore it would not appear that condensation will contribute emission measurement errors unless there are higher hydrocarbons present. The third line on Figure 21 was added to indicate the relationship between the dew point and the fuel/air ratio for diesel fuel/air mixtures. In this case the ordinate is fuel/air ratio by weight. The top of the graph corresponds to a fuel/air ratio equal to 1 and the next lower decade corresponds to a fuel/air ratio 0.1 etc. For the fuel/air range of interest (f/a ~ 0.04) the dew point is 265°F. Thus a sample line heated to 300°F should permit passage of even an unburnt mixture through the instrument without condensation. I' Although we did not expect true condensation to be a problem with our exhaust samples, there are other phenomena to be considered. In tne curve of our FID calibration work, we have often noted the strong tendency for hydrocarbon gases to adhere to the walls of containers and lines. This adsorbtion'phenomenon is not unlike condensation, except that no truly liquid film need be involved. We have found that heating the walls and lines minimizes any adsorbtion problems. Based upon these considerations, the sample line has been heated for all of the burner testing data presented in this report. b. Heated Pump ! I I, " The necessity for maintaining temper- ature control of the sample gas has been discussed. In order to accomplish continuous sampling of the burner exhaust gas at elevated temperature, a sampling pump was designed and fabricated by , Paxve. No commercially available pumps were found capable of meeting the requirements. A photograph of the pump is shown in Figure 22. It utilizes two metal bellows driven by a rotary eccentric mechanism. The eccentric mechanism is in turn driven by an electric motor through a long shaft. The valves in the pump are two steel balls retained by a steel shim stock in a valve hole with a lap seat. All parts of the pump can be operated to over 500°F. In oper.ation the pump is situated in a small oven with the heated sample line coupled into the pump. The outlet side of the pump is a heated 1/4" line which leads from the pump through a small receiver to the flame ionization detector. A bypass bleed is provided at the end of the FID to adjust II V-26 II I image: ------- sample line pressure. The small receiver smooths out the pump pressure pulsations. The receiver is contained in the oven. The FID chromatograph body is maintained at temperature of 200°C (392°F) with the detector head about 50° hotter. Initial operation of the Paxve sample gas pump in connection with the FID chromatograph produced erratic results. The chromatograph traces showed erratic fluctuations combined with random drifting of the instrument. The erratic signals from the line were traced to a cold spot (where calibration gases were introduced). Condensation at this spot with subsequent dripping of condensed water into the line was eliminated with an immediate and permanent improvement in signal quality. During subsequent operation of the system the line was found to be "dirty" (high unburned hydrocarbon readings) on one occasion. This condition was corrected by running hot exhaust products through the line till this spurious signal was cleared. d. Oxygen Synergism As was previously explained in the discussion on calibration of the FID, the addition of oxygen to the span gas altered the linear response of the FID to hydrocarbons. This altering of the response due to oxygen is known as oxygen synergism. The effect of various pure hydrocarbon-oxygen mixtures sampled in a Beckman FID using pure hydrogen is seen in Figure 23. It is seen that the presence of oxygen, in most but not all cases, shows a suppression of the response from the instrument. This effect may be reduced using a hydrogen mixture with either nitrogen or helium for the FID flame. Figures 24 and 25 show the result~ The mechanism which produces these results is not known. Paxve used pure "2 for our FID because we were unaware of the synergism problem until after we had taken of our data. A correction factor was applied to the data for the reduced sensitivity of the instrument in the lean combustion (high 02) mode. Figure IV-l2 shows the oxygen synergism effect for bur FID, with our span gas. the bulk to account References D. 1. Littlewood, A.B., "Gas Chromatogra~ Principles, Techniques and Applications" Academic Press, l~ V-27 image: ------- INDICATORS MECHANICAL ZE"O ADJUSTMENT SC"EWS ZERO ADJUSTER KN08S CENTER LEVER SA'MPLE FILTER JAR AIR FILTER TUBE HYDROGEN CELL SAMPLE INLET POWER CONNECTION a. BAILEY HEAT PROVER . "It ~ 10.. ... !'OSITION POSiTIOIil 10.. CtLL AD,lUITU b. OPERATING SCHEMATIC FIG. 1 BAILEY HEAT PROVER WITH OPERATING SCHEMATIC image: ------- t. REAR CHAMBER (, ! '. . i . ( ~I nr ~-- i . ~, ,~,.,i CiJAMB}:,'R '{;jf' COIiTAC'l' PIPE'J.'TE FLUSHING MANIPOLD BUBBLER PIPE~I'TE' (CO ABSORPTION) BUBBLER PIPE'l'TE (0 ABSORPTION) 2 CONTACT PIPETTE (C02 AdSORPTION) LEVELIfiG b'O'.t.'TLE I : n UBb'LER P IPi:,'TTii: M~ASURING bUR~TT . rlA7'ER JACKE'i' FIG.V-2 VOLUMETRIC GAS ANALYSIS APPARATUS image: ------- 100 ._--~_.-.. ---. --r----- .., IA Wt 100"", ~ J- -;0;;;- 0 0 U'\ II) II) II) E-t ~ ,01; z z ,---- -j 0 10 o 10 >-4 >-4 en en .. ' :li en >-4 >-4 :4 ':1; :li en ~ ~ c.. E-t -------- 1.0 ---....,..-..- --1 ! 'j i I o 10 lO ,)0 OXIDES OF NITROGEN conCENTRATION, EQUIVALENT N02,Ppnl CALIBRATION CURVE FOR DETERMINING OXIDES OF NITROGEN BY GRIiSS SALTZMAN IlETHOD, LOW . ... 100 10001'01 300M' 10-' ""'iO'MI ~ '0.' 1.0 o ,.0 '00 fa 80 100 UXID},;S OF NITROGl::N CONCl::NTRATION, EQUIVALEHT N02/lJPr:: CONCI:;NTRA'l'ION RANGE F1g\1r8 V - J CALIiJRATIOH CURVE FOR DETI::Rf-IINING OXIDES OF II In:OC:UI COi;C,il'J.'Pl'.TICh< BY GRIESS. SAL'rZt-'J\ii Vel.'lhOD, hIGh P.l.i.:GI: . :'c;. V .. image: ------- !,:\d; I"~ t "i" If~; , " tCDEL 800" GAS CHROMATOGRAPH USING THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY DETECTOR TOR IETECTING CARBON DIOXIDE (C02) AND CARBCJf tCNOXIDE (CO) I . I FIGURE V 5 image: ------- NUPN> ""'~"'U\M ""\..\I L C.O\..UMN "'1-\'t..'P.M'~"'OP.~ a. THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY DETECTOR , "NT -_v +-.., I: I; I I; M.. II I HI b. FLAME IONIZATION DETECTOR INTERNAL CONFIGURATIONS OF GAS CHROMATOGRAPH DETECTORS I I: Figure. v- 6 image: ------- ... ~ .... ~ ! .: .... ... ~ . 'II:: .34 .32 ! . I I , : ---- '. .--. .'-- :T:-j'~': ~:.: , r' , , -L.' ~.;.l.w-U....U . ',.!-+~h-+" L 1-!. ' , . 1 . I . ~- ; , i '.,- .30 ; +..w..L;- L: :T::!- ~ -'.-..-'" _.~-....-:- w...I-.. .1..: -....:.;- ~+_i -~~I~L ~_:~.: -~.~.'~. . - :", . j.. i.. ;..'h -L.:'" ._, .. ,28 :-~~ .;ti ! ~ . -. . i ..; ',I .26 ..J . . . .' jt=;~ - !-:=ti. . - : :'l=1=LLtlU : ; ::: ,tr-rlf!'J( .+.. f.L :j.:.+l-~L'l;' .". : .;-;-~. i ;-.L-~-I+!--- I. .,. ... 'JIT~i~j j. I L! .+-:-- . I . . ,24 ~ ~ -.J . . . . .22 ,~,; . : I. i I I: ) I:t: : I' , ~ - i ~El- J ; .:.~,. . I.: 1.' .-. . ,. . .. .~ ~ - ~ ! ..:.... ~- ; _! , '! P-.. . ~ r;.: .20 ; ;- ~ ~ - ~ ", o 5 10 15 25 20 Carrier Gas Flow Rate, cC/rdn PEAK !fI!:IGHT OPTIMIZATION FOR CO I!:LUTION FROM GAS CHROMATOGRAPH .'igure V-7 ;. . A 004 . ...... u u 1 CI I ~ :a 10 3 10. 30 30 20 He CURVES GIVE FLOW THROUGi COLUMI H2 CURVES GIVE FLOW THROOOH rLAME o o 5 10 1!..i 20 2~ :> REGULATED PRESSURE, pai CALIBRATION CURVES FOR GASES USED WITH THE FLAME IONIZATION DETECTOR FIGURE V 8 image: ------- Ii fa 400 ~ be 0 ... I I a 1/1 C I 2 0 300 i '04 6 1/1 '04 > e '04 2 Q ~ " .... 200 ... .., ..c u be (I) '04 " :z:: "I( .., " c.. I I , I 18 16 i 14 o 12 I (\') o ~ 6 g 10 ~ oM . oM ~ > 8 ... is -Q . oM i . 6 :z: (I) -= II P. 4 2 '0 500 100 o o 1200 1600 2000 2400 Carbon Monoxide Concentrat ion. ppm Low Range Calibration 2800 400 800 a. : i Ii' , fJ ,. ~_:!: . .:; .. f' j .,..: :.. t.. !, i ! , : ( , i q ~ .:.:-.J....--I_--.- ~:_~~...:. :'..-i '-1":':"':"" 4~~ -..~--. --..,' on ..' -"1'''' "'-' ~i-~'l~-4s~_p__kf!-~_:-/,---~ _jm ...... ''''''oO -i~"- "j.q.. ....1... "'--'1 r ,./..:" , , . :... \ > .4+. !..:.-..:. -- .). :, i ..+-- -4.-- -~:... .-. - ...- .' .....L. - --. -." --- h -. '. 1---. WoOl"" ; 1 .- , -- --~, "i___i- ,_df'_;m.- m J;t-:r :.;;.X:: I . I I '... .... e;"'" ~: .-:-- ~..:..~;.;. - ';;-:- ~ ::,: rV : ~":'oO ::..;,;.1( ij:~ I:~ ;! : ~ .~-:-~. !Ii! II .~,: ~ t i ;'; ;*'." i 'i: I. ~,t,i;::::. .81UJ'i " . .. I -:.V ! "l ' I . . . .'. I --- ~--- .--.- -.- -_.~ .. :~.~..:.~ :+:..:...:. I . -- .. ....- oO.-- "': i ....- : ;1 -- ..:...:...:..;. ;.;-;":'-"" --- '- ~.~+.- ::: .. , j: '. i, j. ., ., .. .; , " ~ ~ Ii 't"; I :-j ;'j ; I! ';: 1, d 1 ' : j ~ J ! i' ~ i: I : 11 i . " - , '! ;:;j 1 : '..:.;.;.;.fW:-- -- .-- -.... --- .b. 3 4 5 6 7 8 Carbon Monoxide Concentration. , High Range Calibration . 10 9 o 2 1 CARBON MONOXIDE CALIBRATION ON THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY DETECTOR GAS CHROMATOGRAPH Figure V - 9 ".- . 3000 11 image: ------- i I E I'll ~ o +' ~I') e~ ~>t - en 5 5 15 "'..... <... u, ..... +» .c..... bi)~ ..... Q) Q) :c 1 10 ~~ Q) 0.. 30 25 i I. - c_- r- -~::l~; -1- :-~----l. i . ";"'.; T ;" , --;--:. "j~--T-----' [H-rr~..1.. ;JJ--+-l-r> '-. 20 -- - 5 :: t>"1~t:~H "1--.1- -.-. )~:!~:(; . :.. i. . - -r-.:r. . :; . i. -r.'Y ;-- 0- o 2 4 6 8 10 12 Carbon Dioxide Concentration, % CAHBON iHOUUE CALIBHATION ON THER~1Ai. CO!\i)UCT1VITY D!!:TECTOH GAS CHRO/'iATCX;RAPH . F'igure V - 10 14 '" o .-i X 1/1 r: o .... 1/1 .... > .... '" II .-i "' o en .. ~ fie o fJ "' E f .c CJ E o ~ II-< fJ .c tIC .... II ::c .>( "' II Il- 55 50 . L: i ---Fu -ur -:1 '-- - ::-:1:: ' ; ~ ,-- . ,- L ::.: .:...::1: - , - _.- ' '-.-'-' :-r- ::-:::if": ~:-Fi i UU[: :-1-:: ~~1:= :~-4: -:j;- Df~ ~+f-'-' _. :j: I _n.,_: '7~ +-G ~~u - = y::- : 8 ! I "':1: . ;': :: i .1 -- ~ ~ IYS 1 i -~--- ~t'-. ~-:: i : -- f ,.--- i "" -:--~ ! 45 I. :_l:~- _uL 'I:':. ' , , --. - --I. :: :- _.- c:: :d -- ::'- .- .-. i: 71' ... .- ..... " . ..-.. . . . -- -.. .... -. .-. 40 j' t. . . . . ~ .. 'I ::"..-.. -- : u: I:::: :;::-: I , ...-+- . t. 35 --.--- 30 25 -- --:-! -- - '1:: E- ~~y-li--J: .;: tr-e:1 :-0: : ~; 1 ': -, ::C:~:.: 'fr-n T : -+'--'-' I -.. U 20 15 10 5 o 1 ~-:j:-- -- ...- -.-.. _. o 1 -- . ..- .-.. - . . . '-. . ~... -- .' ., . .. .. - .... .- .- ........ - - - r:o.:; -,,' . - : -- - r..:::: :::c_.- U .- ~ -- U .. ...~ -...- .-.- -. "..- ...- ....... -, .. --... --~ -. --. .._~ -.-. . ~.. -..- --, - ~ -. .. ... - .- :-- ... ----. -;.::-, "~ .::1 ... ,... : ~~~.f].'...i~~ ~l:S~: ,- .1 : T -:-:-r.-:--:--:- - : :1: i.:} -1- .... : :.: ::-:: t. :.::: - !:!.)1;::: .. I:": H _.-. l:; ;.: -.'P ...t !-d:;:t:: -- .... . +--' .I.~"-- : . - .-... ........... ...;..~ :::..: ... ..-. ",... ..1- ..t... .....1. ..-- .;......;...... .,. .... .... .- ... 1, .-- ~ ... : I ~-< ~I1 ;;;; ... . .... ...: ::::.. ..... ~ 1.- I 1,_..., is .;..;. : 2 3 .. 5 6 7 8 9 10 Oxygen Concentration. \ OXYGEN CALIBRATION ON THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY DETECTOR (',AS CHROMATOGRAPH Figure V - 11 image: ------- JOOO 2000 g ... . ... ~ <:I . '8 tI:I ..; .c till ... :II ! 1000 o ~~=c-J--:: -i+-.-.\,C.Ll:-;--; .: I ; . .;. ... oPen Pobatal 1- Alr- niiUU--;n I '-_0-0 . .l:~. - "-'~I Filled Po1Dts "D1lutlC111 . !: .;, I::: : :;: .'., . Z ;. ! . I:::. :: i I:::: ::. .... :: I ~ . 1:: ::: ::.: ::, q:.I;"1 ,.qj;" I :./,£14:! ~ ::~ --H-~-!:-"n~:BFe.)- _...'. '~jCf~T: .=l~'-~L&~/~~r+Ell ... .)+r,~~'~~~~ hopi.;$ .... :~:h~~' N¥-..--t., :!::C_:\nn: j-n 17::: :::: :::: : :::' ... '.:. ;.. -'0- .. '-+'":'j'c''- I L._f'.C1~: Ii :f : ; . i : ~_:- :: T - .__.,J Ii : ---r::~::c: r:-'f: :~~ :,d--. ~+--- , , , .. . i , I :~ -.- .--v o 100 Hydrocarbon Concentration, ppM CALIBRATION' (Ji' 5J!:PARATION gIur: (]O' ~'lD GAS CHROHA'l'(X;RAPH ~'1gure V-12 RECORDER ?OO SPAN GAS ZERO AIR CARLE 9000 rID C!{ROHATOGRAPH . CARLE 8004 TC CHROMATOGRAPH N2 L I MA.'UFOLD BLEED fLOWMETER EXPONENTIAL DILl1I'ION FLASK r--HLATER 5CH!!:MATJC DIAGRAM (jO' I!:XPON&NTIAL DlwrrcN 1U'i'AliJ\Tl;S Jo'1,:u.re V - 1) image: ------- 100 .) ' ,-, , ; ~: i i i , i i I i i , , -: , i i i I I. 10 ' : I !~ i I I 'I I , , ! i 1 i I , ! i : i : 1.0 ! I 10000 1000 II ! .= ~ i J . I u ~ ! II :I: 1 ~ If.FI~- .1- ~t~ J.:'-' ',' I :.; ,j I' !' i , !: ! ~1';"1 ii" j.j h+i , tH -11 n -jli; , ! i Ii! ' ! IIi' r ! : i; , ':" ;ld!1 :1, :+': ji) ~IL~ 'm'~ ,-:: +. .1J",')"J' I,' i ! "'I"'!" I : '" iii, !I.. i I :; i ' I- t I, ,!, ii, i I : !" ,,' !, 1! I'.:! +t-'i'T"1- "-'I'~"I . . -~.. - "1";"''- I..~ ui,' I,! j ! ~ : I' I II i ;! ': i: I j : 1 '1! i'." I -1 I ~: I I, , ;' i l': i j :; ~ ~...t-t-i-+-"T-i--1-t -f'j-.t-j-, i~ '!' ':" i 'i ~. ; :';! ;; j. ~;. , ' i i i : : ;, ! i ! i '1 : ! L -'I iT 'I t'\--: rH9P~ ,~ttt$ T-IV!tV:rt:ST ; :: " ,I !.:!: ~-i im++-~!- +;-++-rl+r- ; :n:,[ ',: ~i' ~.~ : : 1: ; ~: ,::::, ; i : : !: ;:: :, ::; ii,' j ~i,! i," : ~,P~: ;A~! ~r~~, tK',~ ,AIR: I . , '" ," "j" I " "I, ~ 'I f'lII nun.. ' i 'I i: I!'T'p: ,_,, ;f' m,.: q mWii",,' 'I" ;..1;, ~ : , II I: I, , i ; I , , i I ; , ; ,j:,.,',' Ii : ! " r ; '~:. : ! i ! 'i , :, ,j , ! ' : ' 1 ! : I j !'! ! ~ i ; i i ! ' ! ' i , , i I I ' . , . i ; , I ' , ; I : ! ! I ' i ' ; i : ' ! ; I : i , ; , , , i i :" ~ i : ! , i , ! : i ! , I i I; I; i.: i i ! ! . , ! , I ' I , I ..1 I I ' , ; I I' : ; ; : . , i ; : ! I i i 1 2 3 Ti- 4 0.11 ' o , f. I ~ I., . i ; : I i I I, I' , , ~ i i " , I! : , I i, , , , , , J I : l I , , t . ; , i ,I " i j, 5 rIG. v-14 image: ------- II II 10000 , I I ~ ~ j. 1000 ! ! , , i I : . ' j: , , \:1' i : :1 : :: ! I ,: : ~ : ! ~ : ! ,...1, L: , I j j.; } i , ! , ;-"rl;~r~ ..1 I ! ' i , ! ; . " , i. i . . i: : ~ , , ; j I .j. i I ; I : : ! : , :1 : : " L-9000 SENSIVITY TEST TI!:ST 2 SPAN DILUTION WrfH AIR UNHISATKU FLASK ,. '. I I i I ii 1 ! i ; :1 i I : .! ! i ,.:' I : , ! . : i I 1 , I , ' , ' ' I' , I: 1 j;1,1 , ".j-! j.: { ~ . : : " I: : i ; : , ! 1 ! : : :: : , I I I , " , ' . , I ' 'I' , , I , " I' . .: ! t.: I I :. ~ I , I I I' , I : l. . II g .. co .. . 100 ~ . j , . . . j I ' i ! , I :. ! 10 ! i i j: : f f to i! . ! , .. ! ! ' II :c . ' i 1.0 I: , ' , , o. I I: , ! ! ! . ' o 1 2 TIME : ; , 3 4 i' , ' 5, rIG. image: ------- Calib~&~ion of flame Ionization Detector Span Ga. Diluted with Nitro~en 2 :~i: ~ ! ~. .~~ 1-' i.h. ; ~ ,1..--. ~, , .. . -'~'''j. ,- ~ I i ; ! , rf I .-1:.1- : . j I I i . .,., x j .-- " ! :; .. ,... '" , .II i::.; : ., e I ~~~ . .: .. ~~..... J::-3 Oet:004 004 U)g t. 1-4 f:i~~ ,,-U)..:IO ('oj ~4 . .... )(3 t 10 9 8 ~ ~ .. o. .... Ks , , . j'l .I J, II 3 4 x 10-3 6 7 8 9 10 3 . x 10-2 ' 6 7 8 9'0 3 . x 10-1 . 1 . ,~ fraction of Full Scale Reading From Right Side (Separation) of fID FiguN- V-l& image: ------- Calibration of Flame Ionization Detector ShowinR OxyRen Syner"ism Effect ~pan Gas Diluted with Zero A~r ... I C,) ... X N t o ..... ... i -IQ. ~ I...t: 0"'1/) !]i~ Jj~l , ' ! ; JC ! ' , , ; i , I' i : j I . . : I :"1 .: . . :.: . ' . . ....EJ~T-Fj~I~!~I:......:~j~I.{i ..1 [ll, i... ! f"! il'! ! i I t i J . " " ..' ---,_.~..- -"'.,-I"---'!'" 'I'''' ""1- 'Of" .." CO') .'.'-..-- -,_.. ''''''', -- 'i '! !' j , " I . : !~':._.I...-- ~-.,:, .:..~_... ~.. ......' .'.. ...,,~. ...~:~L- '... "-1"1" I I ' ' . ! 1'1+ Ij I i ~ I t. : . ~, .J:_- ':'_,:: ~;;-; ,:-' . ',. , . .1, ':! i Iii x 10-3 x 10-2 Fraction 01 Full Scal~ ReadIng RDom Right Side (Separation) of FID . ...,. ." ~ . , "'I" ", i , . I....._.j. I I , i 1 ' x 10-1 t.. , i I' I . ' , ,,, , L i i .j ... ; ! i t I ) I I \ "j :\1 FiguN V-17 image: ------- 10,000 1,000 100 E j:I, j:I, c o ..... ... ~ C III U C o o c ~ o b ..... :z: ..... o VI III 'C ..... ~ 10 1.0 0.1 0.01 o Initial Data Final Data a. 02 0.04 0,06 10'001 Air Ratio, fla o .12 0.08 o ,10 COMPAHISON (JIo' INl'rIAL A1UJ .'IJlAL DATA nJr'l4'8 V-lS ~rRle 1 10' . B In'11er 1st' Sa.ple Point 3 Water Trap 22' 1 y Puap It' 3' . Saaple Point 4 (Init1&l Saapling Point) Distance Between are indicated Distance. Between Bln'11er &lid Sa.ple Point 11 - 1 ft. #2 - 1 ft, 13 - 15 ft, 14 - 52 ft. "Ox SAllPLDfG POOITIONS Figure V-19 image: ------- * r ~ V\ ... .. c o ~ II II ... E J ... ~ ... ~ 100 _._.-.- ---. - :..~-:~~.: :~""-''' , . 10 , ,. . ----'---- ! . I -_.-+~~~~ ~ ! _d:C=._~-~~_. :':"._-:. - --~J.-.---~.- -. .::.f. "'.1. : ~r----- - .. . - ---_: -. .---~._-- I ' j ------ -1---- -_.... ! -----..,.----- i o 10 ::!o 30 1:0 --""" 9 1I02/10r.l i'J>SOPJ3INC HLN'LH'l' CALIBRATION (F GRlJ!:SS-SAL'rlMAli ABSORJUIIG HEAGENT ji'lgure V-20 -- . -- 50 10' - :yO () R . " IN . o ... - III ~ :E ... .01 ! ... ... ~ e103 ! () 102 o 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Temperature in of Kerosene Dew Point Data Figure V-21 image: ------- .J, ~t I j. : I I I ~ ~ ~. ~~, ~ ..~I ) !.!~~--- -:-'~ >"'~ , PAXVE ~' ...':~. . ~'.--~ ;.~, ~~ ... '" . '0>,..,.,---.<; .Ji.:'iI41<~~~'~'- ,-'.... . a. Top View of Pump tj:.:~.) ~ :"~~:"':~. .::~ f '. ..: ~... . ~j b. Side View of Pump DIAPHRAGM PUMP USED TO OBTAIN HYDROCARBON DATA BURNF.R EXHAUST SAMPLING SYSTEM Figure V-22 image: ------- ~ ~ ~ :: N Colt G) " ~ 8. III ~ GI > ...t ... ~ GI ex: 110 :.-+..j:c.l ,.ui -. :.. ':'..::': :'iL ..'. .;'i~ :~~ ;:.I~~; .::.::J: ': :::Ed: uf.~. ~~gl:u : '''i"j::': ...:~~1.!.:.~~B~~7:'~;,"-~!.;-~~0.h :+.. '~~:~t; ,~TL .~~:I'..~~:;,I'SA7.~~.~..,;~~~i~J- ,;,,! ,".' ~~:j ..~..~ ..::.:c..:,~O::'...:::::::::::'-~'..' :.:;.~::::; I. I'; ,.~' i I': ':. .:. ... ~;:'i . .;'~.:.' 4.:J.£::~<~ .,L~-: ~ 'c.cc .. . . ' , 1'..."-. j:X::! . I' I": ; '." ... ,;' :~i: :.: .T : ?45~~"2h........,,,,":,~,!C.ml~~~;f .;' -+-~. .:..\ -t~-; :.'.:.; .:. .;:: .. ..: ~.. :to.::J:~::~: . :l;~::- :~i::L~._:~: ,..., .j' i"...'*.~.'""""4E~-""~ ~ ..." . .,~ ~j.JT:L~~.~t~i!m'~J,]:!;:J, '~',,' .'..'...,i~~,. .,:;" -= ~::~ ~'. ' . ,';'[ .!~:~ - :::.: 1.:.:;.[::::1:':: ::::.: : .! :::iL: :::it:".lid! It!: !'::i : ... :;:1:; :1: :11::: '.'::: :::1;::: .Ji : :.1::1 :.. :.1' 100 .:.::.:.::: , : 90 80 REFERAHCE : BECKMAN INSTRUMENTS OXYGEN SYNIi:HCL'>" FJt'jt'ECT ON YAMIOLB HYUROCANBONS USJNl'; FilJ(lo; HJDH{);..~Ji i01WI\!H image: ------- or. .... CtI ~ < . I>J .f: Q) ,11) s: 8. 11) Q) :x:; QI > ..-f +> cd .-f Q) a:: 110 . .. 100 i ' : ' ,: i ", : ::!' ::: ' , , ::, I ' ;';: i::'::'; I:;: , i ':':' "'::: :::" " ",.. L':i-- ::,:::::;: I ,,', I::: '~ f::: ...;, ---r' , : ,::;' ", "1:::' "'i:: :- :.. " ....' :::".. .."'",, ,.. "1':7:' . I I : ."::::::..: .... ." :'?:'f:...I~::. .:: : : =.. :~~f:.. I::: .. :..." ::: ::" ":d::' '''j ...,:::" '.:, ~r~.a-~: }', .....,. ;~':.;~~:=~ -.'2 ~~ :-r~l] Ii~:~;_~~j i~~1-"+-+ : \ 02 IN SAMPLE f:,:: r: "" :, :tjJ:: :, .it1NANi: ,,:, 1 ,~:I": ~;--"j'::}":}: f-- ~ ~ ;O:,'::i,, ::;::: ' :,..::: : <~".'!:' :', :,;';;,::,' ::~~7: :':' ': ::'H&T~Z~' :: :;: ,~' " " , ' " , : I : ,,,.. : :.. ' : :: ~ I.- : , :: ' ! ' ~~ : I::..: ....:1...: .- -:. : ~i:;.. : i :.. =: :::q~~~:.. - .!: -- ':1 90 i !' ~ ;--:"... : ; ,--J:: r-O-i...: : :;' " .... , .. .. i --: .. : "I' ,,: :J' " .., ',' '.-- .. .. :::,.. ,', ' I -;... :L":":.. -_.::::: '-'! :' ~ ~+:~I"" ,,~-c-'-'::---j;::I>i',"", ::::':~ :' : ::;: .. ::W;;:<::::,,::~,' '" :::~:;;;:'j;,~ -,'-; _. ! .., +'::::1".:: : --:." :"W*4W'~ -- ..-:: -::-:::,::1:.;::::: h ,:::: :.._,,,,. '::;j: ::~I :,: : ( : :.It:j:;: +~ '+H'.Fc-+f.jr:::~: 'j:'~<.-;, '.., ,":21-,(:' '; '..:.-.."...c-t~;=."'~r~~.' "~: ~..'~i ,.j',... c:".'j.c.' .',.. "....1:.\, ..I]~-t-~.]:. I: ,-~cj ti. I tr.C.r~~! ,! ,,' ,ii ,..",1;:: "::::..:':::,:;..;..;:, :;::.:.; ,,:.:.., j' )L:; I :1 I::r:' ::;~;,,: ::!: " ..I: ' : :.:1].:. .::J":.::::: :UlIC,.:: :I;.Q~:. ::~I:~: :: ::~'i:::: TIT1i,; :'1: ':,: :. .. , ,...' , .;... .. .. :.;.;l' , :1 -.J";: -.-- -- 80 REFERANCE : BECKMAN INSTRUMENTS OXYGEN SYNERGISM [i;!o'FECT ON VARIOUS HYDROCARBONS USING A NITR(x;!!:N-HYDROG~:N BLc.:NU AND AIR image: ------- Or. ~ < . N U8 Q) III J:: 8. I/) Q) a:; Q) > or! ~ ,Q) := III ~~-tL:._:__Li ..'!" :~:.':~";:.'::~, I,it, .........:1.n":'I':~- '...;' .:!t ,L ' .. :: ::: :::1::-:: m.. ..,,:,:: 'f":L. :jj~ :,:: ...,.. f..': '!'T ::'; :::.: ! ' :'\ :' "J: : I::. ;;; .'-:.'.::.: ..-- --- ,. :.:~ .:' ,. :{U12 :8. :::: :~~i ;£1 .:':I:! .1:: ... ":f::::. .:-:'.--~:-- :::t::~ ,::.c,:':':i., .J:"::i':y:;:,. ZL co::::: . jot: :'J:';~: ! :: ::::;,~ ;~~~ :::,;~~; <~::, ;:~~:!.:::.~= ~:.~:-: :'iB-:~I~<.'.' :.. :: :::~. :':~ ; i .. .. ::.:j:: :....: :;;;.;::; .:1:;: .:.' :0; :.:.:c .. ::\ ; ':. ...1...,1';.., 2..: I':l.- '4 .'.: :... ':, "--._':::,. ..; u i::~ P.:! ::: 1: ~~ ,: " f:,: ..:..~o- i ';,,1.' ..-- :1. " 1:-- ,. I. ,:: ! _.~:::: .:: "'., .. . -- -- .. :::1::,,:... ,- :.':: i,.. !.iV' --~~ .:: ; ,"'.:: :.': ,,--L ~:'. .. ':;:1~' :. u - =-= ':J~ : ,::.:.;.;.. ~,":':T .~' 1 . ..~; . ~...'j '.' ,..~.". ".='e=~ ;i-;:,~0:,";!n' .~~~~ .':~ ~~.~E J: ,'f"2 :-- "~:: ..J._- 'S}:, ... .. - ::~- .,f'''' :> ~~' -2.lIT~r>< UW:.. "!.J! ; Ii , , , ' .1. I . .. .. .:':.J.:: ::::I:,::...u .!tu- ...,f.. ....,. ':',,::: '-:, ' 'r-. ~I..:i ."""'.'.: ,"."..".i.- .'.~.... .-. "Lnn "'..' ,';;~#----: '--+:j .1+ ... .*:>:: ;87- :::1 :~"'i:,"I.. .. ,;-:T;:; :: ;;1r+r=-'~ =i=- .".:: ,,::::I::::!'j':"'" ':: ,~:- ::: ,:J:," :I.u :~".:!::~_.::~:t. ~';'i' :~' ,-, L' 1"-,-,_- ; -"""":'~':'IT":"':':'':'"'',:.: ::::1::1' :'::1:::: ,:::':'~:HP.:-,:.:.'-:,:,:.:.:.'u co:: .:: I : ':'f~~J...,::..._L,:..",j,,---,.t!:...... ,i_. I ,: . - - .. '. - --c-' :',:,'".-....,.m'jt' -:7!,'1-:-;.~ ! :', ,'.: i,;': .; :..... :'::\"::.''':;: .. ::: ,.::: , ',' ,i::: .. , ...; . 'r _,:~,11:.,~.,_I.',:.: ':rS',".'~.:,:'..'"f~- :..r -"~ 7C '..J! ': (,:' t..,: .'.1 ,I~ I ,;I;;",.". I":. :, ::: :""" G1<",'-~: k~.~~-=.c :OJ::, ,:::i' :, :. : ::T\ : : : ,!..':! ' :':..: ...:; 100 90 80 REFERAHCE : BECKMAN INSTRUMENTS OXYGEN SYNERGISM Ejo'FECT ON VARIOUS HYDHOCAHBONS IJSING A }{r;1IIIM-HYDH(X;i!:N RlENU AND AIM image: ------- SAMPLE POINT PROBE MATERIAL NOx CONCENTRATION (EQUIVALENT N02' ppm) Test 1 Test 2 "1 (At Burner) Quartz 9.5 9.5 n (At Burner) Stainless Steel 9.B 10.2 h (l5' from Burner) Stainless Steel 5.15 B.B (#4 (52' from Burner) Stainless Steel 0.1 2.8 COMPARISON or NOx SAMPLING POSITIONS Table V -1 Standard Solution Transmission at 5.50 m~ (%) New Reagent, Cold 42,0 New Reagent, Warmed 42.0 Old R~nt, Cold 42,5 Old Reagent, Warmed 42.5 TEMPERATURI!: AND AGING FJo'Io'ECTS ON GRIESS-SALT~MAN ABSORBING RJ!:ACEN'f Table V-2 Transmission At Equivalent Oxides 550 m"( of Nitrogen (%) (ppm) Reagent added before evacuation 62.3 2.3 Reagent added after evacuation 64.0 2,2 EFFECT OF EVACUATING PROCEDURI!: ON SAMPLING R&'C)ULTS Table V-3 image: ------- [ : I I FUEL SPECIFICATION - KEROSENE PROPERTIES i o Gravity, API Color, Saybolt. . 0 Flash, Tag c.c., r Pour Point, of Viscosity, cs at 300r Copper Strip at l220r Copper Strip at 212°F Corrosion, Silver Strip ~! image: ------- VI. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS A. Experimental Data Listings A complete listing of all emission and stability data for the Paxve burner obtained during this program is given in Tables 1 through 13. This listing consists of all the basic raw data obtained from burner testing which was conducted intermittently over a period from October 1970 to May 1971. The run numbers were assigned in chronological order and are listed consecutively with deletions of runs 173, 187, 204, 208 thru 216, 276, 277 and '278. These runs were either misnumbered or did not apply to this program. The data tables were compiled by inputting the test data sheets into the APL IBM/360 computer. Data sorting, checking, editing and final printout were greatly facilitated through the use of the computer. All pertinent burner data that was taken is listed and the test parameter symbols are defined in the table of nomenclature, Table 14. Each run is categorized under test type according to the fuel used, test objective, the burner system configuration and the test stand in which the test was conducted. The minus one (-1) notation given ~n the various columns of the data is an IBM 360 computer expedient to indicate data elements which are blank. The data voids will occur as a function of the particular run objective. Where applicable, run comments are given to describe or indicate runs which were made for procedural checks such as stability testing techniques or emission testing techniques to improve the quality of data. Also, in the course of the program, as elements of the test facility were added, such as the vapor generator loop, some runs were allocated for providing a check of .the system additions. Comments are also made to indicate data which through the sorting technique has been indicated to be obviously bad. Improvements were made to the burner in the course of testing. These improvements consisted primarily of better fuel/air mixing to eliminate fuel/air stratification. The injector improvements were applied to the burners in both stands 1 and 2. The comment column of the data listing indicates when the finalized burner improvements were instituted by the designation N which stands for new burner, in contrast to 0 for the old burner. As a further clarification of the major events affecting the test program and relating to the data listings, a table of significant test program events is given in Table 15. The notes indicate by run number when significant changes in test operation or data evaluation techniques took place during the burner evaluation program. 1. Explanation of Data Tabulation Column Headings A table of nomenclature for the symbols given in the column headings of the Experimental Data Tables 1 thru 13 is given in Table 14. The table of nomenclature is self explanatory and further amplification is not necessary. The data given in image: ------- I, I: the experimental data tabulation is all basic raw data with the exception of the nominal fuel/air ratio (FAN). The detailed explanation for the derivation of FAN is presented in Section VI-B. The chromatographic and FID data (C02C, NOT, NOB, CO and HC) is given in either percent concentration or in parts per million. These values were obtained from the measured strip chart recorder deflections and applying the appropriate spanning factor. Span was obtained by calibrating the instrument with a gas of known concentration as discussed in detail elsewhere in this report. For those runs for which the CO emissions were not detectable, the CO values were reported as 5 ppm which was the lower limit of resolution for the chromatograph. Those runs for which the FID readings were below zero were reported as zero ppm. The air flow data (WA) was taken from the meter as a volumetric reading from Stand 1, in percent of full scale (Sa~). The meter reading was then converted to a mass flow rate by using the meter calibration curve and correcting for temperature and pressure in the following manner: (WA)CORR. = PSTD. 'TINDO R (VACFM), IND. -V TSTDoR ~ PSTD = RT (OR) The temperature and pressure corrections were required for Stand I air flow meter since it is calibrated for volumetric flow at standard conditions. . Corrections are required when the test temperature and pressure varied from the values for which it was calibrated. Stand 1 operates at ATM pressure so pressure corrections are not necessary. II I I Stand 2 air flow meter reads in standard pounds per minute and the equation for correcting the indicated flow readings as a function of the temperature and pressure is shown below: ' I """\ /Tnm(OR) . ~ (WA)CORR. = (WA) IND. ~TSTD(OR) ~ Stand 2 operated slightly above 1 ATM and both pressure and temperature corrections were applied to the data. ./ II I The fuel flow readings (WF) for propane were read in standard cubic feet per hour for both Stands I and 2. These meter readings were converted to mass flow in pounds per hour as a function of the propane supply pressure by calibration curves. Temperature variations at the meter were negligible and ' corrections were not necessary. The kerosene liquid flow meter was nearly linear over the required flow range and the meter readings were converted to mass flow rate in pounds per hour by referring to the calibration curve. Corrections for pressure and temperature were unnecessary since liquid flow at the flow meter was maintained at essentially ambient temperature conditions. VI-2 image: ------- As described elsewhere in this report, it was found that the FIDchromatograph was sensitive to oxygen concentration. A correction factor has been applied to all the hydrocarbon emission measurements given in Tables 1 through 13 in accordance w~th the calibration factor given in Figure IV-12 when oxygen.was present in the gas sample. . . . 2. Explanation of Significant Test Program Events In the course of the burner evaluation program, significant events occurred which influenced the quality of the data. Facility improvements were added and procedural methods were developed which aimed at obtaining data of the best quality. The more important events in this regard have been listed to provide the reader with a better understanding of the progression in testing and instrumentation technology achieved during the course of the program. . Stability Test Procedure The test program began with an evaluation of burner stability lean limit with propane on Stand 1. Runs 1 through 7 were devoted to exploring the best indicators for a true' indication of the lean blowout limit. These tests established a procedure which was utilized in subsequent runs and this group of runs in themselves did not produce valid stability data. The initial difficulty in establishing the lean blowout limit was associated with the fact that the residual heat capacity of the burner appeared to sustain burning beyond the lean limit fuel/air ratio. It was found necessary to make a number of runs on and-near the lean limit point for extended time duration to establish that the burner remained at a steady state burning conditiol\. a. b. NOx Line Loss Check Out During initial testing the gas samples for NOx analysis were drawn from the long sample line which provided the gas samples for. all other emission data. The readings became suspect from this testing configuration when only very low values were consistently obtained. Beginning with run 95, a series of tests were conducted in both test stands I and 2 to evaluate the effects of drawing the NOx sample from various line lengths and from sample lines of different materials. It was found that N02 was being absorbed by the condensed water vapor in .the long sample line and a procedure was established for drawing NOx sample through short quartz tubes which gave satisfactory results and was followed for the remaining runs. c. Propane Accumulator Installed Stand 2 It was noted during testing that propane flow oscillations were occurring in test stand 2. Due to low propane supply pressure, pressure coupling with the burner VI-3 image: ------- chamber pressure oscillations occurred which caused oscillations in flow and interferred with the propane flow measurements. This difficulty was eliminated by installing a propane accumulator downstream of the propane supply tank. .This change was made during run 108 and served for the balance of the Stand 2 testing in the program. d. Air Flow Straightener Stand 2 During initial testing in Stand 2 it was noted that unsymmetrical air flow profiles existed at the burner inlet. The air flow plumbing in stand 2 for which the vapor generator loop is utilized, requires that a 90° bend be installed upstream of the burner inlet. To eliminate the effects of the flow discontinuity, a flow straightener consisting of a bundle of small diameter tubes was installed at a secion downstream of the 900 . bend which eliminated the problem. e. Hot Sample Line Installation . During initial emissions testing, long unheated sample lines were used to draw the sample to the chromatograph instruments. It was suspected that condensation of some of the exhaust gas constituents could occur in the sample line. This is particularly true of the unburned hydrocarbon fuels or decomposition products which might exist in the exhaust gas sample. Difficulty was also encountered in hydrocarbons or impurities being retained in the long sample line from previous running modes and obscuring the data for following runs. This problem was resolved py installing a line heater over the entire length of the sample line and maintaining the line temperature at 300°F or above. This temperature was sufficient to vaporize any of the heavier fuel fractions occurring in kerosene. The hot sample line was installed and checked out during run 128 for Stand 2. I \ It was necessary to complete the sample line heating system by installing a specially designed and fabricated electrically heated diaphram pump in the sample line. A pump was required to maintain the necessary pressure for accurate chromatograph data. The pump installation was completed and checked out at run 138 with completely satisfactory results. From this point on the heated system was used in all burner testing. I' f. No Data Runs Run Nos. 173, 187, and 204 are runs during which no data was collected due to misnurnbering of ~he run sequence or due to transient variations which did not permit collecting steady state data. Run groups 208 through 216 and 276 through 278 were made as special runs using special burner equipment for other purposes and are not pertinent to this program. . . VI-4 \ :, image: ------- q. Liquid Kerosene Runs Runs 203, 342, and 348 through 350 were made with liquid kerosene inste.ad of vapori zed k'erosene. The liquid kerosene was atomized by injecting a small amount of nitrogen into the fuel line. These runs are identified to differentiate the normal kerosne runs which were conducted with vaporized fuel. h. Vapor Generator Loop Check Out A vapor generator system was installed in Stand 2 to operate in conjunction with the burner. The purpose of this configuration was to study the effect on emissions of exhaust gas quenching over the vapor generator heat exchanger. This system consisted of a complex arrangement of mechanical, hydraulic and pneumatic components as well as an engine driven pump. It was necessary to run the burner in conjunction with the vapor generator loop to establish th effect of thermal conditions on the operation of the loop. This was accomplished during runs 205 through 207. i. Vapor Generator Stack Clean-Out During the early emissions testing it was found that higher hydrocarbon concentrations were being emitted from the top of the vapor generator stack than from the burner at the bottom of the stack. In the course of investigating the possibility of hydrocarbon emissions being generated from accumulations on the vapor generator coil, a special test was run in which the vapor generator coil was exposed to the burner exhaust gas while flowing nitrogen through the loop instead of the normal working fluid. This procedure was done in order to raise the coil temperature sufficiently to vaporize any absorbed hydrocarbons. j . NOx Saturation Evaluation Further doubt was cast upon the NOx gas analysis procedures which were being used by the fact that limiting values for NOx were being obtained which never seemed to be exceeded for the various runs. It was suspected that the proportions of Saltzman solution per sample which was being used for colormetric analysis might be insufficent to avoid saturating the solution. To investigate this possibility further three one. liter flasks were prepared containing 10, 20, and 50 ml of Saltzman solution respectively. During test No. 218, burner exhaust samples were collected in each of the three flasks while the run condition was maintained constant. It was found that the 10 ml flask indicated a maximum NOx value of 19.7 ppm, the 20 ml flask indicated 33.2 ppm, and the 50 ml flask indicated 32.6 ppm. These data indicate that .aturation of the Saltzman solution was indeed occurring. 'The r70x analysis technique was modified as described in detail elsewhere and checked out fully VI-5 image: ------- 1- ~ during runs 219 and 220. This technique was then utilized for all subsequent runs and gave satisfactory results. I , I I k. Fuel Injector Improvements During runs 220 - 237 it was found that hydrocarbon readings from the top of the vapor generator stack were much higher than those obtained from the burner. A series of investigations were conducted to determine the cause of this phenomenon. oil deposits on the vap~r generator coils and leakage of organic working fluid from the vapor generator tubing were both investigated and ruled out as possible explanations for the high HC readings. The fuel distribution patterns in the burner were then examined. The oxygen, carbon dioxide and hydrocarbon levels were determined at various locations in the plane of the burner exhaust. It was found that the exhaust flow was highly non-uniform. Disassembly of the burner revealed a damaged fuel injector which was flowing most of the fuel into one side of the burner. To remedy this situation and promote even better mixing, new fuel injectors were introduced into both the Stand 1 and Stand 2 test installations. This work was partially documented in runs 279 - 281. Dur1ng this time, the joint between the inlet pipe and the burner was also modified to prevent raw fuel from being carried up the stack without passing through the burner. After the modifications noted above had been made to the test installations, it was found that hydrocarbons data from the burner and the top of the vapor generator stack were in substantial agreement. It was also found in later examination of the data, that the NOx readings from the burner were improved as com~ared to data taken before the modifications. Data taken during and subsequent to run 282 reflect these improved results. B. Fuel Air Ratio Analysis and Correlation 1. Introduction i I I The ratio of fuel mass flow to air mass flow is a very important and basic correlation parameter in burner performance evaluation. All emission and stability characteristics of the burner are established on the basis of operation at a given fuel/air ratio. To provide the most accurate definition of burner emission and stability performance and to reduce data scatter, considerable effort was made to establish a reliable fuel/air ratio for each test run. Various sources of measurement were employed to establish a true value of fuel/air ratio for each run. The following discussion will describe the various methods used and the rationale in sel~cting the valu~ of fuel/air ratio which was assigned to the particular run. ! ! 2. Methods of Fuel/Air Ratio Measurement Values for fuel/air ratio were obtained for each run from various instrumentation' sources using two methods of determination. The first method employed the ~irect flowmeter I" VI-6 image: ------- measurement of fuel flow and air flow. The appropriate calibration factors to the flow meters were then applied and corrections were made for temperature and pressure to the fluid flows ~n arriving at a test fuel/air ratio. The second method employed an indirect means of determining the fuel/air ratio by measurements and analysis of the exhaust gas. The indirect method employed two instruments to measure the exhaust gas oxygen concentration and carbon dioxide concentration as well as the unburned combustible constituent concentration. These measured constituent concentra- tions were then compared with the theoretical equilibrium compo- sition for the combustion of hydrocarbons as given in Figure 1 for the given fuel/air ratio. The exhaust gas carbon dioxide and oxygen composition was measured by the volumetric (Orsat) apparatus dur~ng steady state combustion operation. In addition, the Bailey meter gave continuous readings of . oxygen composition and combustible gas composition of the exhaust gas sample. The Bailey Heat Prover was used during the burner t~sting to estimate the burner operating point. The Heat Prover has two meters, one which reads oxygen, and the other, labeled combustibles, which reads a mixture of the hydrogen and carbon monoxide present. For lean runs, the oxygen meter was used in conjunction with theoretical exhaust composition curves to find the approximate fuel/air ,ratio at which the burner was operating. For rich operation the Bailey combustibles meter was used in conjunction with an especially prepared curve (see Fig. 1) for the same purpose. Figure 2 shows the comparsion of the Bailey oxygen data with the volumetric oxygen information. Although there is fair agreement, it is clear that the Bailey reads low at the higher oxygen values. As a further check, the chromatograph' (TC) was used to also measure C02 and CO for a comparative examination of the operation fuel/air ratio. The specific instru- me~ts used in both methods of fuel/air ratio determination are discussed in extensive detail in other secions of the report and will not be discussed further here. 3. Assessment of the Methods of Fuel/Air Ueasurement In the analysis of fuel/air ratio accuracy the fuel/air ratios indicated by the various were tabulated for all the runs as shown in tables 16 basic measurements which are given in the tables are: measurement instruments thru 23. The a. FA, which is the fuel/air ratio as measured by the flow meters. b. FAO, the fuel/air ratio determined by the oxygen reading from the Orsat apparatus. c. FAC, the fuel/air ratio as determined by the carbon dioxide readings of the Orsat. d. FAB, the fuel/air ratio determined by the Bailey apparatus. Of the three basic measurements the ,greatest weight was given to VI-7 image: ------- the volumetric Orsat analysis. This instrument has the best inherent accuracy (approximately 0.1% of reading) and further provides a self contained check in the balance between the qxygen and the carbon dioxide measurements. The Bailey meter is convenient as a continuous recording device but is less accurate than the Orsat and was used primarily for a check of the Orsat readings in the lean combustion mode. As will be noted from the data of Table 24, the flow meter fuel/air ratio values during the early phases of testing in Stand 1 and in Stand 2 fall below the Orsat readings. This fact is attributed to air leaks tht existed in the facility plumbing downstream from the flowmeter which gave erroneously high air flow readings. This would result in an indicated lower fuel/air ratio at the burner than true value. The lower fuel/air ratio ~eadings from the flow meters as compared to the volumetric were noted in particular while testng in Stand 1 during rhe early test runs. During a later test period an overhaul was made of the Stand 1 air plumbing to eliminate all possible leakage points by welding all joints and it is noted that the correlation with volumetric data improved markedly. The consistency of the Orsat volumetric readings of fuel/air ratio derived from carbon dioxide and oxygen exhaust gas concentration measurements are shown in Figure 3. The general consistency of the volumetric measurements and the greater inherent accuracy of the apparatus makes it a first choice or primary standard in establishing the true value of fuel/air ratio. It is further noted that the volumetric measurements of fuel/air ratio are applicable with the greatest degree of confidence in the regimes of combustion where the equilibrium composition can be reasonably established as given in Figure 1. The Orsat fuel/air ratio determination therefore is not applied at the lean limit or rich limit points. I' In the early phases of testing, Orsat data was taken periodically and is not available for every run. This was done to expedite testing since the Orsat analysis requires that a grab sample be taken and a rather time consuming process is . required in performing the gas constituent analysis during the test run. Since the Orsat data is not available for every run, it was necessary to arrive at an adjusted composite of fuel/air data which could be applied for every run to arrive at the true fuel/air ratio. In order to arrive at cross-correlation of fuel/air ratio from the various instrumentation sources the method described below was employed. 4. Description of Fuel/Air Ratio Correction Procedure I, A tabulation of all the fuel/air ratios derived from the various measurements is given in Table 16-23. The FA column is a listing 6f the fuel/air. ratios obtained from the flow meters and is uncorrected. The column headed FA COR is the flow meter fuel/air ratio determination as corrected by factors which will be described. Correction factors for the flow meter data were determined on the following basis. VI-8 image: ------- a. b. Propane, Stand 1 - early Propane, Stand 2 - later pluIDbing leak repair) Propane, Stand 2 Kerosene, Stand 2 tests tests (after air c. d. The correction to the fuel flow meter readings is derived from the Orsat data using selected runs for which the Orsat data was available. The above correction factors were determined for lean combustion, maximum burner efficiency operation for which the theoretical equilibrium combustion criiteria given in Fig. 1 is closely applicable. The flow meter fuel/air value was divided by the value obtained from the average of the Orsat C02 and 02 fuel/air determin- ation. The ratio thus determined for each of the selected runs was averaged by the computer for all the particular selected run group and a standard deviation was determined. Obviously bad data points which deviated in excess of three standard deviations were excluded. A final correction factor was then obtained by . re-averaging all of the ratios. In this manner, correction factors were obtained for the propane Stand 1 early testing and later testing, the propane Stand 2 testing, and the kerosene Stand 2 testing. A tabulation.of the flow meter correction factors is shown in Table 24. These correction factors are to be applied to the appropriate values of FA to arrive at the values listed under FA COR. Referring again to Tables 16 thru 23, the column heading given by FAO is made up of fuel/air values obtained from the Orsat volumetric oxygen measurements. The fuel/air values under FAC are the corresponding Orsat values derived from the C02 measurement. The values for FAB are the fuel/air ratios obtained from the Bailey Heat Prover. The column headed.FAN gives nominal fuel/air ratios upon which the reported burner performance is based. As a result of the previous discussion and general rationale, the FAN values are based primarily on the Orsat measurements. The corrected flow meter data (FACOR) was used for test runs in which the volumetric data was not available and at lean or rich limit stability test points where combustion efficiency is reduced and non-equilibrium values of C02 and 02 are generated. The Bailey Heat Prover fuel/air measurements (FAB), as derived from the measured concentration of combustible consitituents, are also applied for rich mode operation when the Orsat data was not available. 5. Cross Correlation of Fuel/Air Measurements Further cross correlation among the various fuel/ air instrumentation sources are shown in the following plots. Figure 3 shows a comparison of the fuel/air ratios .derived from the measured Orsat oxygen concentration versus the corresponding Orsat C02 concentration. It is seen that excellent correlation is obtained on an x = y theoretical line. Figure 4 shows a comparsion of the nominal fuel/ air ratio (FAN) versus the C02 concentration as measured by the Orsat. The theoretical equilibrium C02 concentra- tion is also shown superimposed on the data and it is seen that very good correlation is obtained with minimal data scatter over the VI-9 [ . image: ------- I i I I. i I entire range of fuel/air ratio values from lean to rich operation. Figure 5 is a similar comparsion of the nominal fuel air ratio (FAN) versus the 02 concentration as measured by the Orsat. This curve also shows the theoretical equilibrium oxygen line. Here again, it is seen that the nominal fuel/air ratio (FAN) provides a good basic correlation between the measured 02 concentration and the theoretical for combustion of propane and kerosene. When the corrected fuel/air ratio from the flow meters (FACOR) is used as a reference to plot C02 concentration (from Orsat) as shown in Figure 6, it is seen that the data scatter increases. When the uncorrected values of fuel/air ratios from the flowmeters are examined in a similar manner, as shown in Figure 7, it is again apparent that much wider data scatter is in evidence. A comparsion of the fuel/air ratio derived from the Bailey Heat Prover versus the Orsat fuel/air ratio from the oxygen measurements is shown in . Figure 2. It is seen here that reasonable correlation is obtained. It appears that the Bailey has a systematic error and reads 02 concentrations which are slightly lower than the Orsat values. The Bailey combustibles, however, gave values of fuel/air which were in good agreement with Orsat C02 values for rich operation. On the basis of the above comparsions of fuel/air ratio measurements, it has been shown that the selection of the nominal fuel/air ratio (FAN) gives the closest correlation of hydrocarbon combustion characteristics with the theoretical values. This selection of a nominal fuel/air ratio will best serve as a correleating parameter in the documentation of the Paxve burner emissions and stability characteristics. C. Experimental Emissions Data 1. Carbon Dioxide Data I ' Carbon dioxide is not an objectionable emission resulting from hydrocarbon combustion. Its measurement during this test program serves primarily to provide an index of the completeness of combustion and to establish a basis for the determination of fuel/air ratio. . I Figure 4 shows all of the volumetric data for carbon dioxide plotted against the nominal fuel/air ratio (FAN). The good agreement is of course a result of the method by which the nominal fuel/air ratio was selected, which is discussed in detail in a preceding paragraph. In general, the averaged C02 and 02 volumetric data was used when possible for the nominal fuel/air ratio. When this could not be done the next choice was the C02 data, then the Bailey combustibles data, and finally the corrected fuel/air ratio from the flow meters. The fuel/air ratio as measured from the flow meters was corrected to give the best average agreement with the volumetric data. Figure 4 shows the C02 data as measured from the burner by the volumetric apparatus. Figure 8 shows the C02 data as determined by the chromatograph measured from the top of the vapor generator loop. The comparsion of these two values is shown in Figure 9. Computer evaluation of the ratio of C02C to C02V was II VI-10 I : image: ------- conducted. It was determined that the average ratio of these two values was 0.993 +0.120. 2., 02 Data . The measurements of oxygen in the burner exhaust gas products were taken, in general for the same purpose as those for carbon dioxide mentioned above. Figure 5 shows the volumetric oxygen data from the burner plotted against the nominai fuel/air ratio (FAN). As discussed previously the method of selecting FAN causes this curve to lie close to the theoretical oxygen curves shown in the figure. Chromatograph data for the oxygen concentration was not reduced since data from various other sources were available. As noted previously the volumetric oxygen data is in close agreement with the expected values based on the volumetric carbon dioxide data. Figure 3 shows the fuel/air based on the volumetric oxygen compared to the fuel/air based on the volumetric C02' A computer evaluation of the average ratio shows the value to be 1.0174 +0.0374. 3. Carbon Monoxide Data Figure 10 shows all of the carbon monoxide data obtained from the burner plotted versus the nominal fuel/air ratio. The interpretation of this data will be discussed in more detail in Section VII. It will be noticed however, that for fuel/air ratios. above approximately 0.04, carbon monoxi~e data agrees generally with the theoretical prediction based on the information presented in Purdue University Bulletin (Ref. 1). The higher values of carbon monoxide obtained at low fuel/air ratios near the lean stahility limit has been attributed to inefficient combustion. Correlation of this data is discussed in Section VII. Figure 11 shows the carbon monoxide data measured from the top of the vapor generator stack. A comparison of this data with the values obtained from the burner shows that there is substantial agreement for the high fuel/air ratios. Figure 12 shows a comparison of carbon monoxide data taken from the bottom of the stack (the burner) and the top of the stack on the same run. Examination of this Figure indicates that the top of the stack values of CO are lower than those at the bottom of the stack. This. is attributed to the oxidation of carbon monoxide in the gas flowing through the stack.. In general, the maximum values .obtained at the top of the stack are lower for the same fuel/air ratio than those obtained at the bottom of the stack. 4. Hydrocarbon Data Figure 13 shows all of the hydrocarbon data obtained from the burner. The hydrocarbon data is generally characterized by low readings over a wide range of fuel/air ratios near the so-called operating point of the Paxve burner. As lean blowout is approached hydrocarbon values increase for VI-ll image: ------- kerosene becoming rather large near lean blowout. This phenomena is not observed in general for propane operation. A~ lean blowout is approached the hydrocarbon valu~s remain substantially zero until the burner is actually at the lean limit. This fact w~s useful in establishing the lean limit during burner stability investigations. As the lean blowout limit was approached, the flame ionization detector measuring the hydrocarbon output was always the first instrument to register incipient lean blowout. When the FID first showed an increase in signal, the operator would stabilize the burner at that point and. wait. In general, in a matter of 10 to 15 minutes, the other burner operation indicators such as the temperature and the oxygen indication on the Bailey would have bequn to rise and if allowed to continue, burner blowout would ensue. The operator could always prevent this lean blowout condition from occurring by a slight increase in fuel/air ratio which would cause the FID to once again drop to the low value characteristic of normal burner operation. The use of the FID as a blowout indicator was not found to be effective for kerosene runs. Kerosene operation as with propane operation generally showed zero or slightly negative readings on the FID during normal burner operation. However, as the lean limit was approached with kerosene positive readings of hydrocarbon, content began to appear and would stabilize at some measurable value. This was in contrast to operation with propane where either the hydrocarbon reading was essentially zero or it would not stabilize but would continue to increase with time and the burner went out. A further decrease in fuel/air ratio for the kerosene operation caused a further increase in the hydrocarbon output. This conti~ued until incipient blowo~t was reached at ~hich point the hydrocarbon signal would no longer stabilize but would continue to climb as the burner flamed out. I I An examination of the hydrocarbon data near stoichiometric or rich operation of the burner shows that as with the carbon. monoxide there is a gradual increase in hydrocarbon content in the exhaust with increasing fuel/air ratio. The increase in hydro- carbons starts as approximately 90% of stoichiometric for propane and slightly lower values for kerosene. We see again that the kerosene provides higher hydrocarbon readings for a given equivalence ratio than propane during rich operation. II II Figure 14 shows hydrocarbon data measured from the top of the vapor generator stack. We see here that almost all of the runs are plotted as zero hydrocarbons. In fact, most of these runs indicate negative readings but as discussed previously the negative values must be interpreted as being a result of zero shift of the flame ionization detector due to the presence of water vapor. The low hydrocarbon readings evidenced by the plot of the top of the stack data should not be interpreted as a difference between the top and bottom of the stack. In fact, lower values were obtained at the bottom of'the stack than the top. The main reason for the great accumulation of zero and very low VI-12 I I image: ------- hydrocarbon readings in this Figure is that the fuel/air range of operation was fairly narrow. When the burner was being operated in conjunction with the vapor generator it w~s not desirable to use a high value of fuel/air ratio since this would create high flame temperatures which in turn would lead to degradation of the working fluid and difficulty in operating the vapor generator loop over extended time periods. Low values of fuel/air ratio approaching lean blowout were avoided as much as possible during loop operation, particularly when we were operating with kerosene. The reason for this is that the vapor generator coils tend to act like a trap for hydrocarhons and lean operation with significant quantities of hydrocarbon emissions would deposit some hydrocarbon materials on the coils which then continue to flow into the flame ionization detector on a subsequent run. On one or two occasions an inadvertant lean blowout occurred due to operator error. ~~en this situation arose during. kerosene testing, it was necessary to conduct sustained operation of the vapor generator loop with clean burner exhaust to remove all traces of hydrocarbon from the loop coils and the FID output. One of the notes referring to the run data tabulated in Tables 1 thru 13 referes to the use of a new injector. Prior to run 282 we found high levels of hydrocarbons in the vapor generator exhaust although the burner exhaust showed low or even negative hydrocarbon readings. We were prepared to believe that the hydrocarbons might disappear on the way up the stack but we found it difficult to accept the idea that they would be generated in the stack and hence we conducted a series of investigations designed to explain this anamolous behavior.. Several causes for spurious hydrocarbon signals were considered. The first of these was the acutal emission of some hydrocarbon material that had existed in the fuel and air intake pipe but failed to move into the burner. Such a situation could arise due to improper seating of the fuel and air intake pipe at the burner mouth. It was found that, in fact, there was leakage of raw fuel/air mixture up the vapor generator stack and this situation was corrected by providing an adequate seal at the joint between the burner inlet pipe and the burner. This problem is one which is peculiar to the test installation under study here and not a problem which should be considered a factor in burner development for automotive application. Another factor which was considered a possible source of hydrocarbons in the stack was leakage of the organic working fluid from the loop. Extensive investigation of possible sources of leakage in the loop were conducted and none were located. This included pressure checking and helium leak testing. All welds were found to be sound and fittings were tight. The third possible source of hydrocarbons in the loop was oil deposited on the walls of the vapor generator stack or the coils of the loop. The stack was cleaned out by operating the burner with the coil removed so that the exhaust gas exiting from the burner was still at high temperature. This did in fact reduce some of the VI-13 image: ------- I' , I hydrocarbon levels during subsequent tests. The coil was cleaned by passing dry nitrogen through the inside of it while it was held in place and subjected on the outside to the exhaust gas from the burner. This further reduced some of the spurious hydro- carbon signals. Nevertheless hydrocarbon readings continued to show on the order of 30 to 40 ppm from the top of the stack while no comparable values could be found from the burner. The fuel injector assembly was then disassembled and its flow pattern observed. It was found that a serious maldistribution of flow existed in the fuel injector. This caused a non-uniform fuel/air distribution to the burner with locally excessively rich zones. Subsequent modification of the injector succeeded in eliminating the maldistribution of fuel. Tests after run 282 were conducted with a new fuel injector configuration which assured adequate mixing of the fuel and air in a homogeneous fashion prior to entrance of fuel/air mixture into the burner. . Although the burner is successful in eliminating hydrocarbon emissions over a range of fuel/air operating . conditions, it nevertheless emits hydrocarbon under two sets of conditions: . a. b. operation near lean blowout with kerosene extremely rich operation near blowout with both kerosene and propane. II When a poorly mixed fuel/air mixture passes through the burner, local regions of the flow can be near rich or lean blowout while other portions have normal good operating fuel/air values. If the probe which is sampling the burner is in the portion of the burner exhaust which is at the nominal fuel/air ratio no emissions will be seen here. However, the averag~d values finally exhausting from the top of the stack after traversing the long mixing length may contain properly burnt and improperly burnt material which issued from the burner. Thus if a portion of the burner is very rich, while the rest of it, including the probe location, is at a normal fuel/air ratio, we can expect to see apparently clean operation of the burner accompanied by excessive hydrocarbons from the top of the stack. Improvement in the fuel injection pattern eliminated this problem and provided a wide range of hydrocarbon free operation on top of the stack comparable to that previously measured from the bottom of the stack. 5. Oxides of Nitrogen II I Oxides of nitrogen (N02 and NO) formed during combustion of hydrocarbon fuels with air are among the more objectionable atmospheric pollutants. One of the primary objectives of this test program was to document over a wide range of conditions, the oxides of nitrogen emissions from the Paxve burner. This data is given in the curves shown in Figures 15 through 19 representing the complete nitrogen oxides emissions documentation of the burner during the test program. Figure 15 shows the NOx emissions measured from the burner alone while Figure 16 shows the NOx emissions from the burner with' the vapor generator installed. Both of these plots show NOx emissions as a function of , I , VI-14 image: ------- nominal fuel/air ratio. These data show no appreciable difference beyond the normal data scatter. Figure 17, shows the oxides of nitrogen measured at the top of the vapo~ generator stack as as function of nominal fuel/air ratio. Here again there is no distinguishable difference in the NOx emissions between the burner and the top of the vapor generator stack. Figure 18 presents a comparison of emissions data between the top and the bottom of the vapor generator stack. This comparison shows that the emissions from the top of the vapor generator stack are essentially unchanged from those measured at the burner. It is a180 noted that there is no distinguishable influence on NOx emissions by the inlet temperature conditions or the air mass flow. Referring again to Figure 15, we wish to point out that the bulk of the emission data was taken on the lean side of stoichiometric. In ohserving the variation of the composite data with fuel/air ratio as shown in Figure 15, it can be seen that the NOx emissions increase with increasing fuel/air ratio to a maximum occuring at or near stoichiometric. This is consistent with the data shown in Figure 19 which shows NOx as a function of combustion gas temperature. It is seen that NOx emissions increase directly with gas temperature. Since the combustion gas temperature reaches a maximum near the stoichiometric point one would expect that the highest emission rate of oxides of nitrogen would occur as shown in the data of Figure 15. Over the normal operating range of the Paxve burner which is nominally at a fuel/air ratio of 0.034 the NOx emissions are maintained within a range of 10 to 20 pprn. All of the data in Figures 15 thru 19 was obtained using the finalized oxides of nitrogen analysis collection and gas analysis techniques as described during previous sections. D. Experimental Stability Data Figures 20 through 26 show experimental stability data measured on the Paxve burner. Early stability data was taken in Stand 1 using propane together with a burner of relatively small internal volume (33 cu. in.). Later data on a considerably larger burner was obtained in Stand 1. This larger burner had a volume of approximately 66.5 cu. in. All of the kerosene experimental data was obtained in test stand 2 on a burner having an int'ernal volume of 52.3 cu. in. . Tests were conducted with kerosene for lean blowout only due to limitations in the test equipment. The parameters varied during the stability testing included the flow rate, the mixture ratio, and both the air and fuel temperatures independently. Figure 20 shows the stability data obtained with propane on test stand 1 using ambient air and fuel. The circles represent runs for which stable operation of the burner was obtained. The triangles represent runs which were 'considered" to be lean limit operations. Lean limit points are those in which either (1) combus- tion was sustained but was erratic in operation with incipient local flameout due to minor fluctuations in air flow, or (2) the burner did go out after a long period of time (on the order of 10 minutes or more). Squares represent runs for which the burner was below the lean limit. In this mode it continued to operate for a short period of time while decreasing in temperature. Flame VI-15 image: ------- out would then occur unless the fuel/air was adjusted to a condition of stable operation. : I [ . I; Superimposed on Figure 20 is the prediction of stability limit at ambient operating conditions. That prediction was made using the burner theory discussed in Section VII. Examination of Figure 20 shows that the theory and the experimental correlation agree remarkable well at high flow rates. At low flow rates the theory predicts stable operation will be possible under leaner conditions than those for which stable operation was actually achieved. This disparity between the theory and the experiment at low flows is attributable to the fact that the theory does not take into account heat loss from the burner. At low flows this heat loss can be a significant factor and can be altered by appropriate thermal design of the burner. For the Paxve burner tested, there was no attempt made to reduce radiation heat losses from the burner. The heat rejection by radiation constitutes the major thermal loss influencing lean limit operation. . , I The lean stability analysis given in Section VII required the calculation of adiabatic flame temperature for each run condition or fuel air ratio and burner inlet air temperature. This calculation was accomplished by writing a computer program designated CAL for use with the" APL IBM 360 computer. The results of the calculations are given in Tables 25 thru 32. Theoretical flame temperatures are given for each run of the test program. The temperature calculation considers air inlet temperature and fuel characteristics. E. Detailed Emissions Investigation I: As a ~ans of examining in further detail the influence of air flow, inlet temperature, and vapor generator loop on critical burner emissions, expanded plots of the data were made. Data segregation took into account the various burner volumes which were tested and improvements in data quality derived from improvements to the experimental techniques relating to the me~surement of . oxides of nitrogen and hydrocarbons. In addition, the data plots show the influence of the injector modifications which were made to improve fuel/air mixing and distribution. The data taken from run 282 on was obtained using the modified injector configuration and includes all of the latest experimental measurement techniques for NO and HC. This data is considered to be the most representative of the emissions characteristics of the Paxve burner. The emissions data is given in parts per million as well as grams/kilogram of fuel. " 1. Carbon Monoxide Emissions Figures 27 through 37 show carbon monoxide emissions in ppm correlated ~gainst nominal fuel/air ratio. Figures 38 thru 48 are the corresponding plots converted to carbon monoxide concentration in grams per kilogram of fuel. The points are identified for air flow rate, run data from run 282 on, and inlet air temperature. VI-16 image: ------- 2. Unburned Hydrocarbon Emissions The unburned hydrocarbons plotted ~gainst nominal fuel/air ratio'in ppm are shown in Figure 49 thru 55. These data indicate the effects of lean operation down to the blowout limit ort unburned fuel emissions. The effect on rich operation is also shown. Corresponding plots of hydrocarbon emission concentration in grams/kilogram of fuel are shown in Figures 56 thru 64. The hydrocarbon data shown was all taken after the heated sample lines and heated sample line pump were installed. In addition, the runs after modification of the fuel injector (from run 282 on) are identified. The hydrocarbon data shown includes both the measurements taken at the burner and those taken from the top of the vapor generator loop. 3. Oxides of Nitrogen From the Burner NOx emissions from the burner plotted against nominal fuel/air ratio for concentrations in both ppm and gr/Kg of fuel are shown in Figures 65 thru 74. This data was all taken after the initiation of the short quartz tube sampling line technique and the non-saturation precautions for the Saltzman reagent. The influence o~ nonstratified fuel injection and optimal mixing of fuel is shown in the data from run 282 on. 4. Oxides of Nitrogen from the Vapor Generator Stack - Similiar plots to the preceding for NOx taken from the top of 'the vapor generator stack are shown in Figures 75 thru 82. These data, are of course limited to runs taken with the vapor generator installed and all these data were taken in test stand 2. The comments relative to the sampling and gas analysis techniques applied to the burner NOx emissions also apply for the vapor generator NOx emissions measurements. VI-17 image: ------- EXPERIMENTALDArA FROM rHE PAXVE BURNER PAGE 1 RUN TEsr TA TF JlA JlF C02 V C02C 02V 02B Nor NOB co HC PAN kQl[l1iliX~ NO. rIPE -F -P LB/HR LB/HR PCT PCT pcr pcr PPM PPM PPM PPM RUN PRO DAT BUR PSB1 75 71 22.3 0.54 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 18.7 - 1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 0.0299 LO PS B 0 1 PSB1 80 71 22.2 0.61 :1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 11.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 -1. 0 -1.0 0.0340 LO PS 0 2 3 P8S1 II 72 IU.3 1.13 1.0 -1. 0 1.0 9.5 - 1.0 1.0 -1.0 -1.0 0.0309 LO PS 0 PSB1 85 73 45.3 1.06 - 1.0 1.0 - 1.0 10.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 -1. 0 -1. 0 0.0290 LO PS 0 4 5 PSB1 - 85, 73 47.0 1.13 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 -1.0 0.0298 LO PS 0 -1.0 -1. 0 - ~1.0 -1.0 LO PS 6 PSB1 88 74 61.8 1. 4 4 1.0 10.5 1.0 1.0 0.0288 0 7 PSB1 90 75 61.7 1. 58 3.8 -1.0 14.0 8.5 - 1.0 1.0 -1.0 -1. 0 0.0317 LO PS B 0 8 PSB1 90 73 61.7 2.02 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 -1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 1.0 0.0405 LB 0 9 PSB1 90 74 61.7 1.62 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0'-1.0 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 -1.0 0.0325 LL 0 10 PSB1 90 74 61.7 1.50 1.0 -1.0 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 -1.0 0.0301 0 LO 11 PSB1 90 74 61.7 1.67 - 1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 -1.0 0.0335 LL 0 12 PSB1 90 74 61.7 1. 38 -1.0 -1. 0 -1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 0.0277 LO 0 13 PSB1 90 74 61.7 1. 72 -1.0 -1.0 -1. 0 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 . -1.0 -1. 0 0.0345 LO 0 14 PSB1 90 75 61.7 1.62 1.0 -1. 0 -1. 0 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 ,.. 1.0 1.0 0.0325 LL 0 15 PSB1 90 74 61'.7 1.67 6.5 -1.'0 10.5 8.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 -1.0 -1.0 0.0326 0 LB 16 PSB1 90 75 78.1 2.30 - 1.0 - 1.0 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 1.0 -1.0 1.0 0.0364 LD 0 17 PSB1 90 75 78.1 2.19 - 1.0 -1.0 ~1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 -1.0 0.0347 LL 0 18 PSB1 90 73 78.1 2.24 -1.0 -1.0 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 '""1.0 -1.0 -1.0 0.0355 LB 0 19 PSB1 91 73 7.8.0 2.47 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 1.0 ,.. 1.0 1.0 -1.0 1.0 0.0391 LB 0 20 PSB1 92 74 78.0 2.17 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 -1.0 0.0344 LB 0 21 PSB1 92 74 78.0 1. 86 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 ,.. 1.0 -1.0 0.0295 LO 0 22 PSBl 93 72 77.9 2.00 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 ,.. 1.0 -1. 0 -1. 0 0.0317 LO 0 23 PSBl 93 72 77.9 2.10 - 1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 ,.. 1.0 -1.0 -1.0 0.0333 LL 0 24 PSB1 93 74 77.9 2.17 - 1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 -1.0 0.0344 LL 0 25 PSB1 93 75 77.9 2.24 7.4 -1.0 9.5 9.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 1.0 0.0360 LL 0 26 PSB1 90 72 103.3 3.71 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 ,.. 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0444 LB 0 27 PSB1 93 73 103.1 3.09 -1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 0.0371 LB 0 28 PSB1 96 73 102.8 2.78 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 .-1. 0 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 0.0334 LO 0 29 PSB1 97 73 102.7 2.72 -1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 0.0328 LO 0 30 PSB1 97 74 102.7 2.78 1.9 -1.0 17.6 17.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 -1.0 0.0335 LL 0 kQ12E:~ XE~X_XI.fE llIl.lLkQl1l1iliX~ fBQk~QQB4'_kQ~MiliX~ 12d.X.d_kQMME:!i.X~ ~!lli!i.r:.B_QQMMf1li.X~ P-PROPANE NL-NORMAL LEAN PS-STABILITY PROCKD. CK. B-BAILEY N.G. O-OLD INJECT. CON FIG. K-KEROSENE NR-NORMAL RICH PN-NOX E1HSS. PROCED. CK. H-HC N.G. N-NEF' INJECT. CONFIG. E-EMISSIONS LB-LEAN BURNING PH-HOT SAMPLE LINE CK. N-NOX N.G. S-STABILITY LL-LEAN LIMIT Fir-VAPOR GENER. OPER. CK. V-VOLUMETRIC N.G. B-BURNER LO-LEAN GOES OUT T-TRANSIENT OPERe L-LOOP RB-RICH BURNING l-STAND 1 RL-RICH LIMIT Table 2-STAND 2 RO-RICH GOES OUT VI-l image: ------- EXPERIMENTAL DATA FROM THE PAXYE BURNER PAGE 2 .. RUN TEST TA TP WA IIF C02V C02C 02V 02B NOT NOB CO HC FAN C.QHHEli.X2. NO. TYPE .F .F LBIHR LBIHR PCT PCT PCT PCT PPM PPM PPM PPM RUN PRO DAT EUR 31 PSBl 102 75 120.9 3.71 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 LB 0 0.0380 32 PSBl 105 75 120.6 3."1 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 LB 0 0.0350 33 PSBl 108 77 120.2 3.21 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1..0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 1.0 - 1.0 LL 0 0.0330 3.. PSB1 95 75 121.6 3.21 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 LO 0 0.0326 35 PSBl 102 73 120.9 3.33 6.7 -1.0 10." 9.6 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 LL 0 0.0332 36 PSBl 112 7.. 153.8 ".68 - 1.0 -1.0 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 LB 0 0.0376 37 PSBl 117 7.. 153.2 .....5 - 1.0 1.0 - 1.0 - 1'.0 -1.0 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0359' LB 0 38 PSBl 120 7.. 152.8 4.31 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 LB 0 0.03"9 39 PSBl 120 75 152.8 ".19 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1. O' LO 0 0.0339 ..0 PSBl 120 75 152.8 4.06 -1. O' -1. 0 - 1.0 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 LO 0 0.0329 ..1 PSBl 12.. 75 152.3 ".31 6.5 - 1.0 10.5 9.6 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 LL 0 0.0350 "2 PSBl 91 75 103.2 3.71 10.1 9.4 5.5 4.9 - 1.0 - 1.0 124.0 - 1.0 -0.0"8" LB 0 43 PSBl 93 75 103.1 2.78 6.9 - 1.0 10.6 10.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 1.0 - 1.0 LL 0 0.0334 44 PSB1 87 73 41.8 1.63 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 LB 0 0.0482 45 PSBl 85 75 41.9 1. 50 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 LB 0 0.0443 46 PSBl 84 75 41. 9 1. 33 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 LB 0 0.0392 ..7 PSBl 82 75 "2.0 1.16 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 LE 0 0.0341 "8 PSB1 82 7.. "2.1 1.07 - 1.0 6.9 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 8.0 -1.0 0.0314 LB 0 49 PSB1 80 72 "2.1 0.98 -1.0 5.8 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 688~0 1.0 LO 0 0.0288 50 PSB1 80 73 42.1' 1.03 6.5 6.6 10.9 10.5 - 1.0 - 1.0 350.0 - 1.0 0.0320 LL 0 51 PSB1 83 73 25." 0.80 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0390 LB 0 52 PSB1 82 73 25." 0.71 -1. 0 -1.0 -1. 0 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 LB 0 0.03"6 53 PSB1 82 73 25." 0.61 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0297 LL 0 5.. PSB1 83 73 25." 0.66 5.9 - 1.0 12.0 10.9 -1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.00.0289 LL 0 55 PSBl 83 73 "2.0 - - - . 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 RL 0 6.90 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.2032 56 PSBl 81 73 "2.1 5.75 -1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.1690 BB 0 57 PSB1 82 73 "2.0 6.30 0.8. 0.4 17.3 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 713.0 - 1.0 0.1854 RO V 0 58 PSBl 85 ~5 "1.9 5.75 0.6 0.7 19.3 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 12200.0 - 1.0 0.1697 RO V 0 59 PSB1 85 75 41.9 6.90 0.1 0.5 20.3 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 5530.0 - 1.0 .0.2036 RO V 0 60 PSB1 90 75 41.7 4.20 0.0 0.3 20.9 -1. 0 -1. 0 - 1.0 5560.0 - 1.0 0.1245 BB' V 0 C.Q12~~ Xf::2.:LXl.EE. B.lLlLk.QHME.N.X.~ fB.Qk.E.QlLBd'_QQMME.N.X2. ll.d.X-d._QQMl:!E.li.X2. l1lLBliE.B_QQMME.li.X2. P-PROPANE NL-NORMAL LEAN PS-STABILITY PROCED. CK. B-BAILEY N. G. O-OLD INJECT. CON FIG. K-KEROSENE NR-NORMAL RICH PN-NOX EMISS. PBOCED. CK. H-HC N.G. N-NEF INJECT. CONF'I G. E-EMISSIONS LB-LEAN BURNING FH-HOT SAMPLE LINE CK. N-NOX N.G. S-STABILITY LL-LEAN LIMIT FV-VAPOR GEllER. OPERe CK. V-VOLUMETRIC N.G. B-BURNER LO-LEAN GOES OUT T-THANSIENT OPERe L-LOOP RB-RICH BURNING Table l-STA11D 1 RL-RICH LIMIT VI-2 2-STAND 2 RO-RICH GOES OUT' image: ------- EXPERIMENTAL DATA FROM THE PAXVE BURNER PACE 3 RUN 'l'EST 'l'A TF WA WF C02 V C02C 02V 02I1 NOT NOB CO HC FAN ~QMM~liX.Q. NO. TYPE .p .F LBIHR LBIHR PC'l' PC'l' PC'l' PC'l' PPM. PPM PPM PPM RUN PRO OAT BUR 61 PSBl 90 75 41.7 4.20 5.3 5.3 0.1 -1.0 -1..0 -1.0 131000.0 -1.0 0.1245 RII 0 62 PSB1 85 72 41.9 5.75 3.7 3.8 0.4 -1. 0 .-1.0 0.1 126000.0 -1.0 0.1697 RB II 0 63 PSBl 87 72 41.8 6.90 1.0 0.5 16.3 -1. 0 -1.0 0.1 382.0 -1.0 0.2040 RO N 0 64 PSB1 85 72 41.9 5.75 5.1 5.3 0.1 -1. 0 -1.0 0.0 101000.0 -1.00.1697 RB N 0 65 PSB1 88 75 41.8 5.99 5.8 -1. 0 0.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 0.1772 RB 0 66 PSB1 85 75 41.9 6.20 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 1.0 -1.0 0.1829 RL 0 67 PSB1 85 75 41. 9 5.99 5.5 2.6 4.7 -1.0 -1.0 0.1 31500.0 - 1.0 0.1767 RB N 0 68 PSB1 78 75 25.5 3.33 0.5 -1.0 17.9 -1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 0.1617 BB V 0 69 PSB1 82 75 24.7 3.07 3.4 4.3 6.8 -1.0 -1.0 0.1 1"0000.0 4385.5 0.1535 RB NH 0 70 PSBl 85 78 25.3 3.82 4.5 5.1 5.1' -1.0 - 1.0 0.1 115000.016971.2 ~.1867 RL NH 0 71 PSB1 86 78 25.3 4.01 -1.0 -1. 0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 0.1961. RO 0 72 1'SE1 90 78 61.7 7.62 4.7 ".3 0.0 -1.0 -1.0 0.0 1320 00 . 0 5420.0 0.1527 RO NH 0 73 PSBl 93 78 61.5 7.80 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1. 0 0.1568 RO 0 74 PEBl 86 73 25.3 0.66 -1.0 6.7 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 0.0 42.0 108.3 0.0323 LL Nil 0 75 PEBl 85 73 25.3 0.95 8.2 9.0 8.3 7.0 -1. 0 2.7 8.4 -1.0 1).0398 NL N 0 76 PEBl 85 75 25.3 1.00 11.2 8"4 3.9 4.5 -1.0 14.5 18.8 95.8 0.0534 NL NH 0 77 PEBl 85 75 25.3 1.32 13.3 12.1 0.8 1.0 -1.0 17.0 471.0 53.4 0.0637 NL NH 0 78 PEBl 90 75 61.7 1.78 5.3 5.6 12.5 11.1 -1.0 0.3 3920.0 719.5 0.0357 LL NH 0 79 PEBl 92 79 61.6 2.34 9.3 9.2 7.1 5.5 -1. 0 7.3 46.0 23.3 0.0440 NL NH 0 80 PEBl 90 79 61.7 3.11 13.1 12.5 0.9 1.0 -1.0 15.5 1510.0 -1.00.0635 NR N 0 81 PEBl 92 80 61.6 4.60 7.6 7.8 1.4 0.2 -1.0 0.0 62800.0 -1.0 0.0924 NR N 0 82 PEBl 103 75 102.1 2.78 6.6 6.9 10.7 10.0 -1.0 0.0 3660.0 87.6 0.0323 NL HE 0 83 PEl31 105 78 101. 9 3.88 10.3 2.1 5.3 4.5 - 1.0 11.0 149.0 6 0.8 0.0491 NL NH 0 84 PEBl 100 72 102.4 3.95 10.0 10.5 5.6 3.4 -1.0 14.4 186.0 67.3 0.0478 NL. NH 0 85 PEBl 103 77 102.1 4.62 12.5 12.1 2.0 1.9 - 1.0 16.2 822.0 28.9 0.0587 NL NH 0 86 'PEBl 105 77 101. 9 6.76 9.2 9.0 0.0 0.2 -1. 0 1.4 73900.0 27.0 0.0820 NR. NH 0 87 PEBl 300 600 59.3 1. 71 7.1 6.4 10.1 9.0 - 1.0 0.9 5.0 18.7 0.0345 NL NH 0 88 PEBl 300 600 59.3 2.28 9.2 6.8 7.0 4.5 -1.0 9.4 58.0 3.5 '0.0440 NL 1/H 0 89 PEEl 300 600 59.3 3.40 10.1 6.2 0.4 0.6 - 1.0 1.7 36800.0 21.6 0.0709 NR NH 0 90 PE B1 300 720 59.6 1. 71 7.6 6.5 9.3 8.0 - 1.0 5.4 16.3 7.4.0.0369 NL NH .0 kQ12~Q. X~~:LXlf~ B.IUL~QHI!~llXQ. fBQ~rQUB4'_~QMM~liX~ 124X4_k:QMME.ll.XQ. ~IlHli.~ILk:Qf:f!fE.liXQ. P-PROPANE NL-NORMAL LEAN PS-STABILITY PROCED. CK. B-BAILE~ N. G. O-OLD INJECT. CONFIG. K-KEROSENE NR-NORMAL RICH PN-NOX EMISS. PROCED. CK. H-HC N.G. N-NEW INJECT. CON FIG. E-EMISSIONS LB-LEAN BURNING FH-HOT SAMPLE LINE CK. N-NOX N.G. S-STABILITY LL-LEAN LIMIT FV- VAPOR GENER. OPERe CK. V-VOLUMETRIC N.G. B-BURNER LO-LEAN GOES OUT T-TRANSIENT OPERe L-LOOP RB-RICH BURNING l-STAND 1 RL-RICH LIMIT Table 2-STAND 2 RO-RICH GOES OUT VI-3 image: ------- RUN TEST NO. TYPE 91 PEBl 92 PEBl 93 KEB2 94 KEB2 95 KEB2 95.1 PEBl 96 KEB2 97 KEB2 98 KEB2 99 K EB 2 100 KEB2 101 PEB2 102 PEB2 103 PEB2 104 PSB2 105 PSB2 106 PSB2 107 PSB2' 108 PSB2 109 PSB2 110 PSB2 111 PSB2 112 PSB2 113 PSB2 114 PSB2 115 PSB2 116 PSB2 117 PSB2 118 PSB2 119 PSB2 X~Q.X_Xlf~ P-PROPANE X-KEROSENE E-EMISSIONS S-STABILITY B-BURI1ER L-LOOP i-STAND 1 2-STAND 2 EXPERIMENTAL DATA FROM THE PAXVE BURNER TA TF WA WF of of LB/HR LB/RR 310 720 59.3 2.28 300 720 59.3 3.40 250 440 165.3 5.86 250 485 165.3 7.24 250 510 165.3 7.98 95 78 107.0 3.57 250 520 132.9 7.98 95 77 55.9 1.66 95 77 55.9 2.10 95 77 55.9 2.75 100 77 55.6 3.38 102 77 55.5 4.03 102 77 89.0 3.62 400 770 50.0 2.00 400 800 50.0 1.30 84 88 49.9 1.73 85 95 49.9 1.32 85 89 49.9 1.06 85 92 49.9 1.20 85 98 49.9 1.32 400 730 50.0 1.06 400 730 50.0 1.06 400 720 33.2 0.75 400 725 33.2 0.66 400 730 33.2 0.66 400 720 33.1 0.59 400 710 82.7 2.27 400 710 82.8 1.87 400 730 82.8 1.73 400 720 126.8 2.94 IUl.lL(2QHHfLliX.Q. NL-NORMAL LEAN llR-NORMAL RICH LB-LEAN BURNING LL-LEAN LIMIT LO-LEAN GOES OUT RB-RICH BURNING RL-RICH LIMIT RO-RICH GOES OUT C02V C02C 02 V PCT PCT PCT 11.0 8.9 4.1 7.7 7.5 3.0 6.8 5.5 11.0 9.3 7.7 7.9 11.9 8.7 4.2 8.1 -1.0 8.2 13.6 9.5 0.3 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 1'.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -loCI -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 11.9 -1.0 1.9 4.8 3.5 13.6 -1.0 -1.0 1.0 5.6 -1.0 12.0 7.4 -1.0 9.8 5.1 3.2 12.8 4.1 2.6 14.0 6.0 3.3 11.4 5.1 2.8 13.5 4.7 2.9 13.2 4.9 -1.0 13.2 7.1 -1.0 10.3 5.6 -1.0 12.4 4.6 2.6 13.5 6.1 -1.0 11.6 02B PCT 3.0 0.1 9.5 5.8 , 3.2 8.0 0.6 -1. 0, -1. 0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1. 0 3.6 10.0 3.2 10.5 1.0 12.5 9.5 12.1 13.0 11.2 12.2 12.6 13.0 9.9 12.0 13.1 11.5 NOT PPM -1. 0 -1. 0 -1. 0 -1. 0 -1.0 -1.0 -1. 0 -1. 0 -1. 0 -1. 0 -1. 0 -1. 0 -1. 0 -1. 0 -1. 0 -1. 0 -1.0 -1.0 -1. 0 -1. 0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1. 0 -1. 0 -1.0 -1.0 kQQ.fL~ fHQkfLQQft4~_(2QMM~liXQ. PS-STAHILITY PROCED. CK. PN-NOX EMISS. PROCED. CK. FH-HOT SAMPLE LINE CK. FV-VAPOR GEllER. OPERe CK. NOB PPM 13.4 4.3 0.3 3.2 18.0 9.5 17.0 7.7 12.1 16.5 15.6 17.6 14.3 -'1.0 -1. 0 -1.0 0.1 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 0.1 1.4 14.4 1.8 3.9 0.3 -1.0 -1. 0 0.2 0.6 CO PPU 104.0 54000.0 1770.0 186.0 561.0 1.0 14900.0 -1.0 -1. 0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1. 0 -1.0 -1.0 132.0 -1. 0 -1. 0 -1.0 450.0 1260.0 0.0 465.0 300.0 -1. 0 -1. 0 -1. 0 1800.0 -1. 0 12d.X.d._(2QMMfL!lXQ. P.4.GE 4 HC PPM 1.6 :0.0526 3.1 0.0709 -1.0 0.0324 -1.0 0.0432 -1.0 0.0553 -1.0 '0.0397 -1.0 0.0658 -1.0 0.0325 -1.0 0.0412 -1.0 0~0539 -1.0 0.0666 -1.00.0795 -1.0 0.0481 -1.0 0.0535 -1.0 0.0346 -1.0 0.0592 -1.0 0.0313 -1.0 0.0251 -1.0 0.0285 -1.00.0356 -1.0 0.0258 -1.0 0.0251 -1.0 0.0300 -1.0 0.0249 -1.0 0.0243 -1.0 0.0248 -1.0 0.0344 -1.0 0.0276 -1.0 0.0247, -1.0 -0.0299 FAN fQMMEliXQ. RUN PRO DAT BUR NL NH 0 NR NH 0 NL N 0 NL NO NL N 0 NL PN 0 NR PN N 0 NL PN 0 NL PN N 0 NR PN N 0 NR PN N 0 NR PH IV 0 NL PN H 0 NL 0 ilL 0 NL 0 NL VC 0 LO 0 IlL FC 0 NL 0 LB 0 LL 0 LB N 0 LB 0, LB 0 LL 0 LB 0 LB 0 LO 0 LB 0 l1.QlllifLft_fQMME:!lXQ. O-OLD INJECT. COYFIG. H-NEW INJECT. CONFIG. B-BAILEY N.G. H-HC N.G. N-NOX N.G. V-VOLUMETRIC N.G. T-TRANSIENT OPERe Table VI-4 image: ------- EXPERIMENTAL DATA PROM TIlE PAXVE BURNER PAGE 5 RUN TEST TA TP Jr'A Jr'F C02V C02C 02V 02B J10T NOB CO HC FAll kQMM~!lXe. NO. TYPE .p .p LBIHR LBIHR PCT PCT PCT PCT PPN PPN PPM PPM RUN PRO DAT BUR 120 PSB2 400 475 127.0 2.94 5.1 1.0 12.6 12.2 -1.0 1.0 -1.0 1.0 0.0274 LB 0 121 PSB2 400 450 126.8 2.87 5.7 - 1.0 11. 8 11.6 - 1.0 -1. 0 -1.0 - 1.0 0.0286 LB 0 122 PEB2 400 450 126.8 2.75 4.0 - 1.0 13.8 - 1.0 -1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0257 LO 0 123 PEB2 74 70 50.5 2.20 10.6 8.7 4.5 4.1 -1.0 14.6 18.0 - 1.0 0.0509 NR PC N 0 124 PEB2 80 78 49.5 1.27 1.9 7.3 17.0 8.0 - 1.0 1.5 450.0 -1.0 0.0304 LL V 0 125 PEB2 85 78 47.6 1.27 4.5 3.3 13.0 -1.0 -1.0 1.2 585.0 - 1.0 0.0316 NL O. 126 PEB2 95 78 127.3 3.68 6.4 5.5 10.4 7.5 1.0 5.2 430.0 - 1.0 0.0323 LO 0 127 PEB2 95 78 119.6 3.68 - 1.0 5.3 - 1.0 -1.0 -1.0 5.0 630.0 - 1.0 0.0364 LL 0 128 PEB2 90 100 67.8 1.99 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 1.8 -1.0 - 1.0 1.0 - 1.0 0.0346 LB FH T 0 129 PEB2 80 80 86.2 2.36 - 1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0324 LB T 0 130 PEB2 80 80.'82.8 2.61 -1. 0 -1. 0 -1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0373 LB T 0 131 PEB2 80 80 66.7 2.48 - 1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 0.0440 LB T 0 132 PEB2 80 80 44.5 2.54 - 1.0 1.0 - 1.0 1.2 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0675 LB T 0 133 PEB2 80 80 83.4 2.54 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 6:8 -1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 -1.0 0.0360 LB T 0 134 PEB2 80 80 66.7 2.54 -1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 2.5 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 ,0.0450 LB T 0 135 PEB2 80 80 72.3 1. 70 - 1.0 -1. 0 -1.0 9.5 1.0 -1.0 -1. 0 369.5 0.0278 LB TH 0 136 PEB2 88 90 72.3 2.08 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 7.5 -1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 1137.9 0.0340 LB TH 0 137 PEB2 90 90 66.7 2.54 - 1.0 1. 0, - 1.0 2.6 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 14.7 0.0450. LB TH 0 138 PEB2 95 95 96.6 2.95 8.5 -1. 0 7.9 7.6 -1.0 9.8 - 1.0 -1.0 0.0410 NL 0 139 PEB2 95 100 '95.0 3.73 -1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 3.8 -1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0465 NL 0 140 PEB2 95 100 91.1 5.06 -1. 0 -1. 0 - 1.0 -1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0657 NL 0 141 PEB2 95 100 77.3 5.06 1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0774 NR 0 142 PEB2 95 100 77.8 2.27 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 -1.0 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0345 NL 0 143 PEB2 95 100 77.8 5.06 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 0.0769 llL 0 144 PEB2 95 100 91.1 5.06 - 1.0 1.0 -1. 0 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0657 NL. 0 145 ' PEB2 95 100 94.4 3.73 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0467 NL 0 146 PEB2 95 100 96.6 2.84 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 9.5 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0348 NL 0 147 PEI32 95 100 98.3 2.50 -1. 0 -1.0 - 1.0 10.8 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0301 LL 0' 148 PEB2 95 100 90.5 3.73 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 5.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 0.0487 IlL 0 149 PEB2 95 100 53.6 3.73 7.4 1.0 - 1.0 0.0 -1.0 0.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0824 NR '0 'Qll~2. XK2.X_XXeg BIL1Lk:QMMfL/1Xe. ERQk:C;QILBd'_k:Q~MK!lX2. 12.!X!_kQMMKliZ'.2. lIILRflKR_kQtlMgl'i.Xe. P-PROPANE NL-NORNAL LEAN PS-STABILITY PROCED. CK. B - BA I LE Y N. G. O-OLD INJECT. CONFIG. K-KEROSENE NR-NORMAL RICH PH-NOX EMISS. PROCED. CK. H-HC N.G. N-NEFf IllJECT. CONFIC. E-EMISSIONS LB-LEAN BURNIllG FH-HOTSAIPLE LINE CK. N-NOX N.G. S-STABILITY LL-LEAN LIMIT FV- VAPOR eEllER. OPER. CK. V-VOLUMETRIC N.G. B-BURNER LO-LEAN GOES OUT FC-FACILITY CK. T-TRANSIENT OPER. L-LOOP RB-RICH BURNING Table I-STAND 1 RL-RICH LIMIT 2-STAND 2 RO-RICll COES OUT VI-5 image: ------- EXPERIMENTAL DATA FROM THE PAXVE BURNER PAGE 6 RUN TEST '.fA TP WA riP C02V C02C 02V 02B NOT NOB CO HC FAN k.QMl1~li.r~ NO. TYPE -P -P LBIHR LBIHR PCT PCT PCT PCT PPM PPM PPM PPM RUN PRO DAT BUR 150 PEB2 95 100 56.9 1. 35 -1.0 1.0 1.0 10.8 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 1.0 0.0281 NL 0 151 PEB2 iJOO 160 8iJ.0 3.21 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 0.OiJ52 NL T 0 5.8 152 PEB2 iJ 00 330 79.5 3.21 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 ".7 - 1.0 - 1.0 1.0 1.9 0.0"78 NL 0 153 PEB2 360 300 111.2 2.83 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 ,11. 5 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 0.0 0.0301 LL 0 15iJ PEB2 355 200 55.6 2.11 - 1.0 - 1.0 1.0 6.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0"iJ9 NL 0 155 PEB2 270 275 98.9 2.70 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 10.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 1.3 0.0323 NL 0 156 PEB2 260 255 103.3 2.iJO - 1.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 12.8 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0275 LO 0 157 PEB2 260 290 100.0 3.17 0.1 - 1.0 1.0 8.8' - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 0.1 0.0375 LL 0 158 PEB2 260 317 100.6 3.iJ7 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 7.5 -1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 1.0 0.0408 NL 0 159 PEB2 265 350 97.3 iJ.OO - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 3.8 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 1.1 0'.0486 Nt 0 160 PEB2 270 410 90.7 6.00 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0782 HR 0 161 PEB2 275 392 89.6 6.02 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 2.1 0.0795 NR 0 162 PEB2 275 iJ80 87.9 7.42 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 0.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 200.0 0.0998 HR 0 163 PEB2 360 110 22.0 0.65 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 8.5 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 776.1 0.0350 LL 0 164 PEB2 370 120 22.0 0.90 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 1.6 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 496.2 0.OiJ8iJ NL 0 B 165 PEB2 375 120 30.8 1. 32 - 1.0 - 1.0 1.0 5.3 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 1.3 0.0507 NS 0 166 PEB2 365 140 iJ".5 1.60 -1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 7.7 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 0.5 0.OiJ25 NL 0 167 PEB2 370 150 iJ4.0 2.00 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 5.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.6 0.0538 NR 0 168 PEB2 370 170 41.2 2.17 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 2.2 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 1.5 0.0623 NR 0 169 PEB2 3iJ 5 180 55.0 2.17 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 6.7 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 O.iJ 0.0"67 NL 0 170 PEB2 325 190 69.8 2.18 -1.0 - 1.0 1.0 9.6 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 0.1 0.0369 NL 0 171 PEB2 305 195 78.1 2.18 -1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 10.8 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0 0.0330 NL 0 172 PEB2 275 195 97.8 2.18 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 13.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 9.7 0.026iJ LO 0 174 PEB2 400 250 96.6 3.40 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 8.2 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 O.iJ 0.0"16 NL 0 . 175 PEB2 iJ05 275 93.3 iJ.OO - 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 ".8 -1. 0 -1.0 - 1.0 0.5 0.0507 NL 0 176 PEB2 ..05 280 93.1 ".40 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 3.5 - 1.0 -1. 0 -1.0 0.6 0.0559 NR 0 177 PEB2 iJ05 200 98.6 2.iJO 5." - 1.0 12.5 12.2 -1.0 3.6 -1.0 0.0 0.0271 NL 0 178 PEB2 ..05 195 95.9 2.81 - 1.0 - 1.0 1.0 10.1 1.0 - 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.03iJ6 NL 0 179 PEB2 350 300.133.7 6.07 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 3.5 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.2 0.0537 lilt 0 180 PEB2 3iJ5 310 13iJ.6 5.20 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 6.3 -1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 0.2 0.OiJ57 NL 0 kQIlE~ X~~:LX1.f~ 11Il.ILk.Ql:1HEli.X~ EHQk.~QIl.Bd~_k.QMM~li.X~ !ld.X.d_k.Qf:!M~li.X.~ IULB!lE1Lk.Qf:!f:!~!iX~ P-PROPM1E NL-NORMAL LEAl; PS-STABILITY PROCED. CX. B-BAILEY N.G. O-OLD IN.TECT. CON FIG. X-KEROSENE NR-NORMAL RICH PN-HOX EMISS. PROCED. CK. H-HC N.G. li-NEF INJECT. COllFIG. E-EMISSIONS LB-LEAN BURNING FH-HOT SAMPLE LIVE CK. N-1l0X N.G. S-STABILITY LL-LEAN LIMIT FV- VAPOR GEllER. OPERe CK. V-VOLUMETRIC N.G. B-BURNER LO-LEAN GOES OUT T-TRANSIENT OPERe L-LOOP RB-RICH BURNING l-STAND 1 RL-RICH LIMIT Table 2-STAND 2 RO-RICH GOES OUT VI-6 image: ------- EXPERIMENTAL DATA FROM THE PAXVE RURNER PAGE 7 RUN TEST TA TP WA ~!P C02V C02C 02V 02F. NOT NOB CO HC FAN QQI1HE:!iX~ NO. TYPE .p .p LBIHR LBIHR PCT PCT PCT PCT PPM. PPM PPU PPM RUN PRO DAT BUR 181 PEB2 340 305 13~.1 4.57 1.0 1.0 1.0 8.2 1.0 1.0 ~1.0 0.2 0.0397 NL 0 182 PEB2 340 303 138.8 4.10 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 9.6 -1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 0.1 IlL 0 0.0349 183 PEB2 335 295 139.0 3.68 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 11. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.1 NL 0 0.0313 184 PEB2 334 280 141. 7 3.40 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 11. 8 -1.0 2.0 - 1.0 0.1 LL 0 0.0284 185 PEB2 335 320 139.0 3.77 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 10.7 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 0.3 0.0321 liL 0 186 PEB2 335 340 139.0 4.22 7.4 - 1.0 9.5 9.1 - 1.0 9.8 - 1.0 0.0 0.0360 NL 0 188 XSB2 430 340 77.9 3.30 9.6 - 1.0 6.7 5.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 0.1 0.0455 NL 0 189 KSB2 430 320 79.0 2.77 7.7 -1.0 9.4 9.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0 0.0369 NL 0 190 KSB2 430 300 79.0 2.35 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 11. 2 -1. 0 -1.0 - 1.0 0.0 0.0326 LL 0 191 KSB2 400 295 66.9 2.35 - 1.0 1.0 -1. 0, 9.5 -1.0 - 1.0 . - 1.0 0.2 0.0384 NL 0 192 KSB2 405 295 .56.0 2.35 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 7.1 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.1 0.0460 NL 0 193 KSB2 410 360 51.6 3.95 -1. 0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 670.0 0.0839 NR 0 194 XSB2 410 420 113.0 3.77 7.6 -1. 0 9.7 8.5 - 1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 0.4 0.0364 NL 0 195 KSB2 410 410 113.6 3.36 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 9,'5 -1.0 - 1. o. -1. 0 0.4 0.0324 ilL 0 196 KSlJ2 410 390 11.5. 2 3.07 - 1.0 -1.0 -1.0 11. 0 -1.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 101. 5 0.0328 LO- 0 197 KSB2 430 340 101. 4 3.07 7.3 1.0 9.9 9.8 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 11.3 0.0354 NL 0 198 KSB2 360 260 41.2 1.65 -1. 0 -1. 0 - 1.0 8.5 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.1 0.0439 NL 0 r 199 KSB2 340 320 38.5 , 2.30 -1.0 1.0 - 1.0 1.1 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 0.9 0.0655 NR 0 r 200 KSB2 410 270 38.5 1.55 6.4 - 1.0 9.2 8.2 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 7.9 0.0441 NL 0 vr 201 PEB2 86 82 '83.2 3.70 -1. 0 -1.0 - 1.0 4.0 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0~0526' NR 0 202 PEB2 82 82 102.9 4.00 -1. 0 -1. 0 -1. 0 7.7 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0460"' NL 0 203 KEB2 110 100 148.0 5.60 1.0 6.7 -1. 0 10.5 -1. 0 9.8 81.0 0.4 0.0414 NL LK 0 205 PEL2 313 77 76.8 2.90 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 6.0 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0447 NL FV 0 206 PEL2 253 77 167.8 5.90 -1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 7.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 - 1.0 0.0416 OL. F{ 0 207 PEL 2 245 77 181~5 5.50 - 1.0 -1.0 1.0 10.0 3.6 6.1 1.0 - 1.0 0.0358 OL .PV 0 217 PEB2 80 - 1 83.8 2.74 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1. 0 11.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 0.0387 NL FV 0 218 PERl 100 70 91.5 2.30 7.0 6.1 9.8 9.5 -1.0 1.9 7.0 - 1.0 0.0396 NL PN 0 219 PEBl 110 70 95.3 3.55 10.7 8.1 5.3 4.0 -1.0 32.6 307.0 - 1.0 0.0502 ilL PN 0 220 PEL2 100 100 86.2 2.73 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 8.0 6.0 7.1 - 1.0 4.5 0.0375 NL 0 221 PEL2 100 100 116.8 3.64 -1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 9.0 . - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 4.6 0.0369 NL .0 kQll.E~ X.~~X._X.IP.E IULlLk.QI1H~liX~ fBQk.~ll.UBd~_QQI1M~~X.~ 12dX.d_QQMM~~X.~ lUlIUi.E.ILk.QMM~li x'Q. P-PROPANE NL-NORMAL LEAN PS-STABILITY PROCED. CK. R-RAILEY N.G. O-OLD INJECT. CONPIG. K-KEROSENE NR-NORMAL RICH PN-NOX FMI8S. PROCED. CK. H-HC N.G. N-NEf! INJECT. CONPIG. E-EMISSIONS LB-LEAN BURNING PH-HOT SAMPLE LINE CK. N-NOX N.G. S-STABILITY LL-LEAN LIMIT FV-VAPOR GEllER. OPER. CK. V-VOLUMETRIC N.G. B-BURNER LO-LEAN GOES OUT LK-LIQUID KEROSENE T-TRANSIFNT OPER. L-LOOP RB-RICR BURNING Table l-STAND 1 RL-RICH LIMIT VI-7 2-STAND 2 RO-RICH COES OUT image: ------- EXPERIMENTAL DATA FROM THE PAXVE BURNER PAGE 8 RUN TEST TA TF Jr'A Jr'F C02V C02C 02V 02F NOT NOB CO HC FAN kQl1H:li.X~ NO. TYPE .F .F LBIRR LEIRR PCT PCT PCT PCT PPM PPN PPM PPM RUN PRO DAT BUP 222 PEL 2 100 100 131. 8 - - -0.1 - -1. 0 - 1.0 24.0 . 0.0327 NL 0 3.64 1.0 1.0 10.0 1.0 223 PEL2 100 100 108.4 3.64 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.1 8.0 - 1.0 1.0 - 1.0 7.9 .0.0397 NL 0 224 PEL 2 100 100 168.5 5.07 -1. 0 - 1.0 -0.1 9.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 4.3..0.0356 NL 0 225 PEL2 100 100 151.8 5.07 -1.0 - 1.0 0.1 . 8.2 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 12.9 0.0395 NL 0 226 PEL2 100 100 177.9 5.07 -1.0 - 1.0 - 0.1 10.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0337 LL 0 227 PEL2 76 82 55.8 1. 75 - 1.0 8.5 - 0.1 7.5 - 1.0 17.2 7.0 12.6 0.0371 NL 0 228 PEL2 82 90 58.4 1. 82 - 1.0 7.4 -0.1 11.0 -1. 0 2.4 7.0 5.4 0.0369 NL F 0 229 PEL2 85 95 57.6 1.80 - 1.0 8.5 0.1 9. O' - 1.0 7.6 7.0 8.5 0.0369 NL F 0 230 PEL2 433 98 57.6 1. 80 - 1.0 - 1.0 -0.1 9.5 - 1.0 5.0 - 1.0 5.9 0.0370 NL F 'O 231 PEL2 420 100 60.8 1. 80 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.1 11.2 -1.0 2.7 - 1.0 4.1 0'.0350 NL F 0 232 PEL 2 410 100 90.9 1. 70 -1.0 - 1.0 -0.1 10.5 1.0 4.1 - 1.0 3.4 0.0333 NL F 0 233 PEL2 407 100 90.2 1.25 - 1.0 -1. 0 - 0.1 8.3 - 1.0 13.8 - 1.0 6.4 0.0395 NL F 0 . 234 PEL2 90 82 76.9 2.80 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 0.1 4.0 - 1.0 36.6 - 1.0 24.0 0.0430 NL 0 235 PEL2 92 89 77.3 2.48 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 0.1 6.2 - 1.0 22.4 - 1.0 35.5 0.0380 NL 0 236 PEL2 89 89 77.7 2.05 7.0 - 1.0 10.6 8.8 - 1.0 15.0 - 1.0 40.4 0.0384 NL 0 237 PEL2 82 82 38.4 1. 32 - 1.0 -1.0 0.1 4.0 53.8 42.6 -1.0 42.3 0.0407 NL 0 238 PEBl 79 70 49.1 1. 55 5.4 1.0 12.4 10.0 1.0 1.3 -1.0 1.0 0.0312 NL 0 239 PEBl 80 71 48.9 1. 90 7.4 -1.0 10.2 8.0 - 1.0 4.2 - 1.0 -1.0 0.0345 RL 0 240 PEBl 82 71 48.9 2.04 8.7 1.0 7.5 6.0 - 1.0 12.6 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0420 NL 0 241 PEBl 82 72 48.8 2.50 9.7 - 1.0 6.0 4.0 - 1.0 60.0 - 1.0 - 1. 0 . 0.0465 NL 0 242 PEBl 78 68 49.2 2.45 9.9 - 1.0 4.8 4.0 - 1.0 58.7 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0488 NL 0 243 PEBl 80 72 48.8 2.62 11.7 -1.0 2.4 2.0 - 1.0 104.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0573 NL 0 244 PEBl 79 68 98.1 3.36 6.5 1.0 10.7 10.0 - 1.0 2.5 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0323 NL 0 245 PEBl 80 70 97.6 3.88 7.8 -1.0 8.6 8.0 - 1.0 6.6 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0384 NL 0 . 246 PEBl 80 70 60.5 2.50 7.2 -1.0 9.5 12.0, - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0409 NOT VALID DATA 247 PEBl 75 70 1.0 - 1. 00 - 1.0 1.0 - 0.1 11.8 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0. 0.9295 NOT VALID DATA 248 PEBl 85 70 47.2 - 1.00 - 1.0 - 1.0 -0.1 9.5 - 1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 .0.0360 NOT VALID DATA 249 PEBl 75 70 49.2 2.70 7.3 "":1.0 9.6 9.5 -1. 0 4.1 - 1.0 - 1.0' 0.0542 NOT VALID DATA 250 PEEl 85 70.48.8 2.70 10.0 - 1.0 -0.1 5.1 -1. 0 46.5 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0548 NOT VALID DATA 251 PEBl 85 70 100.8 3.25 5.6 - 1.0 14.3 1;).0 - 1.0 1.6 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0319 NOT VALID DATA kQllE~ XE~X_XrEE liIlli._kQMMft:li.X~ fHQk~llQH4'_kQMM[li.X~ llAX4_kQf:[M[li.X~ l1.QHli.~ILQQ!:1!:1ft:li.X~ P-PROPANE NL-NORMAL LEAN PS-STABILITY PROCED. C" B-BAILE~~ N. G. O-OLD INJECT. COA'FIG. 11.. K-KEROSENE NR-NORMAL RICH PN-l/OX EMISS. PROCED. CK. H-HC N.G. ii-REf! INJECT. CON FIG . E-EMISSIONS LB-LEAN BURNING FH-HOT SAMPLE LINE CK. N-NOX N.G. S-STABILITY LL-LEAN LIMIT FV-VAPOR GEllER. OPERe CK. V-VOLUMETRIC N.G. B-BURNER LO-LEAN GOES OUT FC-FACILITY CK. F-FLOT! N.G. L-LOOP RB-RICH BURNINr: LK-LIrUID KEROSENE RUN T-TRANSIENT OPERe Table 1-STAND 1 RL-RICH LIMIT VI-8 2-STAND 2 RO-RICR GOES OUT image: ------- EXPERIMENTAL DATA PROM THE PAXVE BURNER PAGE 9 RUII TEST TA TP rIA WP C02 V C02C 02V 02B NOT NOB CO HC PAN ~lfl1~flX.~ RO. TIPE .p .p LBIHR LBIHR PCT PCT PCT PCT PPN PPN PPN PPM RUN PRO DAT BUR 252 PEB1 90 70 100.4 3.25 -1.0 -1.0 -0.1 9.5 -1.0 1.1 -1.0. -1.0.0.0320 NOT VALID DATA 253 PEB1 92 70 97.0 3.62 7.0 -1.0 7.8 9.0 -1.0 3.1 1.0 -1. 0 f 0.0369 ROT VALID DATA 254 pIB1 93 70 100.1****** 9.5 -1.0 7.8 6.3 1.0 6.6 -1.0 1.0 O. 0410 nOT VALID DATA 255 P'L2 93 70 90.0 2.18 8.0 -1.0 7.0 -1.0 - 1.0 -1.0 1.0 - 1.0 0.0388 NL FV 0 256 pil.t 85 70 97.6 -1.00 9.5 1.0 6.3 6.0 - 1.0 14.7 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0460 NL 0 257 PEB1 85 70 97.6 -1.00 10.5 -1.0 4.8 ".0 -1. 0 "".0 -1.0 - 1.0 0.0503 NR 0' 258 PEBl 85 70 97.5 5.25 12.4 -1.0 2.6 2.0 -1.0 78.5 -1.0 - 1.0 0.0576 NR 0 259 PEBl 85 70 97.4 -1. 00 12.9 -1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 113.0 -1.0 - 1.0 0.0640 NR 0 260 PEBl 85. 70 97.3 6.10 12.2 -1. 0 0.5 1.0 - 1.0 41.0 -1.0 -1.0 0.0615 NR 0 261 PEBl 89 ..70 97.2 -1.00 9.5 -1.0 0.9 0.2 -1.0 59.0 - 1.0 1.0..0.0760 NR 0 262 PEBl 90 70144.4 4.83 6.7 1.0 10.5 10.0 1.0 5.0 - 1.0 -1.0 0.0331 NL 0 263 PEB1 97 70 143.5 5.75 8.0 -1.0 9.1 8.0 -1.0 9.4 - 1.0 1.0 0.0381 NL 0 264 PEBl 85 73 48.8 1.68 6.6 6.0 11.1 11.3 -1.0 2.2 5.0 - 1.0 '0.0317 NL 0 265 PEBl 85 73 48.8 -1.00 7.7 7.5 9.2 9~2 -1.0 10.2 7.0 -1.0 . 0.0372 NL 0 266 PEBl 96 70 143.0 4.82 7." 9.8 9.3 8.9 1.0 -1.0 10.0 1.0. 0.0363 NL 0 267 PEBl 96 70 97.8 3.20 6.9 -1.0 11.2 11.0 -1.0 2.0 1.0 - 1.0 0.0323 NL 0 268 PEBl 96 70 97.2 3.55 7.7 1.0 9.2 9.0 -1.0 6.6 - 1.0 - 1.0 0.0372 liL. 0 269 PEBl 96 72 97.2 4.15 8.7 -~.O 7.4 7.0 -1.0 19.0 -1.0 - 1.0 0.0421 NL 0 270 PEBl 96 . 72 97.1 ".30 9.0 -1.0 6.7 6.0 - 1.0 56.5 - 1.0 ':"'1.0 0.0439 NL 0 271 PEBl 100 75 '141f.l 5.10 7.1 1.0 9." 9.4 - 1.0 ".2 -1.0 1.0 0.0357 NL N 272 PEBl 100 71 llfl.7 5.95 8.9 - 1.0 6.9 6.9 -1.0 IIf.l 1.0 - 1.0 0.01f21f NL N 273 PEBl 100 70 143.1 6.65 9.0 -1.0 7.2 6.0 -1.0 1f2.0 - 1.0 - 1.0' 0.01f32 NL N 271f PE.!l 100 70 I1f3.5 6.60 10.2 9.7 5.5 5.1f 1.0 12.5 24.5 0.0 0.0484 NL N 275 PEBl 95 70 143.7 7.30 11.1 10.3 ".1 3.8 - 1.0 36.5 42.7 - 1.0 0.0528 NL N 279 PEL2 109 70 91.0 2.82 7.4 7.7 8.8 8.1 Ih 0 8.2 5.0 2.6 0.0371 NL' N 280 PEL 2 110 70 90.9 3.35 -1. 0 8.3 -1.0 5.9 20.8 22.6 10.0 14.5 0.0436 NL. N 281 PEL2 110 70 111.3 3.1f6 7.7 8.0 8.7 8.3 4.1 8.3 5.0 0.6 0.0380 NL N 282 PEL2 94 70 46.4 1.35 8.0 8.5 9.6 8.0 7.7 9.4 5.0 0.0 0.0389 NL N 283 PEL2 100 70 47.3 1.25 7.3 6.0 10.0 9.5 2.0 2.8 5.0 0.0'0.0386 NL N 284 PEL 2 105 70 46.5 1.08 5.1f 5.8 12.5 11.3 0.8 1.1 5.0 0.0 0.0271 IlL 'N 'Q12~~ x.~~X._X.l.f~ lHlll._'QltH~!!.X.~ EBQ'I12~B4'_£QHH~ll.X~ IMX!_f:Qt!H~~X~ lI!ll1~~B._f:QMH~~X.~ P-PROPANE NL-NORNAL LEAN PS-STABILITY PROCED. CK. B-RAILEY N.G. O-OLD INJECT. CONFIG. K-KEROSENE NR-NORNAL RICH PN-NOX EMISS. PROCED. CK. H-RC N.G. N-NEr! INJECT. CONPIG. E-EMISSIONS LB-LEAN BURNING PH-HOT SAMPLE LINE CX. N-NOX N.G. S-STABILITI LL-LEAN LIMIT FV- VAPOR GENER. OPERe CK. V-VOLUNETRIC N.G. B-BURNER LO-LEAN GOES OUT FC-PACILITY CK. F-FLOf! N.G. L-LOOP RB-RICH BURNING LK-LIOUID KEROSENE RUN T-TRANSIENT OPERe 1-STAtID 1 RL-RICH LIMIT Table 2-STAND 2 RO-RICH GOES OUT VI-9 image: ------- EXPERIMENTAL DATA FROM TilE PAXYE BURNER PAGE 10 RUN TEST TA TF WA WF C02Y C02C 02V 02B NOT NaB co HC PAN £QMMA:!i.X2. NO. TrPE .p .F LB/HP. LB/HR PCT PCT PCT PCT PPM PPM PPM PPM RUN PRO OAT BUR 285 PEL 2 116 70 136.5 3.30 6.~ 6.3 11.1 11.0 1.2 - 1.0 8.2 0.0 0.0312 NL N 286 PEBI 82 75 58.8 1.95 6.3 - 1.0 10.5 9.6 - 1.0 2.3 - 1.0 - 1. 0 '. 0 . 0321 HL N 287 PEBI 92 70 144.0 ~.90 5.5 6.9 11.6 10.5 - 1.0 3.5 95.0 0.0 0.0337 In N 288 PEBI 90 69 144.3 5.07 7.4 7.0 9.4. 9.3 - 1.0 4.4 1.0 0.0 0.0362 HL N 289 PEBI 95 69 143.6 5.48 8.0 7.5 8.9 8.5 - 1.0 6.5 - 1.0 0.0 0.0385 NL N 290 PEBI 99 60 142.9 6.30 9.5 9.0 6.1 5.6 - 1.0 4.0 ~1.0 5.9 0.0460 NL N 291 PEBI 68 .5.15 - - -1.0 - 1.0 - -1. 0 - 0.0895 NR N 73 66.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 35.0 1.0 292 PEBI - - 1.0 -1.0 HR V N 75 70 49.1 ~.OO 1.0 0.3 1.0 26.8 12.5 5000.0 0.1000 293 PEBI 82 70 ~7.1 3.85 7.0 6.3 0.3 -1.0 1.0 -1.0 98000.0 30.3 0.0870 NR N 294 PEBl 90 70 51.1 3.45 8.~ . 9.0 2.4 -1.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 64500.0 76.0 0.0805 NR N 295 PEBI 72 70 49.2 3.85 7.5 7.5 1.0 :1.0 - 1.0 63.2 83500.0 25.9 0.0845 NR N 296 PEBI 86 73 48.6 3.65 7.2 8.0 0.2 1.0 - 1.0 90.0 82800.0 17.6 0.0860 NR N 297 PEBI 92 71 48.3 4.30 6.5 6.5 0.0 1.0 - 1.0 55.6 104000.0 17.0 0.0905 NR N 298 PEBI 95 - 1.0 - NR N 71 48.2 3.73 8.1 9.0 2.2 1.0 109.6 75000.0 24.2 0.0820. 299 PEBI 96 71 87.2 8.00 - 1.0 7.5 -1.0 -1.0 - 1.0 1.0 87500.0 26.5 0.0880 NR Y N 300 PEBI 85 69 49.3 4.31 - 1.0 8.0 -1.0 1.0 - 1.0 40.0 81500.0 27.0 0.0750 NI? V N PEBl - 1.0 - 301 88 69 48.5 3.40 9.0 10.1 2.8 1.0 117.0 52000.0 15.4 0.0780 NR N PEBl - 1.0 - N 302 92 70. 96.9 8.75 6.4 6.5 0.8 1.0 17.8 100000.0 1.0 0.0910 NR 303 PEBI - 1.0 - N 7~ 68 98.5 7.30 8.0 7.9 0.0 1.0 30.0 36200.0 65.0 0.0820 NI? PEBI - 1.0 - N 304 87 70 141. 5 10.92 7.2 7.4 1.5 1.0 22.7 83400.0 28.9 0.0860 NR 305 PEBI - 1.0 - NR N 100 67 12~.2 11.65 6.9 7.0 0.0 1.0 24.0 91600.0 25.0 '0.0880 306 PEBI 100 68 139.8 10.26 9.8 9.9 0.1 :1.0 - 1.0 30.0 45900.0 157.5 0.0750 NI? N 307 PEBI 104 69 94.3 6.40 9.4 9.9 0.0 1.0 - 1.0 18.8 45500.0 - 1.0 0.0765 NR N 308 PEL2 90 320 ~6.6 1.60 7.2 6.9 9.5 8.6 2.3 ~.8 75.0 - 1.0 0.0350 NL N 309 PEL2 98 350 ~7.5 1. 50 6.7 5.9 11.0 10.3. 1.3 1.9 75.0 0.0 0.0323 NL N 310 PEL 2 9~ 310 ~ 8.4 0.90 ~.o 5.0 15.2 12.~ 0.8 0.8 13.8 1.~ 0.0220 LB N 311 PEL2 385 350 49.~ 1. 75 7.7 7.4 8.9 8.5 7.6 8.4 75.0 0.0 0.0377 NL N 312 PEL2 388 348 48.3 1.30 6.8 6.3 10.8 10.5 1.6 0.4 5.0 0.0 0.0326 NL N 313 PEL2 395 340 47.2 1.00 5.0 5.0 13.1 12.5 0.6 0.1 5.0 0.0 0.0252 NL N 314 PEL2 340 450 88.2 2.78 7.2 - 1.0 10.2 8.6 3.6 2.0 - 1.0 - 1.0 '0.0345 NL N £Q{;l~~ :f~Q.:LXI.f.E. lIIlIL£QHf!lE.liXQ. f.HQ£~QIlHA~_£QMH~~:fg P.4:fA_£QMM~li.Xg I1IlH!i.~IL~Q!:1M~~Xg P-PROPANE NL-NORMAL LEAN PS-STABILITY PROCED. CK. B-BAILE.V N.G. O-OLD INJECT. CONFIG. K-KEROSENE NI?-NORMAL RICH PN-NOX EMISS. PROCED. CK. H-HC N.G. N-NEW INJECT. CONFIG. E-EMISSIONS LB-LEAN BURNING FH-HOT SAMPLE LINE CK. N-NOX N.G. S-STABILITY LL-LEAN LIMIT PV-VAPOI? GENER. OPERe CK. V-VOLUMETRIC N.G. B-BURNER La-LEAN GOES OUT FC-FACILITY CKo F-FLOFI N.G. L-LOOP RB-RICH BURNING LK-LIQUID KEPOSENF. RUN T-TRANSIENT OPERo Table 'i.-STAND 1 RL-RICH LIMIT VI-IO 2~STAF!D 2 RO-RICH GOES OUT image: ------- EZFERIMEwrAL DArA PRON rBE PAZ'IE BURRER PAGE 11 RUM rEsr TA T' liA liP C02V C02C 02V' 02B Nor MOB co HC 'All 'allllilll~ NO. r~PB .p ., LBIBR LBlllR PCT pcr per '.' pcr PPII PPII PPII PPII RUN PRO DAT BUR 315 PBL2 364 "50 .93.1 2."0 6.1 -1.0 11." 10~" 1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 0.0302 NL N 316 PEL 2 ..00 460 90.5 2.16 6.5 6.1 10.7 10.3 0.7 -1.0 5.0 0.0 0.0323 ilL N 317 PBL2 IU5 ..60 90.0 1.95 5.0 s. 3 12.-6 12.2 0." 0.1 5.0 0.0 0.0260 .L N 318 PEL2 350 638 137.1 3.75 6.4 6.4 11.0 10.3 1.8 0.8 5.0 0.0 0.0316 NL N 319 PEL2 350 620 137.2 3.08 4.8 5.3 12.8 12.3 0.6 0.0 9.2 0.0 0.0266 NL N 320 PEL2 351 600 134.5 ".47 7.9 7.6 6.6 8.6 3.6 1.9 8.3 0.0 0.0415 NL N' 321 PEL2 no 540 89.8 2.95 7.7 7.9 8.5 8.4 3.5 2.4 15.0 0.0 0.0383 NL N 322 PEL2 115 490 90.0 2.34 6.2 6.0 11.0 10.3 0.8 0.1 16.7 0.0 0.0311 NL N 323 PEL2 105 530 90.0 2.18 5.2 5.6 12.2 11.9 0.6 - 1.0 158.5 2.8 0.0287 LL N 324 PEL2 95 585 135.5 4.45 7.6 7.1 8.9 8.5 2.8 1.5 5.0 0.3 0.0374 NL N 325 PEL 2 105 550137.3 3.85 5.7 6.3 11.1 10.2 1.0 0.4 33.5 0.1 0.0332 NL N 326 PEL2 110 610 138.7 3.60 5.7 5.9 12.0 11.0 0.8 0.1 150.0 2.7 0.0307 LL N 327 PEL2 412 77 48.2 1.50 7.8 8.1 8.5 8.4 6.0 3.7 16.8 0.4 0.0385 NL N 328 PEL 2 395 90 47.3 1.15 6.0 6.1 11.6 1%.2 1.3 0.6 15.9 0.0 0.0297 NL N 329 PEL 2 390 95 47.1 0.87 4.8 5.0 13.3 12.6 0.4 0.0 82.4 0.0 0.0245 LB N 330 PEL2 407 97 90.3 2.93 7.7 7.8 8.6 8.3 9.2 6.7 5.0 0.0 0.0381 NL N 331 PEL2 400 100 92.7 2.30 6.2 6.3 11.1 10.5 1.8 1.8 5.0 0.0 0.0309' NL. N 332 PEL2 435 92 89.7 2.02 5.0 5.5 12.6 11.0 7.0 0.0 9930.0 0.0 0.0260 LL N 333 PEL2 392 95 135.2 3.22 5.8 1.2 9.2 10.6 1.1 0.0 144.0 0.0 0.0282 NL N 334 PEL2 395100 .140.3 2.89 4.8 -1.0 13.2 12.2 0.7 0.0 -1.0 0.0 0.0246 LL N 335 KEL2 92 590 91.3 2.75 7.8 7.8 9.5 8.5 3.1 1.8 5.0 0.0 0.0370 NL N 336 KEL2 . 90 630 92.6 2.41 6.1 6.3 11.2 10.3 1.2 0.0 300.0 0.7 0.0311 LL N 337 K~L2 90 610 48.5 1.85 7.1 7.3 9.5 8.2 2.4 3.5 5.0 0.0 0.0362 liL N 338 KEL2 90 660 49.6 1.78 6.0 - 1.0 9.4 9.2 1.5 0.2 5.0 0.0 0.0393 NL N 339 KEL2 100 660 136.7 4.46 7.5 -1.0 8.9 8.4 3.9 4.4 - 1.0 2.6 0.0379. NL N 340 PEL2 395 90 138.3 3.79 6.5 6.6 10.9 8.6 2.3 0.5 5.0 0.1 0.0320 NL N 341 PEL2 150 100 92.4 2.55 6.9 6.6 10.5 8.8 2.1 0.6 5.0 0.0 0.0336 NL N 342 KEL2 90 85 93.3 2.88 7.2 7.1 9.5 8.4 19.8 0.0 5.0 - 1.0 0.0365 NL LK N 343 PEL2 102 100 91.3 2.54 6.7 7.0 10.1 10.4 2.1 1.0 5.0 0.0 0.0337 11L N 344 PEL2 100 100 91.9 2.25 6.0 6.6 11.4 11.4 1.4 0.1 5.0 6.8 0.0300 NL N kQ12£:~ l£:.2.:LXlfi BllB._kallltiii.X.2. fBQki1211B4~_~Q~ltiB.X.2. 124X4_~QH~illX~ /;!'1lB.B.E.1L'Q.Hll&.li.X~ P-PROPANE NL-NORMAL LEAN PS-STABILITY PROCED. CK. B-BAILEY N.G. O-OLD INJECT. CONFIG. K-KEROSENE liR-NORMAL RICH PN-NOX EMISS. PROCED. CK.' H-HC N.G. N-NEli INJECT. CONFIG. E-EMISSIONS LB-LEAN BURNING FH-HOT. SAMPLE LINE CK. N-NOX N. G. S-STABILITY LL-LEAN LIMIT PV-VAPOR GENER. OPERe CK. V-VOLUMETRIC N.G. B-BURNER LO-LEAN GOES OUT FC-FACILITY CK. F-FLOW N.G. L-LOOP RB-RICH BURNING LK-LIQUID KEROSENE RUN T-TRANSIENT OPERe Tahle 1-STAND 1 RL-RICH LIMIT VI-ll 2-STAND 2 RO-RICH GOES OUT image: ------- EXPERIMENTAL DATA FROM THE PAXYE BURNER PAGE 12 RUN TEST TA TF WA WP C02Y C02C 02Y 02B NOT NOB CO HC FAN kQ.HHi.N.X.~ NO. TIPE -P -P LBIHR LBIHR PCT PCT PCT PCT PPM PPM PPH PPH RUN PRO DAT BUR 345 PEL 2 102 95 135.3 3.97 7.0 7.3 9.8 9.8 3.9 0.6 5.0 0.0 0.0348 NL N 346 PEL 2 105 95 138.2 3.65 6.3 6.6 11.0 11. 2 1.9 0.0 -1.0 2.0 0.0313 NL N 347 PEL 2 105 97 134.5 4.80 8.6 8.9 7.5 8.4 11. 7 5.8 1.0 0.0 0.0417 NL Ii 348 KEL2 107 95 90.1 2.88 8.5 7.1 8.9 9.5 14.4 0.7 37.5 0.0 0.0401 NL LK N 349 KEL2 100 100 91.9 2.60 6.8 6.4 10.3 11.0 3.1 0.1 4680.0 30.1 0.0342 NL LK N 350 KEL2 101 105 136.4 4.00 7.9 1.9 9.5 10.4 8.2 1.0 555.0 1.3 0.0380 NL LX N 351 KEL2 105 810 92.4 3.00 8.7 7.2 8.3 8.4 4.7 2.6 5.0 0.0 0.0421 NL N 352 KEL2 110 815 93.1 2.65 7.3 6.9 10.9 9.6 0.3 0.4 5.0 0.0 0.0336 LL N 353 KEL2 120 790 137.7 4.45 8.7 7.1 8.3 8.4 5.7 4.0 5.0 19.3 0.0421 NL N 354 KEL2 430 630 81.4 2.62 7.6 6.8 9.9 9.2 3.7 2.3 5.0 0.0 0.0359 NL N 355 KEL2 438 610 82.0 2.15 5.9' 5.5 12.1 11.2 0.8 0.2 5.0 0.0 0.0287 NL N 356 KEL2 450 625 43.8 1. 70 7.7 7.0 9.4 8.4 3.7 2.4 5.0 0.0 0.0371 NL 11 357 KEL2 140 690 180.5 4.97 7.0 6.5 10.5 9.7 1.7 0.6 5.0 0.0 0.0337 NL N 358 KEL2 110 690 46.8 1.64 6.4 6.2 11.5 8.3 1.6 . 2.0 5.0 0.0 0.0312 NL N 359 KEL2 120 730 138.2 4.18 7.1 6.9 10.8 8.2 2.2 1.4 5.0 0.0 0.0335 NL N 360 KEL2 380 570 92.6 3.00 7.5 6.8 - 1.0 8.7 3.8 2.5. 5.0 0.0 0.0355 NL N 361 KEL2 400 620 90.9 2.65 6.5 6.1 11. 5 10.4 1.6 0.3 5.0 0.0 0.0312 NL N 362 KEt2 405 670 89.8 3.30 9.0 9.2 8.0 7.6 8.9 5.3 5.0 0.0 0.0420 NL N 363 KEL2 405 645 90.8 3.05 6.9 7.0 10.8 10.5 5.0 3.7 5.0 0.7 0.03~2 NL N 364 KEL2 405 670 48.7 1. 90 8.0 7.0 9.2 10.5 4.8 4.4 5.0 6.6 0.0379 NL N 365 KEL2 405 670 48.0 .2.10 8.8 7.9 8.1 9.5 5 .2 7.2 5.0 0.9 0.0416 NL N 366 KEL2 410 660 47.9 1.55 5.9 5.6 12.1 13.5 1.2 1.0 5.0 0.0 0.0287 NL N 367 KEL2 405 670 137.0 4.00 7.0 6.5 10.3 12.5 2.8 1.1 - 1.0 0.0 0.0340 NL N 368 KEL2 410 690 137.1 3.48 5.9 -1. 0 12.1 13.6 0.8 0.5 5.0 - 1.0 0.0287 NL N . 369 KEL2 400 690 136.3 4.36 8.0 7.6 9.2 11. 5 5.6 3.6 10.0 0.0 0.0379 NL N 370 KSB2 403 710 90.9 2.98 7.7 - 1.0 9.8 9.5 - 1.0 2.4 14.6 1.9 0.0365 LB N 371 KSB2 426 720 137.1 4.36 8.1 7.5 9.1 9.5 -1.0 3.8 37.3 0.0 0.0383 LB N 372 KSB2 425 700 138.7 4.27 7~5 . 6.6 9.5 10.0 - 1.0 1.2 46.2 6.6 0.0362 LL N 373 KSB2 425 720 90.9 2.72 7.5 6.6 10.1 9.8 - 1.0 2.2 5.0 0.9 0.0355 LB N 374 KSB2 430 700 90.3 2.62 6.8 6.1 10.7 10.5 - 1.0 1.2 205.0 74.1 0.0327 LL N ~Qlli.~ x.i.~x._x.1.I!.i. ll.lJ.1LkQMMi.li.X~ I!.ll.Q~i.llQll.4~_kQMMi.«X.~ 124X.d._~QMHi.(iX.~ liILli(i~ll._~QHM~!l.X.~ P-PROPANE NL-NORMAL LEAli PS-STABILITI PROCBD. CK. B-BAILEY N.G. O-OLD IllJECT. CONFIG. K-KEROSENE NR-NORMAL RICH PN-NOX EMISS. PROCED. CK. H-HC N.G. Ii-NEW INJECT. CONFIG. E-EMISSIONS LB-LEAN BURNING FH-HOT SAMPLE LINE CK. N-NOX N.G. S-STABILITI . LL-LEAN LIMIT FY- VAPOR GENER. OPERe CK. Y-YOLUMETRIC N.G. B-BURNER LO-LEAN GOES OUT FC-FACILITY CX. F-FLOW N.G. L-LOOP RB-RICH BURNING LK-LIQUID XEROEENE RUN T-TRANSIENT OPERe Table l-STAND 1 RL-RICH LIMIT VI-12 2-STABD 2 RO-RICH GOES OUT image: ------- EXPERIMENTAL DATA PRON THE PAZYE BURNER PAGE 13 RUN .TEST TA TP riA JlF C02Y C02C 02Y 02B NOT NOB CO HC PAN kQItI!l~li.X.~ NO. TYPE .p .p LBIHR LBIHR PCT PCT PCT PCT PPII PPM PPM PPN RUN PRO DAT BUR 315 KSB2 400 110 91.4 2.51 3.9 5.9 14. 5 12.5 -1.0 0.1 825.0 1155.3 0.0308 LL N 316 KSB2 400 110 90.3 2.59 4.5 5.1 13.6 13.0 - 1.0 0.1 2850.0 1956.5 0.0314 LL N 311 KSB2 405 105 48.3 1.62 6.8 6.4 11.1 10.4 - 1.0 2.1 -1.0 8.1 0.0322 LB N 318 KSB2 428 130 45.5 1.55 6.8 5.1 10.8 10.5 -1. 0 1.4 120.0 56.1 0.0325 LL N 319 KSB2 375 120 41.0 1.50 6.4 5.5 11.6 10.5 - 1.0 1.3 280 . 0 36.9 0.0310 LL N 380 KSB2 412 115 45.1 1.38 5.4 5.1 12.~ 12.0 - 1.0 0.1 860,0 760.0 0.0293 LL N. 381 KSB2 411 128 138.5 3.80 5.6 5.6 12.5 11.0 -1.0 0.1 1025.0 690.5 o.o~oo LL N 382 KSB2 411 721 138.1 3.80 4.1 5.6 14.4 12.5 - 1.0 0.1 1510.0 1618.9 0.0300 LL 11 383 KSB2 403 100 41.1 1.54 6.4 5.1 11.3 11.5 - 1.0 1.4 695.0 625.4 0.0315 LB N 384 KSB2 76 110 91.4 3.12 8.1 1.8 9.1 8.8 -1.0 2.0 18.3 0.7 0.0385 LL H 385 KSB2 90 430. 91. 6 3.12 1.9 1.9 9.2 9.5 -1.0 3.4 -1.0 0.5 0.0375 LB N 386 KSB2 91 410 89.8 2.89 4.3 6.1 13.9 13.0 1.0 0.6 1210.0 105.1 0.0352 LL N 387 KSB2 80 140 41.8 1.53 6.1 6.2 10.9 9.5 - 1.0 2.2 150.0 12.2 0.0350 LL 11 388 KSB2 81 140 45.5 1.48 4.3 4.1 13.8 11~5 -1.0 0.1. 2035.0 350.1 0.0356 LL 11 389 KSB2 85 390 48.2 3.62 10.4 6.0 0.2 1.6 1.0 21.5 102400.0 503.4 0.0822 NR N I 390 KSB2 90 515 80.9 2.58 1.6 1.1 9.1 9.6 - 1.0 5.8 5.0 2.6'0.0360 LL. N I 391 KSB2 93 550 80.5 2.40 2.2 5.0 11.3 13.5 -1.0 0.2 2100.0 215.2 0.0321 NL 11 'Q12i~ x.~~r_rlfi BlI.l._kQltltiliX~ fBQklQlI.B.~_'Q!ltiI.X~ 12.X4_kQItI1~li.X.~ D.lI.B.li.~B._kQItI1~li.X.~ P-PROPA.NE NL-1I0RNAL LEAN PS-STABILITY PROCED. CK. B-BAILEY N.G. O-OLD INJECT. CONFIG. K-KEROSENE NR-NORIIAL RICH PN-NOX EMISS. PROCED. CK. H-HC N.G. N-NEJI INJECT. CONFIG. E-EIiISSIONS LB-LEAN BURNING PH-HOT SAMPLE LINE CK. N-NOX N.G. S-ST~BILITY LL-LEAN LIMIT PY- VAPOR GENER. OPERe CK. Y-YOLUMETRICN.G. B-BURNER LO-LEAN GOES OUT PC-PACILITY CK. F-FLOW N.G. L-LOOP RB-RICH BURNING LK-LIQUID KEROSENE RUN T-TRANSIENT OPERe 1-STAND 1 RL-RICH LIMII' 2-STAND 2 RO-RICH GOES OUT Table VI-13 image: ------- ~ 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. Symbol Run No. Test type TA TF WA WIo' C02V C02C 02V 02B NOT NOB co HC FAN Comments IIO*NCLATURE FOR EXPERIHi'~AL DATA TABl&S .lJescription Chronological run sequence Fuel type, test objectives, system configuration, test stand Inlet a{r temperature to the burner Inlet fuel temperature to th~ burner Air flow rate Fuel flow rate Carbon dioxide concentration as meas\~ed by the Orsat apparatus Carbon dioxide concentration as measured by the Chromatograph Oxygen concentration as measured by the Orsat apparatus Oxygen concentration as measured by thl;! Bailey intrument Ni trogen dioxide as measured from the top of the genera tor loop In trogen dioxide as measured from the burner Carbon monoxide as measured by the chromatograph Hydrocarbons as measured by the chroma- tograph Nominal fuel air ratio Run comments as explained by the footing of the data tables ~ 010' or' lb/hr lb/hr % by volume % by volume % by volume % by vol UJ:\& PPM PPM PPM PPH Table VI-l" image: ------- SIGNIFICANT TEST PROGRAM MILESTONES Run No. ,Event 1-7 Stability test pr.ocedure investi~ation. 95 NOx line 108S checkout on stand 1. 96-102 NOx line loss checkout on stand 2. 103 Started quartz tube sample techni~ue for NOx. 108 Propane accumulator installed st~nd 2. 123 Air flow 6trai~htener installed stand 2. 128 Hot semple line installed stand 2. 138 Heated hydrocarbon pump installed. Start of , good data from burner. 173 Tried to stop LBO by raisin~ TA. Burner out. No data. 187 No data. 203 Liquid kerosene atomized by N2 carrier flow. 20~ No data. 205-207 Vapor Renerator loop checkout. 208-216 Not part of this prol',t'am. 217 Vapor generator stack clean out. 218 Start of finalized good NOx measurement procedure. 218-220 MOx saturation evaluation. 220 MOx top of stack and burner comparison. 26~-25~ New employee ran tests. Data invalid. 255 Vapor I!;enerator check out. 271 New fuel injector stand l; start of ~ood HC data stand 1. 276-278 Not part of this proj!;ram. 282 New fuel injector stand 2; start of good HC data stand 2. Table VI-15 image: ------- COMPARISON OF FUEL AIR RATIO VALUES PAGE 1 RUN NO. FA FA COR FAC FAO FAB FAll 1 0.0242 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.0299 0.0299 2 0.0275 0.0340 -:-1.0000 - 1.0000 0.0320 0.0340 3 0.0250 - L 0000 - 1. 0000 0.0360 0.0309 0.0309 4 0.0234 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.0345 0.0290 0.0290 5 0.0241 0.0298 - 1.0000 - 1. 00 00 - 1. 0000 0.0298 6 0.0233 ,- 1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.0330 0.0 2GB 0.0288 7 0.0256 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.0390 0.0317 0.0317 8 0.0327 0.0405 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.0405 9 0.0263 0.0325 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 0.0325 10 0.0243 0.0301 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.0301 11 0.0271 0.0335 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.0335 12 0.0224 0.0277 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 0.0277 13 0.0279 0.0345 - 1. 0000 1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.0345 14 0.0263 0.0325 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 0.0325 15 0.0271 0.0335 0.0320 0.0331 0.0410 0.0326 16 0.0294 0.0364 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 0.0364 17 0.0280 0.0347 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 0.0347 18 0.0287 0.0355 1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.0355 19 0.0316 0.0391 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.0391 20 0.0278 0.0344 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 0.0344 21 0.0239 0.0295 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 0.0295 22 0.0257 ,0.0317 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 0.0317 23 0.0270 0.0333 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.0333 24 0.0279 0.0344 - 1. 0000 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 0.0344 25 0.0288 0.0356 0.0360 0.0361 0.0380 0.0360 26 0.0359 0.0444 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 0.0444 27 0.0300 0.0371 - 1.0000 - 1. 0 000 - 1. 00 00 0.0371 28 0.0271 0.0334 - 1.0000 ,-1.0000 - 1.0000 0.0334 29 0.0265 0.0328 - 1. 0000 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 0.0328 30 0.0271 0.0335 1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.0335 31. 0.0307 0.0380 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 0.0380 32 0.0283 0.0350 - 1. 0000 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.0350 33 0.0267 0.0330 - 1. 0000 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 0.0330 34 0.0264 0.0326 - 1. 0000 - 1. 00 00 -1. 0000 0.0326 35 0.027.5 0.0341 0.0330 0.0334 0.0360 0.0332 36, 0.0304 0.0376 - 1. 0000 -1.0000 '-' 1. 0000 0.0376 37 0.0291 0.0359 - 1. 0000 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 0.0359 38 0.0282 0.0349 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.0349 39 0.0274 0'.0339 - 1.0000 1. 0000 1.0000 0.0339 40 0.0266 0.0329 1. 0000 - 1.0000 1. 0000 0.0329 41 0.0283 0.0350 0.0320 0.0331 0 . 0 360 0.0350 42 0.0359 0.0444 0.0490 0.0478 0.0500 0.0484' 43 0.0270 0.0334 0.0340 0.0328 0.0350 0.0334 44 0.0390 0.0482 1. 0000 1. 0000 1. 0 000 0.0482 45 0.0358 0.0443 - 1.0000 ,- 1.0000 1.0000 0.0443 46 0.0317 0.0392 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 1. 0000 0.0392 47 0.0276 0.0341 1. 0000 - 1. OOOQ - 1.0000 0.0341 48 0.0254 0.0314 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.0314 49 0.0233 0.0288 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.0208 50 0.0245 0.0303 0.0320 0.0320 0.0330 0.0320 FA -FUEL/AIR FROM FLOW METERS FACOR-CORRECTED VALUES OF FA FAC-FUEL/AIR FROM VOLUMETRIQ C02 FAO -FUEL/AIR FROM VOLUMETRIC 02 FAB-FUEL/AIR FROM DAILEY DATA FAN -NOMINAL FUEL/AIR FOR ANALYSES Table VI-16 image: ------- COMPARISON OF FUEL AIR RATIO VALUES PAGE 2 RUN NO. FA FA COR FAC FAO FAll FAN 51 0.0316 0.0390 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 0.0390 52 0.0280 0.03~6 -1. 0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.03~6 53 0.02~0 0.0297 -1.0000 - L 0000 - 1.0000 0.0297 5~ 0.0260 0.0322 0.0290 0.0287 0.0320 0.0289 55 0.16~3 0.2032 - 1. 0000 -1. 0000 -1.0000 0.2032 56 0.1367 0.1690 -1.0000 -1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.1690 57 0.1~99 0.185~ 1.0000 1.0000 -1.0000 0.185~ 58 0.1372 0.1697 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 0.1697 59 0.1646 0.2036 -1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.2036 60 0.1007 0.1245 1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.1245 61 0.1007 0.1245 0.0990 - 1. 0000 -1.0000 0.1245 62 0.1372 0.1697 0.1180 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 0.1697 63 0.1649 0.2040 -1.0000 - 1. 0000 -1.0000 0.2040 64 0.1372 0.1697 0.1010 -1.0000 - 1.0000 0.1697 65 0.1433 0.1772 0.0960 -:-1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.1772 66 0.1479 0.1829 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 -1.0000 0.1829 67 0.1429 0.1767 0.0976 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.1767 68 0.1307 0.1617 -1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.1617 69 0.1241 0.1535 0.1250 - 1. 00 00 - 1.0000 0.1535 70 0.1510 0.1867 0.1075 - 1. 0000 -1.0000 0.1867 71 0.1586 0.1961 -1.0000 -1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.1961 72 0.1235 0.1527 0.1055 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.1527 73 0.1268 0.1568 ~1. 0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.1568 74 0.0261 0.0323 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1. 0000 0.0323 75 0.0375 0.0464 0.0400 0.0396 0.0430 0.0398 76 0.0395 0.0489 0 .0542 0.0525 0.0510 0.0534 77 0.0522 0.0645 0.0640 0.0635 0.0610 0.0637 78 0.0289 0.0357 0.0263 0.0273 0.0310 0.0357 79 0.0380 <1.0470 0.0448 0.0431 .0.0480 0.0440 80 0.0504 0.0623 0.0640 0.0631 0.0626 0.0635 81 0.0747 0.0924 0.0840 -1.0000 -1. 0000 0.0924 82 0.0272 0.0337 0.0321 0.0325 0.0350 0.0323 83 0.0381 0.0471 0.0497 0.0484 0.0510 0.0491 84 0.0386 0.0477 0.0480 0.0475 0.0540 0.0478 85 0.0452 0.0559 0.0590 0.0585 0.0590 0.0587 86 0.0663 0.0820 0.0770 -1.0000 - 1. 0000 0.0820 87 0.0288 0.0356 0.0347 0.0343 0.0380 0.0345 88 0.0384 0.0475 0.0445 0.0434 0.0510 0.0440 89 0.0573 0.0709 0.0739 0 .0660 -1.0000 0.0709 90 0.0287 0.0355 0.0372 0.0367 0.0410 0.0369 91 0.0384 0.0475 0.0533 0.0519 0.0550 0.0526 92 0.0573 0.0709 0.0839 -1.0000 -1.0000 0.0709 93 0.0354 0.0388 0.0320 0.0328 0.0380 0.0324 94 0.0438 0.0479 0.0440 0.0424 0.0485 0.0432 95 0.0483 0.0528 0.0569 0.0538 0.0560 0.0553 96 0.0601. 0.0658 Q.0663 0.0700 -1. 0000 0.0658 97 0.0297 0.0325 -1. 0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.0325 98 0.0376 0.0412 -1.0000 -1. 00 00 - 1.0000. 0.0412 99 0.0492 0.0539 -1.0000 1.0000 - 1. 0000 0.0539 100 0.0608 0.0666 -1.0000 -1. 0000 -1. 0000 0.0666 FA ~FUEL/AIR FROM FLOW METERS FACOR-CORRECTED VALUES OF FA FAC-FUEL/AIR FROM VOLUMETRIC C02 FAO -FUEL/AIR FROM VOLUMETRIC 02 FAB-FUEL/AIR FROM BAILEY DATA FAN' -NOMINAL FUEL/AIR FOR ANALYSES Table VI-17 image: ------- COMPARISON OF FUEL AIR RATIO VALUES PAGE 3 RUN NO. FA FA COR FAC PAO FAD FAN 101 - - . 0.0726 0.0795 1. 0000 1. 0000 1.0000 0.0795 102 0.0407 0.0481 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 1.0000 0.0481 103 0.0400 0.0473 0.0535 - 1.0000 0.0550 0.0535 104 0.0260 0.0307 0.0346 - 1. 0000 0 . 0 35 0 0.0346 105 0.0347 0.0410 0.0595 0.0589 0.0560 0.0:;92 106 0.0264 0.0313 0.0240 0.0240 0.0330 0.0313 107 0.0212 0.0251 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 1.0000 0.0251 108 0.0241 0.0285 0.0277 0 .0289 0.0272 0.0285 109 0.0265 0.0313 0.0360 0.0352 0.0360 0.0356 110 0 '00 21 2 0.0251 0.0255 0.02G2 0.0281 0.0258 111 0.0212 0.0251 0.0210 0.0228 0.02:;8 0.0251 112 0.0226 0.0267 0.0295 0.0305 0.0311 0.0300 113 0.0199 0.0235 0.025:; 0.0243 0.0280 0.0249 114 0.0199 0.0235 0.0235 0.0252 0.0269 0.0243 115 0.0178 0.0211 0.0245 0.0252 0.0258 0.0248 116 0.0275 0.0325 0.0350 0.0338 0.0350 0.0344 117 0.0226 0.0267 0.0277 0.0275 0.0288 0.0276 118 0.0209 0.0247 0.0230 0.0242 0.0255 0.0247 119 0.0232 0.0274 0.0300 0.0298 0.0302 0.0299 120 0.0232 0.0274 0.0255 0.0269 0 .0200 0.0274 121 0.0226 0.026R 0.0280 0.0292 0.0298 0.0286 122 0.0217 0.0257 0.0205 0.0235 - 1. 0000 0.0257 123 0.0436 0.0515 0.0510 0.050R 0.0519 0.0:;09 124 0.0257 0.0304 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.0405 0.0304 125 0.0267 0.0316 0.0228 0.0258 - 1.0000 0.0316 126 0.0289 0.0342 0.0312 0.0334 - 1. 00 00 0.0323 127 0.0308 0.0364 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 0.0364 128 0.0293 0.0346 - 1. 000'0 - 1. 0000 0.0592 0.03&+6 129 0.0274 0.0324 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 0.0420 0.'0324 130 . 0.0315 0.0373 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 0.0375 0.0373 131 0 . 0372 0.0440 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.0440 132 0.0571 0.0675 - 1. 0000 -1. 00 00 0.0615 0.0675 133 0.0305 0.0360 - 1.0000 -1.0000 0.0440 0.0360 134 0.0381 0.0450 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 0.0568 0.0450 135 0.0235 0.0278 - 1. 0000 -1. 0000 0.0362 0.0278 136 0.0288 0.0340 - 1.0000 -1.0000 0.0420 0.0340 137 0.0381 0.0450 - 1.0000 1. 0000 0.0565 0.0450 138 0.0305 0.0361 0.0412 0.0408 0.0420 0.0410 139 0.0393 0.0465 - 1. 00 00 - 1. 0000 0.0528 0.0465 140 0.0555 0.0657 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.OG57 141 0.0655 0.0774 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.0774 142 0.0292 0.0345 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 0.0345 143 0.0650 0.0769 -1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.0769 144 0.0555 0.0657 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 0.0657 145 0.0395 0.0467 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 0.0467 146 0.0294 0.0348 - 1. 0000 -1.0000 0.0362 0.0348 147 0.0254 0.0301 - 1.0000 1. 0000 0.0320 0.0301 148 0.0412 0.0487 - 1. 00 00 - 1. 0000 0.0492 0.0487 149 0.0696 0.0824 0.0850 - 1. 0000 0.0865 0.0824 150 0.0237 0.0281 - 1. 0000 -1. 0000 0.0320 0.0281 FA -FUEL/AIR FROM FLOW METERS FACOR-CORRECTED VALUES OF PA FAC-FUEL/ AIR FROM VOLUMETRIC C02 FAO -FUEL/AIR FROM VOLUMETRIC 02 FAB-FUEL/AIR FROM BAILEY DATA FAN -NOMINAL FUEL/AIR FOR ANALYSES Table VI-18 image: ------- COMPARISON OF FUEL AIR RATIO VALUES PAGE 4 RUN NO. FA FA COR FAC FAO FAD FAN 151 0.0382 0.0452 - 1.0000 1.0000 0.0470 0.0452 152 0.0404 0.0478 - 1. 0000 1. 00 00 0.0502 0.0478 153 0.0254 0.0301 1. 00 00 1. 0000 0.0300 0.0301 154 0.0379 0.0449 -1.0000. -1.0000 0.0465 0.0449 155 0.0273 0.0323 1. 0000 1.0000 0.0345 0.0323 156 0.0232 0.0275 1. 00 00 -1. 0000 0.0265 0.0275 157 0.0317 0.0375 -1. 0000 .. 1. 0000 0.0380 0.0375 158 0.0345 0.0408 -1.0000 - 1. 0 000 0.0420 0.0408 159 0.0411 0.0486 -1.0000 -1. 0000 0.0525 0.0486 160 0.0662 0.q782 -1.0000 -1. 0000 0.0775 0.0782 161 0.0672 0.0795 1. 00 00 -1.0000 0.0750 0.0795 162 0.0844 0.0998 - 1. 0000 -1. 0000 0.0930 0.0998 163 0.0296 0.0350 -1. 0000 -1. 0000 0.0390 0.0350 164 0.0409 0.0484 -1.0000 -1. 0000 0.0595 0.0484 165 0.0429 0.0507 -1. 00 00 -1. 0000 0.0485 0.0507 166 0.0359 0.0425 - 1. 0000 -1. 0000 0.0415 0.0425 167 0.0455 0.0538 -1. 0000 -1. 0000 0.0495 0.0538 168 0.0526 0.0623 -1.0000 -1. 0000 0.0578 0.0623 169 0.0395 0.0467 -1.0000 -1.0000 0.0445 0.0467 170 0.0312 0.0369 1.0000 -1. 0000 0.0360 0.0369 171 0.0279 0.0330 - 1.0000 1.0000 0.0320 0.0330 172 0.0223 0.0264 -1.0000 -1.0000 0.0258 0.0264 174 0.0352 0.0416 -1.0000 -1.0000 0.0400 0.0416 175 0.0429 0.0507 -1. 0000 -1. 0000 0.0500 0.0507 176 0.0472 0.0559 - 1.0000 -1. 0000 0.0535 0.0559 177 0.0243 0.0288 0.0270 0.0273 0.0282 0.0271 178 0.0293 0.0346 .- 1.0000 - 1.0000. 0 . 0 34 5 0.0346 179 0.0454 0.0537 -1.0000 - 1.0000 0.0535 0.0537 180 0.0386 '0. 04 5 7 -1. 0000 -1. 00 00 0.0458 0.0457 181 0.0336 0.0397 -1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.0400 0.0397 182 0.0295 0.0349 -1. 00 00 -1. 0000 0.0360 0.0349 183 0.0265 0.0313 -1. 0000 1.0000 0.0315 0.0313 184 0.0240 0.0284 -1. 0000 -1. 0000 0.0290 . 0.0284 185 0.0271 0.0321 -1.0000 -1. 0000 0.0325 0.0321 186 0 . 0304 0.0359 0.0360 0.0361 0.0385 0.0360 188 0.0424 0.0464 0.0450 0.0461 0.0510 0.0455 189 0.0351 0.0384 0.0360 0.0378 0 . 039 0 0.0369 190 0.0297 0.0326 - 1.0000 -1.0000 0.0320 0.0326 191 0.0351 0.0384 -1. 0000 -1.0000 0.0370 0.0384 192 0.0420 0.0460 -1.0000 -1.0000 0.0445 0.0460 193 0.0766 0.0839 -1.0000 -1. 0000 0.0900 0.0839 194 0.0334 0.0365 0.0360 0.0368 0.0400 0.0364 195 0.0296 0.0324 -1.0000 -1.0000 0.0370 0.0324 196 0.0266 0.0292 0.0328 -1.0000 0.0328 0.0328 197 0.0303 0.0331 .0.0345 0.0362 0.0367 0.0354 198 0.0401 0.0439 1. 0000 -1. 00 00 0.0405 0.0439 199 0.0598 0.0655 -1. 0000 -1.0000 0.0630 0.0655 200 0.0403 0.0441 0.0305 0.0384 0.0415 0.0441 FA -FUEL/AIR FROM FLOW METERS FA COR-CORRECTED VALUES OF FA FAC-FUEL/AIR FROM VOLUMETRIC C02 FAO -FUEL/AIR FROM VOLUMETRIC 02 PAB-FUEL/AIR FROM BAILEY DATA FAN -NOMINAL FUEL/AIR FOR ANALYSES Table VI-19 image: ------- COMPARISOll OF FUEL AIR RATIO VALUF:S PA Cr. 5 RUN NO. FA F,1 COR FAC FAD FAl:: FAi:' 201 0.0445 0.0526 1. 0000 1. 0000 1.0000 0.0570 1. 0000 - 1.0000 1. 0000 0.0460 202 0.0389 0.0460 203 0.0378 0.0414 1. 0000 1. 0000 1.0000 0.0414 205 0.0378 0.0447 - 1. 0000 1.0000 0.0464 0.0447 206 0.0352 0.0416 - 1. 0000 1.0000 0.0435 0.04H 207 0.0303 0.0358 1.0000 1. 0000 0.0347 0.o3S8 217 0.0327 0.0387 - 1.0000 - 1. () 000 0.0317 0.0387 218 0.0251 0.0249 0.0440 0.0352 - 1.0000 0.0396 219 0.0372 0.0368 0.0520 0.0484 - 1.0000 0.0502 220 0.0317 0.0375 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 0.0406 0.0375 221 0.0312 0.0369 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.0378 0.0369 222 0.0276 0.0327 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.0346 0.0327 223 0.0336 0.0397 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 0.040G 0.0397 224 0.0253 0.0300 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 0.0378 0.0356 225 0.0281 0.0333 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 0.0400 0.0395 226 0.0240 0.0284 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.0346 0.0337 227 0.03H 0.0371 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.0420 . 0.0371 228 0.0312 0.0369 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.0315 0.0369 229 0.0312 0.0369 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.0378 0.0369 230 0.0313 0.0370 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 0.0360 0.0370 231 0.0296 0.0350 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 0.0310 0.0350 232 0.0187 0.0221 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.0333 0.0333 233 0.0139 0.0164 - 1. 0000 - 1. 00 00 0.0395 0.03rJ5 234 ' 0.0364 0.0430 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 0.0522 0.0430 235 0.0321 0.0380 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.0460 0.0380 236 0.0264 0.0312 0.0440 0.0328 0.0380 0.0384 237 0.0341./ 0.0407 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.0522 0.0407 238 0.0316 0.0312 0.0270 0.0275 0.0350 0.0312 239 0.0388 0.0384 O. 03 50 0.0340 0.0410 0.0345 240 0.0417 0.0413 0.0420 0.0420 0.0465 0.0420 241 0.0512 0.0507 0.0465 0.0465 0.0520 0.0465 242 0.0498 0.0492 0.0475 0.0500 0.0520 0.0488 243 0.0537 0.0531 0.0575 0.0570 0.0580 0.0573 244 0.0342 0.0339 0.0320 0.0325 0.0350 0.0323 245 0.0398 0.0393 0.0380 0.0307 0.0410 0.0384 246 0.0414 0.0409 .. 1.0000 - 1. 0000 0.0289 0.0409 247 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 0 . 0 29 5 0.0295 248 - 1.0000 1.0000 - 1.0000 1.0000 0.0360 0.0360 249 0.0548 0.0542 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 0.0350 0.0542 250 0.0553 0.0548 - 1.0000 1.0000 0.0490 0.0548 FA -FUEL/AIR FROM FLOW METERS FACOR-CORRECTED VALUES {iF FA FAC-FUEL/AIR FROM VOLUMETRIC C02 FAO -FUEL/AIR FROM VOLUMETRIC 02 FAB-FUEL/ AIR FROM BAILEY DATA FAN -NOMINAL FUEL/AIR FOR ANALYSES Table VI-20 image: ------- COMPARISON OP FUEL AIR RATIO VALUES PAGE 6 RUN NO. FA PACOR PAC PAO FAB PAN 251 0.0322 0.0319 1.0000 -1.0000 0.0348 0.0319 252 0.0324 0.0320 -1.0000 - 1. 0000 0.0360 0.0320 253 0.0373 0.0369 -1.0000 -1.0000 0.0410 0.0369 254 -1. 0000 -1.0000 0.0410 - 1.0000 0.0470 0.0410 255 0.0242 -1.0000 0.0388 -1. 0000 -1.0000 0.0388 256 -1. 0000 -1. 0000 0.0460 0.0460 0.0460 0.0460 257 -1. 0000 -1.0000 0.0505 0.0500 0.0500 0.0503 258 0.0539 0.0533 0.0589 0.0564 0.0565 0.0576 259 -1.0000 -1.0000 0.0640 -1.0000 1. 00 0 0 0.OG40 260 0.0627 0 . 0.620 0.0580 0.0650 0.0625 0.OG15 261 -1. 000 0 ,- 1.0000 0.0760 1. 0000 -1.0000 0.0760 262 0.0335 0.0331 0.0330 0.0331 0.0348 0.0331 263 0.0401 0.0397 0.0390 0.0372 0.0410 0.0381 264 0.0344 0.0341 0.0320 0.0314 0.0310 0.0317 265 -1.0000 -1.0000 0.0375 0.0370 0.0375 0.0372 266 0.0337 0.0334 0.0360 0.0367 0.0383 0.0363 267 0.0327 0.0324 0.0335 0.0311 0.0323 0.0323 268 0.0365 0.0361 0.0375 0.0370 0.0380 0.0372 269 0.0427 0.0422 0.0420 0.0422 0.0438 0.0421 270 0.0443 0.0438 0.0435 0.0443 0.0467 0.0439 271 0.0354 0.0350 0.0350 0.0364 0.0365 0.0357 272 0.0420 0.0415 0 .0410 0.0437 0.0455 0.0424 273 0.0465 0.0460 0.0435 0.0428 0.0480 0.0432 274 0.0460 0.0455 0.0490 0.0478 0.0495 0.0484 275 0.0508 0.0503 0.0537 0.0519 0.0540 0.0529 279 0.0310 0.0366 0 . 03 60 0.0381 0.0400 0.0371 280 0.0368 0.0436 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000, - 1.0000 0.0436 281 0.0311 0.0368 0.0375 0 .0384 0.0395 0.0380 282 0.0291 9.0344 0.0390 0.0387 0.0410 0.0389 283 0.0264 0.0313 0.0425 0.0346 0.0360 0.0386 284 0.0232 0.0275 0.0270 0.0273 0.0310 0.0271 285 0.0242 0.0286 0.0310 0.0314 0.0315 0.0312 286 0.0332 0.0328 0.0310 0.0331 0.0360 0.0321 287 0.0340 0.0337 0.0280 0.0299 0.0335 0.0337 288 0.0351 0.0348 0.0360 0 . 0 364 0.0370 0.0362 289 0.0382 0.0378 0.0390 0.0380 0.0385 0.0385 290 0.0441 0.0436 0.0460 0.0461 0.0478 0.0460 291 0.0780 0.0772 -1.0000 - 1. 0000 0.0895 0.0895 292 0.0815 0.0806 -1.0000 -1.0000 0.1000 0.1000 293 0.0918 0.0809 0.0870 - 1. 0000 0.0945 0.0870 294 0.0675 0.0668 0.0805 1. 0000 0.0770 0.080,5 295 0.0782 0.0774 0.0845 1.0000 0.0875 0.0845 296 0.0751 0.0743 0.0860 1. 000 0 0.0820 0.0860 297 0.0890 0.0880 0.0905 1.0000 0.0960 0.0905 298 0.0774 0.0766 0.0820 1.0000 0.0790 0.0820 299 0.0918 0.0908 1.0000 1. 0000 0.0880 0.0880 300 0.08~4 0.0865 '1.0000 -1. 00 00 0.0750 0.0750 FA -PUEL/AIR FROM PLOW METERS PACOR-CORRECTED VALUES OF PA FAC-PUEL/AIR PROM VOLUMETRIC C02 PAO -PUEL/AIR FROM VOLUMETRIC 02 PAB-PUEL/AIR PROM BAILEY DATA PAN -NOMINAL FUEL/AIR FOR ANALYSES Table VI-21 image: ------- COMPARISON OF FUEL AIR RATIO VALUF.S PACT: 7 RUN NO. FA FA COR FAC FAO FAn FAi.' 301 0.0701 0.0780 - 1. 0000 0.0730 0.0780 0.0694 302 0.0903 0.0910 - 1. 0000 0.0930 0.0910 0.0894 303 0.0741 0.0820 - 1. 0000. 0 .0 BO 5 0.0820 0.0733 304 0.0772 0.OB60 - 1.0000 0.0845 0.0860 0.0764 305 0.0938 0.0928 0.0880 - 1. 0000 0.0895 0.0880 306 0.0734 0.0726 0.0750 - 1. 0000 0.0755 0 . 07 50 307 0.0679 0.0672 0.0765 - 1.0000 0.0745 0.0765 308 0.0343 0.0406 0.0340 0.0360 0.0390 0.0350 309 0.0316 0.0373 0.0330 0.0317 0.0338 0.0323 310 0..0186 0.0220 0.0205 0.0193 0.0275 0.0220 311 0.0354 o. 0419 0.0375 0.0378 0.0390 0.0377 312 0.0269 0.0318 0.0330 0.0323 0.0330 0.0326 313 0.0212 0.0251 0.0250 0.0255 0.0272 0.0252 314 0.0315 0.0373 0.0350 0.0340 0.0390 0.0345 315 0.0258 0.0305 0.0300 0 .0305 0.0335 0.0302 316 0.0239 0.0282 0.0320 0.0325 0.0339 0.0323 317 0.0217 0.0256 0.0250 0.0270 0.0279 0.0260 318 0.0274 0.0324 0.0315 0.0317 0.0338 0.0316 319 0.0225 .0.0266 0.0240 0.0264 0.0279. 0..0~66 320 0.0332 .0.0393 0.0384 0.0446 0.0390 0.0415 321 0.0329 0.0389 0.0375 0.0390 0.0395 0.0383 322 0.0260 0.0308 0.0305 0.0317 0.0338 0.0311 323 0.0242 0.0287 0.0260 0.0281 0.0290 O. 02!-7 324 0.0328 0.0388 0.0370 0.0378 0.0390 0.0374 325 0.0280 0.0332 0.0280 0.0314 0.0340 0.0332 326 0.0260 0.0307 0 . 0280 0.0287 0.0317 0.0307 327 0.0311 0.0368 0.0380 0.0390 0.0395 0.0385 328 0.0243 0.0288 0.0295 0.0299 0 .0320 0.0297 329 0.0185 0.0219 0.0240 0.0249 0.0270 0.0245 330 . 0.0324 0.0384 0.0375 0.0387 0.0396 0.0381 331 0.0248 0.0293 0.0305 0.0314 0.0330 0.0309 332 0.0226 0.0267 0.0250 0.0270 0.0320 0.0260 333 0.023E! 0.0282 0.0285 0.0370 0.0330 0.0282 334 0.0206 0.0244 0.0240 0.0252 0.0280 0.0246 335 0.0301 0.0330 0.0380 0.0361 0.0390 0.0370 336 0.02,60 0.0285 0.0300 0.()322 0.0335 0.0311 337 0.0382 0.0418 0.0350 0.0375 0.0400 0.0362 338 0.0359 0.0393 71. 00 00 0.0362 0.0380 0.0393 339 0.0326 0.0357 0.0365 0..0393 0.0390 0.0379 340 0.0274 0.0324 0.0320 0 .0320 0.0388 0.0320 . 341 0.0276 0.0326 0.0340 0.0331 0.0388 0.0336 342 0.0309 0.0338 0.0355 0.0375 0.0390 0.0365 343 0.0278 0.0329 0.0330 0.0345 0.0335 0.0337 344 0.0245 0.0289 0.0295 0 . 0 30 5 0.0305 0.0300 345 0.0294 0.0347 0.0345 0.0352 0.0352 0.0348 346 0.0264 0.0312 0.0310 0.0317 0.0310 0.0313 347 0.0357 0.0422 0.0415 0.0420 0.0390 0.0417 348 0.0319 0.0350 0.0410 0.039.3 0.0360 0.0401 349 0.0283 0.0310 0.0335 0.0350 0.0317 0.0342 350 0.0293 0.0321 0.0385 0.0375 0.0335 0.0380 PA -FUEL/AIR FROM FLOW METERS FACOR-CORRECTED VALUES OF FA FAC-FUEL/AIR FROM VOLUMETRIC C02 FAO -FUEL/AIR FROM VOLUMETRIC 02 FAD-FUEL/AIR FROM BAILEI DATA FAll -NOMINAL FUEL/AI? FOR ANALYSES Table VI-n image: ------- COMPARISON OF FUEL AIR RATIO VALUES PA GE 8 RUN NO. FA FA COR FAC FAO FAB FAN 351 0.0325 0.0355 0.0430 0.0411 0.0415 0.0421 352 0.0285 0.0312 0.0340 0.0331 0.0370 0.0336 353 0.0323 0.0354 0.0430 0.0411 0 . 0415 0.0421 354 0.0322 0.0352 0.0355 0.0362 0.0380 0.0359 355 0.0262 0.0287 0.0280 0.0295 0.0320 0.0287 356 0.0388 0.0425 0.0365 0.0378 0.0410 0.0371 357 0.0275 0.0302 0.0330 0.0344 0.0370 0.0337 358 0.0350 0.0383 0.0310 0.0313 0.0410 0.0312 359 0.0302 0.0331 0.0335 0.0335 0.0415 0.0335 360 0.0324 0.0355 0.0350 - 1. 0000 0 .0400 0.0355 361 0.0292 0.0319 0.0310 0.0313 0.0350 0.0312 362 0.0367 0.0402 0.0420 0.0421 0.0430 0.0420 363 0.0336 0.0368 0.0330 0.0335 0.0330 0.0332 364 0.0390 0.0427 0.0375 0.0384 0.0330 0.0379 365 0.0438 0.0479 0.0415 0.0418 0.0370 0.0416 366 0.0324 0.0355 0.0280 0.0295 0.0250 0.0287 367 0.0292 0.0320 0.0330 0.0350 0.0280 0.0340 368 0.0254 0.0278 0.0280 0.0295 0.02 50 0.0287 369 0.0320 0.0350 0.0375 0.0384 0.0410 0.0379 370 0.0328 0.0359 0.03G5 0.0365 0.0370 0.0365 371 0.0318 0.0348 0.0380 0.0385 0.0370 0.0383 372 0.0308 0.0337 .0.0350 0.0375 0.0360 0.0362 373 0.0299 0.0328 0 .0350 0.0360 0.0370 0.0355 374 0.0290 0.0318 0.0320 0.0335 0.0330 0.0327 375 0.0281 0.0308 0.0190 0.0230 0.0260 0.0308 376 0.0287 0.0314 0.0220 0.0265. 0.0260 0.0314 377 0.0335 0.0367 0.0320 0.0325 0.0340 0.0322 378 0.0341 0.0373 0.0320 0.0330 0.0340 0.0325 379 0.0319 0.0350 0.0310 0.0310 0.0330 0.0310 380 0.0302 0.0330 0.0260 0.0280 0.0290 0.0330 381 0.0274 0.0300 0.0268 0.0280 0.0315 0.0300 382 0.0274 0.0300 0.0200 0.0230 0.0280 0.0300 383 0.0327 0.0358 0.0310 0.0320 0.0300 0.0315 384 0.0341 0.0374 0.0380 0.0390 0.0390 0.0385 385 0.0340 0.0373 0.0360 0.0390 0.0375 0.0375 386 0.0322 0.0352 0.0210 0.0240 0.0260 0.0352 387 0.0320 0.0350 0.0320 0.0330 0.0370 0.0350 388 0.0325 0.0356 0.0210 0.0250 0.0300 0.0356 389 0.0751 0.0822 0.0780 - 1. 00 00 0.0770 0.0922 390 0.0319 0.0349 0.0350 0.0370 0.0370 0.0360 391 0.0298 0.0327 0.0115 0.011+0 0.0260 0.0327 PA -PUEL/AIR FROM FLOW METERS PACOR-CORRECTED VALUES OF FA PAC-PUEL/ AIR PROM VOLUMETRIC C02 FAO -FUEL/AIR FROM VOLUMETRIC 02 PAB-PUEL/AIR PROM BAILEY DATA PAN -NOMINAL FUEL/AIR FOR ANALYSES Table VI-23 image: ------- -!:!.~~~IFI R_A.TIO CORRi<~C'T'ION !A~ FOR ji'ww"'~r&H DATA TES'!' RUN GROUP FIJEL STANL) ~TOH GOMM;..;NT ( I;''T'O II'! w I:i c h - --- fact.or obtal"p.d) ~&rly runs PropB.M 1 O,80R" :t ,0467 Ai:r. ] el\.\<::: (Approx, rUnI'!, 15 t.o (:)1) I.at"r :-:-uns PropB.1')e 1 1,017 :t ,OS6R ~ir lealre; (Approx, ru!'!s el1mlna,ted ?44 to ?90) ".:I:Ipm)!' , runs !'-r:-ouane 2 0, R4.~ :t ,0.5(,0 Ai T leak~ 12.J t.o )41 Approx, rIms Ke:rn~en~ 2. 0,9133 :t ,1028 "1.r lea.k~ 93 to 369 Nem;. To correct JII8&:,;ured flowmeter fue1-!1.1,r value~. divide hy factor, labl. VI-2~ image: ------- THEORETICAL FLAME TEMPERATURES PACE 1 RUN AIR TEMP FUEL/AIR FLAME TEMP NO. OF of 1 75 0.0299 2157 2 80 0.03~0 2~00 3 85 0.0309 2221 ~ 85 0.0290 2105 5 85 0.0298 215~ 6 88 0.0288 2099 7 90 0.0317 2272 8 90 0.0~05 2776 9 90 0.0325 2320 10 90 0.0301 2177 11 90 0.0335 2378 12 90 0.0277 2031 13 90 0.03~5 2~36 1~ 90 0.0325 2320 15 90 0.0326 2325 16 90 0.0364 25~5 17 90 0.0347 2~47 18 90 0.0355 2492 19 91 0.0391 2699 20 92 0.03~4 2~ 34 21 92 .0.0295 2144 22 93 0.0317 2279 23 93 0 .0333 2372 24 93 0.03~4 2436 25 93 0.0360 2526 26 90 O. 04 ~4 2982 27 93 0.0371 2585 28 96 0.0334 2381 29 97 0.0328 2342 30 97 0 .0335 2384 31 102 0.0380 2638 32 105 0 .0350 2475 33 108 0.0330 2364 34 95 0 .0326 2333 35 102 0.0332 2372 36 112 0.0376 2627 37 117 0.0359 2536 38 120 0.0349 2480 39 120 0.0339 2425 40 120 0.0329 ~364 41 124 0.0326 2350 42 91 0.0~84 3167 43 93 0.0334 2377 44 87 0.0482 3154 45 85 '0.0443 2973 46 84 0.0392 2701 47 82 0.0341 2410 48 82 0 . 0314 2252 49 80 0.0288 2091 50 80 0.0320 2283 Table VI-25 image: ------- THEORETICAL FLAME TEMPERATURES PAGE 2 RUN AIR TEMP FUEL/AIR FLAME TEMP NO. OF OF 51 B3 0.0390 .26 BB 52' B2 0.0346 2437 53 B2 0.0297 2150 54 83 0.0289 2098 55 83 ' 0.2032 1492 56 81 0.1690 17!J8 57 82 0.1854 1639 58 85 0.1697 1794 59 85 0.2036 1490 60 90 0 .1245 2447 61 90 0.1245 2447 62 85 0.1697 1794 63 87 0.2040 1480 64 85 0.1697 1794 65 88 0.1772 1717 66 85 0.1829 1661 67 85 0.1767 1720 68 70 0.1617 1875 69 82 0.1535 1978 70 85 0.1867 1629 71 86 0.1961 1549 72 90 0.1527 1993 73 93 0.1568 1942 74 86 0.0323 2306 75 85 0.0464 3075 76 85 0 "0 5 3 4 3356 77 85 0.0637 3554 78 90 0.03S7 2504 79 92 0.0440 2962 80 90 0.0635 3555 81 92 0.0924 3143 82 103 0.0323 2321 83 105 0.0491 3203 ~4 100 0.0478 3143 85 103 0 . 0587 3502 86 105 0.0820 3371 87 300 0.0345 2587 88 300 0.0440 3080 89 300 0.0709 3658 90 300 0.0369 2717 91 310 0 .0526 3446 92 300 0.0709 3658 93 250 0.0324 2362 94 250 0.0432 2926 95 250 0 . 05 53 3431 96 250 0.0658 3634 97 95 0.0325 2251 98 95 0.0412 2724 99 95 0.0539 3305 100 100 0.0666 3563 Table VI-26 image: ------- THEORETICAL FLAME TEMPERATURES PAGE 3 RUN AIR TEMr FUEL/AIR FLAME TEMP NO. OF OF 101 102 0 . 0795 3485 102 102 0.0481 3160 103 400 0.0473 3284 I 104 ~oo 0.0307 2459 105 84 0.0410 2801 106 85 0.0313 2246 107 85 0.0251 1872 108 85 0.0285 2076 109 85 0.0313 2248 110 400 0.0251 2131 111 400 0.0251 2131 112 400 0.0267 2229 113 400 0.0235 2037 114 400 0.0235 2039 115 400 0.0211 1885 116 400 0.0325 2555 117 400 0.0267 2229 118 400 0.0247 2110 119 400 0.0274 2272 120 400 0.0274 2269 121 400 0.0268 2234 122 ~OO 0.0257 2167 123 74 0.0509 .3262 12~ 80 0.0304 2187 125 85 0.0316 2262 126 95 0.0342 2423 127 95 0.0364 2548 128 90 0.0346 2445 129 80 0.0324 2308 130 80 0.0373 2586 131 80 0.0440 2955 132 80 0.0675 3562 133 80 0.0360 2517 13~ 80 0.0450 3007 135 80 0.0278 2033 136 88 0.0340 2409 137 90 0.0450 3013 138 95 0.0410 2807 139 95 0.0465 3082 140 95 0.0657 3569 141 95 0.0774 3460 142 95 0.0345 2440 143 95 0.0769 3472 144 95 0.0657 3569 145 95 0.0467 3095 146 95 0.0348 2456 147 95 0.0301 2182 148 95 0.0487 3183 149 95 0.0824 3356 150 95 0.0281 2061 Table VI-27 image: ------- THEORETICAL FLAME TEMPERATURES PACE 4 RUN AIR TEMP FUEL/AIR FLAME TEMP 110. OF OF 151 400 0.0452 3196 152 . 400. 0.0478 3303 153 360 0.0301 2391 154 355 0.0449 3155 155 270 0.0323 2443 156 260 0.0275 2158 157 260 0.0375 2718 158 260 0 . 040 8 2898 159 265 0.0486 3268 160 270 0.0782 3546 161 275 0.0795 3525 162 275 0.0998 3096 163 360 0.0350 2657 164 370 0.0484 3315 165 375 0.0507 3412 166 365 O. 0425 3050 167 370 0.0538 3516 168 370 0.0623 3687 169 345 0.0467 3229 170 325 0.0369 2734 171 . 305 0.0330 2511 172 275 0.0264 2105 173 -1 - 1. 0000 1 174 400 0.0416 3030 175 405 0.0507 3429 176 405 0.0559 3595 177 405 0.0288 2354 178 405 0.0346 2675 179 350 0.0537 3502 180 345 0.0457 3185 181 340 0.0397 2891 182 340 0.0349 2639 183 335 0.0313 2439 . 184 334 0.0284 2271 185 335 0.0321 2481 186 335 0.0359 2688 187 -1 -1.0000 - 1 188 430 0.0455 3147 189 430 0.0369 2734 190 430 0.0326 2513 191 400 0.0384 2788 192 405 0.0460 3151 193 410 0.0839 3587 194 410 0.0364 2695 195 410 0.0324 2487 196 410 0.0292 2313 197 430 0.0354 2657 198 360 0.0439 3027 199 340 0.0655 3677 200 410 0.0441 3070 Table VI-28 image: ------- THEORETICAL FLAME TEMPERATURES PACE 5 RUN AIR TEMP FUEL/AIR FLAME TEMP NO. OF of 201 86 0.0526 3331 202 82 0.0460 3054 203 110 0.0414 2749 204 -1 - 1.0000 1 205 313 0.0447 3120 206 253 0.0416 2935 207 245 0.0358 2621 208 -1 - 1. 0000 1 209 -1 - 1.0000 - 1 210 -1 -1. 0000 -1 211 -1 -1. 0000 1 212 - 1 1. 0000 - 1 213 -1 - 1. 0000 - 1 214 - 1 - 1. 0000 - 1 215 -1 -1.0000 -1 216 -1 - 1. 0000 - 1 217 80 0.0387 2666 218 100 0.0311 2245 219 110 0.0460 3072 220 100 0.0375 2611 221 100 0.0369 2578 222 100 0.0327 2339 223 100 0.0397 2738 224 100 0.0300 2179 225 100 0.0333 2374 226 100 0.0284 2.083 227 76 0.0371 2574 228 82 0.0369 2566 229 85 0.0369 2572 230 433 0.0370 2817 231 420 0.0350 2706 232 410 0.0221 1959 233 407 0.0164 1584 234 90 0.0430 2914 235 92 0.0380 2632 236 89 0.0312 2244 . 237 82 0.0407 2781 238 79 0.0390 2686 239 80 0.0480 3143 240 82 0.0516 3293 241 82 0.0634 3550 242 78 0.0615 3530 243 80 0.0664 3563 244 79 . 0.0323 2300 245 80 0.0384 2647 246 80 0.0511 3275 247 75 O. 0295 2131 248 85 0.0360 2519 249 75 0.0678 3558 250 85 0.0684 3559 Table VI-?q image: ------- THEORETICAL FLAME TEMPERATURES PAGE 6 RUN AIR TEMP FUEL/AIR FLAME TEMP NO. of of 251 85 0.0399 2738 252 90 0.0400 2751 253 92 0.0462 3068 254 93 0.0410 2809 255 93 0.0388 2681 256 85 0.0460 3056 257 85 0.0503 3242 258 85 0.0576 3472 259 85 0.0640 3556 260 85 0.0775 3453 261 89 0.0760 3482 262 90 0.0331 2354 263 97 0.0381 2645 . 264 85 0.0317 2270 265 85 0.0372 2589 266 96 0.0363 2545 267 96 0.0323 2313 268 96 0.0372 2595 269 96 0.0421 2869 270 96 0.0439 2961 271. 100 0.0357 2511 272 100 0.0424 2884 273 100 0.0432 2926 274 100 0.0484 3172 275 95 0.0528 3343 276 -1 -1.0000 1 277 1 1.0000 - 1 278 - 1 - 1.0000 -1 279 109 0.0371 2594 280 110 0.043G 2953 291 110 0.0390 2644 282 94 0.0389 2685 283 100 0.0313 2257 284 105 0.0271 2011 285 116 0.0312 2263 286 82 0.0321 2290 287 92 0.0290 2111 288 90 0.0362 2533 289 95 0.0385 2664 290 99 0.0460 3065 291 73 0.0965 3042 292 75 0.1008 2949 293 82 0.1011 2945 294 90 0.. 0835 3329 295 72 0.0967 3036 296 86 0.0929 3129 297 92 0 . 11 00 2754 298 95 0.0957 3073 299 96 0.1135 2682 300 85 0.1081 2792 Table VI-30 image: ------- THEORETICAL FLAME TEMPERATURES. PAGE 7 RUN AIR TEMP FUEL/AIR FLAME TEMP liD. of of 301 88 0.0867 3261 302 92 0.1117 2718 303 74 0.0917 3147 304 87 0.0954 3074 305 100 0.1160 2631 306 100 0.0907 3183 307 104 0.0839 3329 308 90 0.0406 2782 309 98 0.0323 2317 310 94 0.0199 1554 311 385 p.0377 2816 312 388 0.0326 2553 313 395 0.0252 2138 314 340 0.0345 2616 315 364 0.0302 2402 316 400 0.0323 2544 317 435 0.0260 2215 318 350 0 .0316 2465 319 350 0.0252 2097 320 351 0.0393 2878 321 140 0.0383 2680 322 115 0.0311 2257 323 105 0.0271 2008 324 95 0.0374 .2605 325 105 0.0332 2371 326 110 0.0284 2090 321 412 0.0385 2878 328 395 0.0297 2397 329 390 0.0245 2086 330 407 0.0381 2854 331 400 0.0309 2410 332 435 0.0260 2215 333 392 0.0282 2307 334 395 0.0246 2099 335 92 0.0370 2499 336 90 0.0311 2165 337 90 0.0362 2453 338 90 0.0393 2620 339 100 0.0379 2550 340 395 0.0320 2524 3-1 150 0.0336 2427 342 90 0 .0365 2467 343 102 0.0329 2353 344 100 0.0289 2117 345 102 0.0347 2458 346 105 0.0312 2259 341 105 0.0422 2880 348 107 0.0401 2675 349 100 0.0342 2351 350 101 0.0380 2555 Table VI-3l image: ------- THEORETICAL FLAME TEMPERATURES PAGE 8 RUN AIR TEMP FUEL/ AIR FLAME TEMP NO. of o.F 351 105 0.0421 2780 352 110 0.0336 2320 353 120 0.0421 2789 35~ 430 0.0359 2683 355 438 0.0287 2312 ~56 450 0.0371 2761 357 140 0.0337 2349 358 110 0.0312 2183 359 120 0.0335 2322 360 380 0.0355 2624 361 400 0.0312 2413 362 405 0.0420 2969 363 405 0.0332 2527 364 405 0.0379 2767 365 405 0.0416 2949 366 410 0.0287 2289 367 405 0.0340 2567 368 ~10 0.0287 2289 369 400 0.0379 2763 370 403 0.0359 2664 371 426 0.0348 2627 372 425 0.0337 2568 373 425 0.0328 2518 374 430 0.0318 2470 375 400 0.0308 2393 376 400 0.031~ 2426 377 _05 0.0367 2707 378 428 0.0373 2754 379 375 0.0350 2594 380 412 0.0330 2523 381 411 0.0300 2362 38.2 411 0.0300 . 2360 383 403 0.0358 2660 384 76 0.0374 2506 385 90 0.0373 2510 386 91 0.0352 2399 387 80 0.0350 2380 388 81 0.0356 2411 389 85 0.0822 3423 .390 90 0.0349 2380 391 93 0.0327 2256 I I Table VI-32 image: ------- 'F.UEL - ,e...\R ..COM8U5T\ON .-D""'\~ - -- oc. ""'~E. ~ P"OP"~I. \ , 'NO ' I I 4000 20 1 I TO,. lOt. \.. * 1 I I , C.OM1!IU&",'~Li.~ I , I , , I I , ., I ! . , :II: ... ~ ~ 15 ~ 3000 0 III: :2; W ~ '0 ~ c: III !i! ~ 0 ~ t s:: "'" ... 1-4 U) I 0 S ~ I 0 ... C,) I i 2000 U) I. t110 I UI. ~ ... ~ I ~ < I ~ w I .. 1Wt\., \"a."C "'.Jo.'t ftoO""" ......~.. o..Ic:..O+"'." ":\ ,,~ I '-0,.",- ('o"'1:It\J~"'''~)\,,'' I \ I~ " 1000 " , "' '' ..... " . - ~ .s7r:!lCN ~At-M'I8N6o.HIO t"70~N' 1'8~ tX:TAJII a~" o 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 FUEL AIR RATIO,...f/a R8ferencez. CombU8tion of Hydrocarbonl-- Property Table, Purdue Univereity" EDI. Ext. Ser '122, May 66 Figure VI-l image: ------- COMPARISON OF VOLUMETRIC AND BAILEY OXYGEN DATA . VOLUMETRI C OXYGEN DATA o2V' 4.00 8.00 12.00 16.00 0.00 20.00 .111 C\I. o 20. I I I I: I 22. 16. /. . . / L . ./... ./*".. . A.. . .,(~ ~ : i- e. .,,' :... . ."r: . . .~ii: " . - 8. ,.. -,' . .. ... . /. . ,,~. . 14. '8.0 ~.., ,dQ ~~ 6.00t .4.0+ 2.0 . I . . 0.00 4.00 8.CO 12.00 VOLUt1ETR I C OXYGEtJ ()A T A 16.00 02V 20.00 0.06 O'05t r:::! :It 0.04 i O.03J. 0 I ... ~ 0.030++ Ie I ... ~ 0.025t ~ 0.020.1+ I 0.015-1+ I 0.0100t I, 0.0050.1+ , I I <.., I .....,. .011 I ...~ . 0.00 0.01 l, . . COMPARISON OF VOLUMETRIC FUEL/AIR RATIO VALUES 1'- I 0,02 0,03 O,O~ 0.05 FUEL AIR RATIO BASED ON VOLUMETRIC CO2 0,06 0,07 0,' image: ------- 12. "" THEORETICAL CO2 ~ lOot > PROPANE AIR COI!BUSTION N 8 9.00 OCTANE AIR COI!BUSTION , : 80'+ ... 7.0 >co 0 ::: I :0: 6.00 \ a ~ u 5.00 u ... ; " ., 8.. ~ ~ ~;:! IGO "'Ii II . . CARBON DIOXIDE VALUES VERSUS NOMINAL FUEL/AIR RATIO 0.00 0.02 0.011 0.06 0.08 0.10 FAN 0.12 0.111 . 0.16 NOMINAL FUEL/AIR RATIO. .. ~ 14.0 N o 1 c 12. ~ R 10. tc o U 8.0 16.0 Il ~BEORETICAL ozrCEN 'OR PROPANE AIR COMBUSTION 22. 18. : . 16. '. : . VOLUIEftIC OXtGEII DATA VEllSUS JOIlIJAL FtEL/AIR RATIO . . . 0.00 0.02 0.0. 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.111 0.16 ., i NOMINAL FUEL/AIR RATIO ~.., I" '"5 image: ------- 12.0 11.0 '10.0 ... 8 I 9 00 < . ~ g ~ 8.00 ~ o ~ 7.00 :r: ! ,.oat i 5.00 ~ ~ 4.00 2.0 <"'I ........ .. ~ ~.~ 1.0 0.00 . . THEORETICAL CO2 . . " ~ ...... ~ . . CARBON DIOXIDE VALUES VERSUS CORRECTED FUEL/AIR ~ATIO 0.02 0.011 O.~S 0.08 CORRECTCD FUeL/AIR RATIO 0.111 0.16 0..10 FACOF'. 0.12 'ftfr.nKTICAL CO2 . . . PROPANE AIR COIIBUSTION ~ OCTANE AIR COIIBUSTION \ \ \ , ~ . . . . . '. CARBON DIOXIDE VALUES VERSUS FLOW METER FUEL/AIR RATIO 0.011 0.06 0.08 flO\.j r1fnn FIJEUAI p, RATIO 0.12 o. 0.10 FA 0.111 image: ------- t ~ I 13.'5f . 12.5t 11.'5L I 111.'5++ . .,. , I q r;(1,k "I .. . ... ' 8 I I 1\.<:;0f+ < J ~ '" 7. 'iof+ ~ , ... , )( ~ 6.50r i 5.,nf+ < I U I ~ Q. 50t j 3.50r ~ 2.50 0.5 . . . . . . . .. "- ~ , CARBON DIOXIDE DATA FROM THE GAS CHROMATOGRAPH <.., ...... 'IIQ ...~ . 0.00 0.02 0.011 0.06., 0~08 0.10 0.12 0.111 0.16 NOMItJAL FUEL/AIR RATIO .FAN 11. ~ ~ 10. u N 0 9.0 u :J: 8.0 Q. . . . < . ... ex . . ~ 7.0 . . . I.. .. .. - ~ \ . . .,. 0 6.0 . ". a: . 0 . . . . . ILl 5.0 :J: .... ~ ex LL. < .... 3.0 < yaX 0 N 0 2.0 u 1.0 C02C 0.00 2.00 Q.OO 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 C02 DATA FROM THE VOLUMETRIC ANALYZER - C02V -- " <"'I ... ... , .. "'Ii . COMPARISON OF CARBON DIOXIDE CHROMATOGRAPH AND VOLUMETRIC DATA image: ------- 100,000 I . , ; 10,000 ! i. E Co Co I !: o oM .. re 1000 .. !: " u 8 o . ~. . . .~: ..-!. !. '-:":'~-;f;" -~,~~' '. :=:-~ -: '---~ ... . , , . . -. . . " -.- p. . : 0:,: ::;~-,:: :~; :.!. ~~ tI 'tI .,.. M o ~ g ~ o 100 i I - ::......::: =- -- 10 AIR FLOW ,PROP. DR. FLAG AIR FUEL '/Hr. TEMP. TEMP. Under 40 + ... 6 Cold Cold 40 - 70 o . ~ Hot Cold 70 -120 6 A Cold Hot 120 -150 o . Hot Hot OVer 150 0 . 1. 0.02 0.0" 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.1" riRure NOMINAL FUEL AIR RATIO FAN VI-10 image: ------- 10,000 1000 100 ::::: e- ll. 10: Q H X i i :z: ~ 10 1.0 i : I ; I "j.O I I ,I I. I I : : : I: :; . ,"i.:.t~!TfJ,.':~ : i I' I . . PAXVt .B' R EM 8&1011' : : . . J t4 VAPOR ~N&RAT+R :SU~~. .!' .: . rS!': . FUEL +IR RATIO I : , . ; ! I . j , i ; , ; I' " ' : I::' ,: : .' ; , ! . I , . ! ' , i ' ! , ; . lb. '0 d'o RtifS WITH NO CO DETECTED VERE PLOTTED AS 5 PPM VHIai IS THE RESOLUTION LIMIT or THE GAS CH1tOMATOGRAPH A 0./1 Q , (j) . a ~ .d .. ~ ~ 8 r;f , f. image: ------- CO EMISSIONS COMPARISON VAPOR GENERATOR VS BURNER KEROStNE LEAN COMBUSTION RUN COtop COburner 110. PPH PPH 360 5 5 361 5 5 362 5 - 363 5 5 364 5 5 365 5 5 366 5 : 5 367 - - 368 5- 5 369 10 20 370 14.6 25.6 RtJfS WITH 110 CO DETECTED WERE PLOTTED AS 5 PPM WHICH IS THE RESOLUTIOM LIMIT or THE GAS CHmMATOGRAPH Fi,ltUl'e VI-12 image: ------- i (:) ' ; , ! ! I ! i , P'XVE.~R ~MISS'1NS ! , ! # j ~~QRPCA~ONS,~O~:T ~ lItmlER: ' ' .' I IVS I ! ' I RATIO ' ¥ i FUEL:AIR ! I ! I ! ! I : , ! I I I : ii ' ! i , Ci)~ i i I " I i I i. I i , I ; ! 1000 , , , . i ~ : . Q 100 . ' .~ Ci) ~ fI fI, :II: i (1)0 ~ C Q. Q. A VI 0 <:> 0 i,o Ci) '" . i " ~ Q Ef >- a :z: A ~ A 1.0 u 6 i* .~ \A \.:. ~ I- ~It ;~ r:f fljr:f II. ~ ..' RIllS WITH ZERO HYDROCARBON READINGS ARE PLOn'ED BELow , THE SCALE ON SEMILOG PLOTS Air rlow Prop Ker rle~ Air f /. Hr Tem !f Under 40 + t A cold cold 40 - 70 0 t hot cold 70 -120 A . cold hot 120 -1~0 C . L$. hot hot OverlSO o . : , 0.1 o 0.02 0.04 NOMINAL FUEL AIR RATIO - (FAN) Figure VI-13 0.06 0.08 0.12 o. 4 0., ~ image: ------- 10 HC ppm 5 4 , 3 2 1 I o I ~ I , c:..., 0.02 t-t"" "OQ ~i , , " ~-- ~ , . . ~~-+-~-~ ~.~._---. --~- ----..-... --+---+ --~~ , .. I +i- I I I , ' +-+-+-.~- . . . -r---o.--r--r-' - -. =ti= -.,....-.-- ~-.... . .- .. _. - -- I' r-"" ~ ; ; , t~.-;- .' =,': :-::~ -- .. - , ' ;i--; I ' ~..L : -------r , .:.J.. , . ~ ,+"'''' I I i , , -+-~,---- . -- +-- 0.03 . ..! .. ':--h~-,~-~ . PROP. KER. FLAG AIR FUEL TEMP. TEMP. + -+- 6 Cold Cold o . ~ Hot Cold 6 . Cold Hot O . Hot Hot o . - -, ...--. -...... --- -+ -... \"" . I i ,. .,~.~.. . . .. - -- ... .. .. -- - ..-.' . . t-. -.-.--" .. i--"""'" "":_~.,.+--- AIR FLOW I/Hr. Under 40' 40 - 70 70 -120 120 -150 OVer 150 -+-.-..... .. I .--t.. ;. . , . . .' . . . '., '--r- ----:---' - - . - ..1-.- .~ :..;-.~-. -~-~_.~ -'- +-. ~~ '.;~F=~' .. ..0-- -... --+-. _--.1-:-- 0-- - , . -~.........,._, --~ . +------1-, -. ...~t-..- ~_:-_...: J..---L. ---'--1-'-" ~_. ~ .-. .... r . --.:- -~=:~:.~ F-~~-: :;:,::+:.'1,4--:,_"" '- .... j . ".. . - ~":':=:-:',:. \ ! ---.----...-.. u...-- .-~.--i. .... .-'--'-~f-:'~-- . --.-.... .t 0-'- -._-- .. + . .-- I ..----...-- - .... - ...- '--j-- ' ~ . t j . . . iA. .."---',- . . - ._- . I' . t. . . , : ~_: = . ...: I:::: A:4 i-- I' NOI-IINAL FUEL AIR 0.04 . ' .. .--- -- . .. . .. r - . -. . . . t . J ..i .... -' I.. . - . r ---t-.-- . '" . - . - I ; -----.--.- ,--=-~._.: . . j . I I ! ~ '"t1 "tt > o :x ~ :>:I >< ...., C1 ~ G) ~ t'1 tJ:I I:" Z (") C < t'1 > ~ > tn ~ .~ H t'1 :>:I o-i 0 :>:I o Z :>:I :>:I tn t'1 > 3: o-i ...., H H tn :>:l tn o o-i C> tn > ::;:: H (") ~ ~ tn 0.05 image: ------- :t II. Il. ~ M >< o :z: ~ c.~ ~ ... M :z: PAXVE BURNER EMISSIONS NITROGEN OXIDES FROM BURNER VS rUEL AIR RATIO 1000 Cold Cold Hot Hot AIR FLOW , '/Hr. PROP. KER. FLAG AIR FUEL-c:. TEMP. TEMP.; 100 -+- . . . . 6- ~ Cold Hot Cold Hot Under 40 40 - 70 70 -120 -- :::- 120 -150 . - -- Over 150 10 1.0 0.1., 0.0 . I 0.02 I 0.04 , 0.06 , 0.08 NOMINAL FUEL AIR RATIO. (FAN) , 0.10 Fiaur. .YI-15 image: ------- 100 10. so 11. 11. (I) 1.:1 Q ... X a :z: ~ ~ 1.0 f-o ... :z: 0.1 0.0 PAXVE BURNER EMISSIONS NITROC,EN OXIDES FROM BURNER WITH VAPOR GENERATOR OPERATION vs rtEL AIR RA 0 '-+A . AA o ~ EQUILIBRIUM NO af~ ~ri 'ti ~". b Ff ~. (;IQ A ~ . 0.04 EQUILIBRIUH N02 - 0.06 0.08 o .10 NOMINAL FUEL/AIR ~ATIn (FAN) AIR FLOW PROP. KER. FLAG AIR FUEL '/Hr. TEMP. TEMP. Under 40 + ... !:!. Cold Cold 40 - 70 o . ~ Hot Cold 70 -120 b. . Cold Hot 120 -150 o . Hot Hot OVer 150 0 . Figure VI-16 100 .,10 :0.: 11. Il- (I) 1.:1 Q ... X C :z: ~ 1. ~ f-o ... :z: 0.1 0.0 ?AXVE BUffi~R EMISSIONS NITR()(~EN OXIDES FROM VADOR GENERATOR STACK VS + ~ A . C ~ A. ~ ~I EQUILIBRIUM NO EQUILIBRIUM .N02 d 0.02 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.0" NOMINAL FtEL AIR RATIO - FAN AIR FLOW PROP. KER. FLAG AIR FUEL '/Hr. TE!-tP. TEMP. Under 40 + ... b. Cold Cold 40 - 70 o . ~ Hot Cold 70 -120 b. . Cold Hot 120 -150 O . Hot Hot OVer 150 0 . Figure VI-17 image: ------- PAXVE BURNER EIIISSIClfS NITIOGElI OXIDES COMPARISONS 100 90 80 70 60 1 '~-+ ;.- 50 " f..o a.. '" o <30 , , t; t ~ ' ~ :, ... '!"-, ~20 1;- ~ ' ~ '" o T~;, ',= " ~ 'jl, ;10 W":' e - ~8 .... >C o :0:6 ~ i ... ~II '--- --t-- :--.. i ~- ~ I 'I i i I~Tt -fnL., 'I: \ I - -f' -~ U. III I ' I i i I , : I" " : .i:! i.u_. ; _,Lm.J~::'- : I i --1'--1 . ,-' ,. : i : ! : ---.t--.......-- , ~~~'__--,i.:' - -j-- 1- r-' I ' . ~-'-"--;'- 2 : AIR FLOW ! '/Hr. UDder 40 40 - 70 70 -120 = 120 -150 OYer 150 ,-,--'-:-'-'---!-----T"nr---;"",", , PROP. DR. FLAG AIR TEMP . FUEL TEMP . .. . . . . Cold Hot Cold Hot Cold Cold Hot Hot 6. ~ + o 6. [] o 1 2 7 3 6 II 8 10 2 3 5 6 1.5 .. NITROGEN OXIDES FROM BURNER - PPH F1cuN VI-18 .. 3600. . . . 3400. . J 0 3200. : . I .....1 . 3000. . . . . ~ 0 .0 28000 o. . ... ~ .. . ,- . . ~ 2600. e;. ... . ' I:! .0 . ~,. . . .. ! ... . .-. . .. .... 2400. . . .. ~ . . .. t . . . ." . 0 2200. 0 . .. , . 0 . .. 2000. 1800. TBURN F 0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 1000.00 OXIDES OF NITROGEN EMISSIONS fROM THE BURNER - NOB-PPM CORRELATIONS Of OXIDES Of NITROGEN DATA 8 9 lD FigUl'e VI-19 image: ------- III: X ...... ~ I '" 100 ~ ~ ~ III: ... ~ 100 :a 0 0 ~ ..i 0 .. ~ 0 Q :a 0 ~ D 0 '" r;P 0 ... < 50 IJ 0 0 0.7 FilllJ'8 VI-20 0.05 o 0.02 0.05 0.03 0.011 Fuel Air PBtio - fta 0.8 0.7 0.03 0.8 0.11 0.5 0.6 rqui valence :?at io -

image: ------- 200 ,*-II~ naaD.ln 150 : ..LI1In '100" J! .... ~ .c :II 100 . w ~ :II S ... III: .. C 50 . t. J : . ~.;.:.::.: . o 0.02 0.3 0.4 'AXVE IUJIIIER STABILITT DATil .IO.AIIE Hal' 20 . 0 - IUIIIt18 A - LIaIt C - 0... o.t ---- Yol" . D.a ...a 15 0.03 0.0. Fuel Air Ratio - f/a o Go 05 0.05 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 PAXVE BUP~T.R STABILITY DATA Propane Ambi_t g- Stable - Limit - Goes Out BURNER VOLUI'£ ' 52.3 in3 0.10 o .15 o .20 . 1.0 3.0 EquiYalence Ratio -

image: ------- 150 - H ..c ...... .Q 100 .... . < ;J: .. II ... III t>: ~ .... t.. H .... < 50 PAXVE BURNER STABILITY DATA Kerosene - Antbient 200 - I ! 1HEOJETICAL STABILITY 'IIIIT -70 F o~ 0.02 & 0.03 ruel Air Ratio - f/a 0.3 0." 0.5 e -StUlle - LiI!Ii t -Goe. Out Burner Volume z 52.3 in3 o 06 ~ <:> o 0.0" 0.6 .0.7 ECluivalence Ratio -

image: ------- ~ ~ ~ . 100 c :. . ~ ~ '" M C 200 ~ 15 50 d '. f!! o 0.02 o .O'f 0." 0.6 0.8 0.06 SUMMARY OF PAXVE BURNER STABILITY DATA e d d o : 0 .08 1.0 1.2 (j) c1 d c;J (;) (11)(;) (I) o .10 . 0.12 Fuel Air Ratio fIe 1." I 1.8 I 2.0 1.6 Equivalence Ratio - cp o Stable t:,. Limit o Goes Out . Open Symbols - Propane rilled " - l image: ------- 100.000 10.000 1000 - - -r.-f I . --.- -- - - - - . ., . -.. . ~ - ' "- -" oj: j - - I T-!--i -- - =lTfTFt:H n:~l,n:tj:=L1=.J-:tj'=tLl~I':Efl j 1 ! I J- I -i:Y :-~-- ::.- CO ~Issi~HS D~TA FR~r1 THE P1-XVE DURNER '!! i tltf - -: FUEL :PROPANE ! I' ! Ir; i 4:j -, AIR TEMP :UNDER 250 F I ~ 1 I i !;:'~_""'.-:.~.VO.LU.f...1E' ..,5 C.~.~INI#I 11;; II' . --:- m.:'__. ':;!; I ~': : i I :"~ -_.-r"',,:,>-: -_:----.---1'=.-::'::----" 1__--j 1 Ii ,i :I!' 1"'L-"'~ '~~=C;"'r~,,-i .- ,1,,1,! i ,: :h: 1 1'""- --!:Hr - cf-L Jt-= -- i--J -::1 ! ,; - ! ii' !:;; I :-,-: I '1-tJ~ .~ !~l. -,: 1. tt-f+fi j: ::1:1~ t f1.+ '1-1. ~-tLj'd - :i -1M' :,: ;; '-~ I'--r-t-fr-!" ,,!_c Fti-l--+t]L :lj,jFj-j 1';: l.~j; i1r-1 r1" ", : !..'~. .' ~ +:.f ".: ~ f I -<- I ~ ~,~ . r:l ! - -.- t. t" -~ . I .. I ~ .: t l' .'! i ~ i . :;.,:~....~, ::1 i~~ -J,.jj-i..J-- i 'i 'f I i- -I I-I ",_..:.~~' '" ,:;, L;'" U': '-~"T - TfA: :t -j- AIR FLOW of' "'H-=-'-..:;. -:'+j 10- -1-: ; - . ~-~ ,,:~ '1' - I' , - ,. . /Hr . >+ 1- ~-:1. !£-;: - -j ":r .-~. _tT .- - - . . .:r:Lt.: .LIIT '-B.- i8S - - . .- -. - -- - ~ .~. I ii, ': ~. -L-L I I I , I ! i i Lu- ! ; :! !,!, I J; , :: :;-,-- :--H+ .~-H"H 1 ' I " '- - - - .- - -- "] "1::oI"o.{: - :::t- - .- ~:'71-=1 -- -. --. 7 = - - -. 11- Il. ...... o (J .-, - :t=.i---:..'- ~~~[LfJT: n . ~.: . '~:-:r~ ';~::~f~ .. ':t '-1'-- - . -:=t -- --I-"t- - ~~t-~::l. .1 :+t'---1-:':: -1=f -J. :.1- -+ f:i - ~i:.:'~ .- ~ 1: : ~:t:t -+-- 1=+--':-4.. --+ +- - --+ -I J. t t- .t.--+ ". . . .J.. . j .- h + - :Lit - -'-hut . Ct_--F_T-l- 'L. 4.., t :.. - ,- - - .. - 100 Under 40 40 - 70 70 -120 120 -150 OVer 150 + o 6 o o Flag indicate. run. from No. 282 ON t -- - L:( .::1-- - -- - -- -+ . - .- -- - - -- - 10 ,.-'- i -1 , , i i : I ! i. j j ,I' I: f 1 11 ! : :..t.~ : . 1 ~ ~ - t.: 1 -- " . -- - -- ~ - - = - -- -- --- - -- -- -- RtlfS WITH NO co DETECTED WERE PLOTTED AS 5 PPM WHICH IS THE - RESOLUTION LIMIT OF THE GAS CHROMATOGRAPH . 1 0.02 0.03 0.04 o .05 0 .06 NOMINAL FUEL AIR RATIO-FAN 0.07 0.08 ~ 0.09 Fi~ VI 27 image: ------- 100,00 0- - - - --- .-.- - n - - : - - - -- - - :: > f-EO' 7 -" - -- -. ~ELj - - - -. - c cl:I=T;! - - - - - - - d. , o :i-16 n -" 7 , J 1 - - .. j I ! 1 ! I ' 10,000 f " rl - ~ -- .- ~ ;J~ -=t". =i--t- :"t- j .. :.:r-: ~.t:1.~: .~: :,1.'.'.'_'".1" _..c-"-'""-. - . - - _. - . - - .- - " - " - - - - . - . -;. .- - - - - - -. -. - -. .'. :. - "~ - - .'.. ".:. - :=1:: - i j I i r j j j : , , I j T -t t t + ,- 1000 , . II, ! 1: 1 ! ! . 'I ! : . I I ! _.J~~ - : : "- - ." - : e p.. p.. ...... o (.J - 100 i j ! I I I" ' .j j t; -J l 11 t V II' ; f I i j j.c! Ij . >,1,1. -" -- ~ - - - - - i: -. :r f ( , I I ! I ~ , I - - - .J 1 ..I. t r j ! t! I - 1 ~ - - - - t ~- ! f :1 f.i t r ~' t r it! , J ; . , ,- j ; j t " , . '" ! " 1 - : ' -- , - -" -- - -- -1 . + -. ". , ' - "' :"- 1 :j: - - n" - "L u Ij- j j ~ r- - n> !1."J!:.11)g~,j,tl!....~i ,:,"i Ii ,,:"'"::-"f~~ci=: : -"- - - _. -,j'.. =l:f - - 10 "4 - - -" ~- - - - 1 0.02 O.O~ 0.06 :- j L i:: 1 i ! ! i - -- - "-- - - - - -!- - -+; T-- , I I' I, : ' . : ! I ::. , I: Cfj,~-~ 0-:16, ""'416 ~I~ "- T - 0.!03 : ! - ! . i - J.- : -- : Ii:: 1'1 i :1 Ij I ! I.: 11 j j i: ,': I 1-. ,I ! j ! I! I . , ...- I j r AIR FLOW '/Hr. -- II 0.,.. under 40 40 - 70 70 -120 -. 120 -150 Over 150 + o ~ o o ., I ! J ~ .w O.~ ! : , : : i i 11 :-4+- ! j F1a9 indicate. run. from No. 282 ON -~" , . . . -: j -- "4 I I II Ii' 1 I I II I I "" ,IIJ liT RtlfS WITH NO CO DETECTED WERE PLOTTED AS 5 PPM VHIaf IS THE RESOLUTION LIMIT or THE GAS CHROMATOGRAPH I i : : I I , , r T I! . r "- ; ;. :1 : . I" !: t J : : :: I ! . ; . : : : : ! : i i i . , ' : ii, ~ 1 ! ~ "-. , : i Ii, ~ I ! I '- ". - - :.1" - - A q I! i l' . -- 1 j I! : ,! 11- t i I J' r 1-'; j .11 j ; j i I ! II , ~- . i' .1 i 1 i i ! I 0.14 . Q 08 0 . 10 0 . 12.. NOMINAL FUEL AIR BATIO -FAN o .16 Figure VI-28 image: ------- 100,000 10,000 1,000 - , , , , , ; i 4"-,," ..,. ~ -, .::~.t.. .1_.1- -£1-..:'::--j i i :; ., r-t ., - .' i ~ -{ L i : f . -. - r ~ i t ) :A i/= ..... I:;.d 1 ~:1;- !-r~. , r "1 :r=, i . -.... - - :..r f t -.. . ,- ..:l L! ~ ".. r-;.. :f:"H"tn-hi "';::t:tA Lrf cj::;Jf ", ,+-+-I-4-+.# 8~{' :1 ;:~ - .t. .~. r .. ~ f- t~ j~ -, ,.1 1-:-~ , L r 1-1---- -.f P:~ 1=+-+1- :jof {Y'! ~ . . " " ! ! -j if: .1 LJ. ! c F, .D.'; '~~l f: +tf.f; l tl +t - " . ._.~- .. - - " - ~ ~ , 1 AIR FLOW '/ur. ;-! :-t I-'i- ! :ft- J,t.t ' ! j- f f; i ~ ..{ -t! -~1 - 'ii, 1 t .~ "~.' .:H-+.). RUNS WITH NO CO IETEC'J'ED VERE :H:f!: PLOTTED AS 5 PPM WHIOI IS THE i+P: - . ~:~~~~MIT or THE GAS d:ttt '0101: 01 ..- .. , . l ,.; ; I=.r:~ - 'f! +rvrn'n ;f1-~: 1: . -=r=1=+ :~:I. i'l ii.r.1:" Li +;'-4.r::.++ i; i .: ,I -. .::--" :.J. , - , , : ;; ..1.!O'E .':1' 01:"[.['£.1" )c . r g..g ::;.::'F -.. - :t-T ! f: =1":;. ;:i :L1 iC". : .1 .:r ..- ! t- --r . t -~. -~ . .- - ... ::p T:-.i=:::i:_:-l~ .l:"'-,:j .. ~_l ~-I :~~T- =-:-;-+:.- +..:~ L E "- P- ..... C '-' Under 40 + 40 - 70 0 70 -120 ~ 120 -150 0 -; !,,, ,. rOVer 150 0 - . 1 f ~ i _:t'. ~ - - - l f-j ~I- r f? ~ -t-r ~ -:=¥--,-01 r f. . j- t-.-~~- f I" 1 cX.. ,rlc. - '.:.;0.."'''::: .;, n. l. F1aq ind1cate. runs, l: T i . . frOlll NO. 282 ON ' - , --! .::~. :- = ~ ~ :: . I t- i 1.'.~-,~'.'.~.~.:.c: ,,' - " '~';:: ';A:' >:" .J ..: '" ; -f-., - h';' ~;-:=-~.. : ";.~ t. i ;-ii. .. :J .. . , t ~; - J+ ~Lr.t-+ '''f : 100 L - ,. - ...' b' ~J.', ;":;.' ~ , '1">J: , . ~..; : -1"- - ~. i : lTt"i- , . . ! =-: , ,I; , 1 ill i"!' ., J' ; ~"-r--: I ~- -f ; :=-F .:-;-1 t. , ,. .. ~ - , '" . 1 . !.'~ i: r . , :...cl- .- t:.. T -7.~ . - 10 .t.-"'".- ., :, ..,:1 'f.'~.. ,!E~'~~~6'f( ~~k :-r:-t.j'- :f!::-; !: + ~.. - ~ : . . . . . . ~.: l:t! ~ ; .L- i ,-!-- .r! t .. i.. :" . , .. - I L I .'. ~ -r=E :....~. -- -.;::. .u . i ..; o...-J--I- , , J J .- ~ - -. - - - 1 0.02 0.03 0.04 o .05 o .OC ;;Ji:lr'5I~', ~ ".::;1. ;~~Cl'i:- ,-'t. :- J. i! ; if i ",.j, r ! I~ ! , f 1 ;"]" .. ,.-, - .4 -, 1- °t+~ "I J-';i';:.. !., J. r.:t=Jl . -J t -1 ...Ft'. r(.J j: -t'l.::tj ., 1 ] : : ~ ~! ; if! : , h;. f ! J .. !.> , , i! , , : ~ T ! .-. I .-. I - ,. I. ! ;. o .07 o .OR Tli"!;lJC:.. .. r 10,000 :IE: a.. a.. " o u 1000 Under 40 40 - 70 70 -120 120 -150 OVer 150 + o ~ o o F1aq indicate. run. from No. 282 ON 100 10 1 0.02 -'-+-r 0.06 0.07 0.03 0.04 0.05 NOMINAL FUEL AIR RATIO - FAN Figure image: ------- 10,000 :0: 100 '" '" .... o u PAM' BURNEPt::-~.~ ~ ._.~ . ~ . L 1000 ;'i+::1! : !: - r-~:~--' : j" '. . 81. J t ,;.I~', .ltl~:~,~ :, -I. . 1 ,..'''', : ; ; I l~J ~.I:.' .~. 1 ii, I : ! [ i \ AIR FLC/tII ./Hr. I I ; [ UDCl8~ 40 40 - 70 70 -120 120 -150 098~ 150 + o 6. o o Flag iDdicat.8. run. f~C18 Ho. 2U III . . . , j . Hj!i:' .------.-- l! : 10 I:Q~LIBRIUM co + atIfS VITH 110 CO IETEC1ED VElIE PLOfTED AS 5 "11 IIHlai 15 THE IIESOLUrIIII LIIIIT OF THE GAS CIIJIOIlATOGRAPII 1 0.02 0.03 o .0'1 0.05 o .06 0.07 NOMINAL fUEL AlE . F1gure VI-31 eo EMISSIOnS DATA FROr1 TilE Pl.X'IE . FUEL IJ>ROJ>1U1. AIR T~W IOvr.~ 2S0 F BURNER VOLUME: S2. 3 en IN . VAPOR GENERJlTOP EXlIJlUST D1T1 nur-:a:! 10,000 . 1000 :! : "I: . . AIR FLOW '/H~, t! -+ o 6. o o . . . I:: . ; ! . C1~ <- .... c u - - .. - f:~ - 1 ~ ~: -'f t:.. I ! f~ :....-;:- '1-~ 1-1.1j" . . . ~ '-""' .... .. .-.- ..,. f .... , . ...' ~... l . ..1 -... - -. - . :-~, ~--;- 100 10 1 - 0.02 0.05 0.06 o .07 o .0" 0.03 r:c:mL~L feEL F.E RATIO -FAIl 'rigU1'8 VI-32 image: ------- 100,000 10,000 llico m 8 ~ . : 1000 EMISSIONS DJI.TT\ FRO'" TilE P1\XVE FUEL :PP.OP11U; 1\IR TEMr :lmuER 250 F BURNER VOLUME: 52.3 CU IN BURlIER .. . VJI.POR CENEMTOn EX!1J1.US'l' D~.T1\ .. :. I . :! : : ! r .-.' ! - - ..-,....-'.. : I , ! ! 1',; ,T' . . , I ~--;- .-1":'--.,. - I ; : --~- +--- - : : ~:"~r:~ . .._~ - . '.-rl-L~- .....u_;L!b-:. ;.- , , , , I E p ...... c c.; 100 : I' t-+-+M AIR FLOW '/ur. - under to to - 10 10 -120 120 -150 OVer 150 F1aq indicate. run. from No. 282 ON .';: iH-H+ _.- m. h:' ,"-j- -. - --+ --- i I .. -1 >-.--. . i I' I ! H+!'++- \-+1.+,+,-~: .._- '~':'d ' : 1.0 f I I t t : ! l---i-L ; :: ;oi 1 0.02 . : ! - ~ --1 :~ lt~ : A;' :. I: ~ i I .. , : I , i I! I .- I"T"! I~ i . ~ ~ J ! .; !L - , 1 . . 0.0:1 L.j-,. , ! i ! .:. i. ~-i:-:~ - ~l'S~ -.. .t T~+" , : h_- " , j i ! ! I !:! ....i.. : , , ~ .' -4-U ... .-.-- -- + o 6 o o .~ 00 -+--'-+-i- ..:.+ ~ ----- mt . . . ! +-++ , , .: : . . I . . . . .. :':':r-::-~ , ! 1-- i ., .. . +-+++ .~ . . !. I r 1 ! ::: . 1; j: ~::; . . "-", " C ""'if RtlfS VITH "0 CO IETECTED VERE ++ PLOTTED AS 5 PPM WHICH IS THE -4 JlESOLUTIOil LIMIT or THE GAS\.i.. alN>JlATOGIlAPH ...:....:.. , , 0.0" I : I: i i o .~S I ~ o .'JE Figure ".~" PATt:;--. f.,;:" o .~- '"(Y1r!.1'L r,-~! :!.I),OOO . . . , , ::. i: CO El-fISSIOllS DATA FROP.! THE PNWE BURNER . FUEL :KEROSEUE AIR TEMP :UNUEP. 250 F BURNER VOLUHE : 52.3 CU IN 1 j; ! i-! : '. . ::. I :.: I : j j j j: . . - " : ... . . , ~... . . . . . . . .".. I: AIR PLOW ,jUr. . .. - . . .. . .- - .-. .- 1000 ; ' i ! i 100 < , I C- ...... I , I ; i c I U , 1 : i I ! : : i i i ' , : : 10 Under to 40 - 10 10 -120 120 -150 OVer 150 + o 6 o o :: -: P1aq.indicate. run. froa No. 282 0If i L ; : ; ~- 0.02 0.'1:1 0.D5 o.or. 0.07 0.!J4 ..: '1:"'!:" ,.:. T J ';"l;::~, f.!" RATIO - FAN Figure VI-3rt image: ------- 10,000 co EMISSIONS DA'fA PROM THE PAXVE PUBL I ltEROSENE AIR TEMP lOVER 250 P BURRER VOLUME I 52.3 CU IN. 1000 100 100 :E "- "- ..... 0 u & c Under 40 ..... + c u 40 - 70 0 70 -120 6. 120 -150 0 . 10 OVer 150 ° 10 atIIS WItH 10 CO IlETECftD WEP:E PL01'TED AS 5 "1 VllIOi IS T1IE RESOwrl~ LIMIT or T1IE GAS CHmIlATOGUPII 1 0.02 0..05 0.06 0.07 0.03 0.0" Nm!INAL ruEL AIR AATIO -FAJI ria- VI-35 10,000 1000 ~.- r------- :! ; .. . AIR FLOW '/Hr. Under 40 40 - 70 70 -120 120 -150 OVer 150 + o 6. .0 0. F1aq indicate. run. frOD No. 282 ON 1 . r-r 0.02 0.03 0.04 o .05 0.0(, 0.07 :IOI!I?~L f1Jr.L M P RATIO -FAN Figure VI-3& image: ------- 10,000 . .CO EMISSIONS 'DATA FROM TilE PAXVE BURNER . FUEL zKEPOSENF. AIR TEMP rOVER 250 F BURNER VOLUME: 52.3 CU IN VAPOR GENEPATOR EXHAV:';T DATA . , ... I .. . ., , ,:: I , . . . ! i.:: ! : ... . AIR FLOW '/Hr. Under 40 40 - 70 70 -120 120 -150 OVer 150 + o ~ o o Flag indicate. run. frOlll No. 282 ON ~ p ~ ..... c (J t7> :;::. t:' 1.0 o tJ 1 ~ 0.02 O. .0'1 0.06 0.07 O.O~ o .03 Ii Oi'I!;AL FU!':L A I" Figure VI 3' 1000 BU RNFP COG EMISSIONS DATA FRO~ Till' PJlXVE FUEL :PPOprNF. AIR TE~W :UNDEF 250 F BURNER VOLUME: 52.3 CU It1 100 10 .10 0.02 ,r- . 0.03 o .04 RUNS WITH NO CO DETECTED WERE PLOTTED AS 5 PPM WHICH IS THE RESOLUTION LIMIT OF THE GAS CHROMATOGRAPH 0.05 o .06 N01'IHl\L FUEL AIR RATIO -FAN :.:+ 0.07 Figure VI-38 image: ------- lO~ 103 102 t7\ ,.\( '- . u u 10 1. 0.1 0.02 0003 0.04 0.05 NOMINAL FUEL AIR RATIO - FAN RUNS WITH NO CO DETECTED WERE PLOTTED AS 5 PPM WHICH IS THE RESOLUTION LIMIT or THE GAS CHROMATOGRAPH 0.06 0.07 0.08 0..10 0.09 Figure VI-39 image: ------- t7I ~ "- b> o U 1000 100 10 1.0 RUNS WITH NO CO DETECTED WERE PLOTTED AS 5 PPM WHICH IS THE RESOLUTION LIMIT OF THE GAS . CHROMATOGRAPH . 0.1 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 NOMINJI,L FUEL AIR RATIO -FAN CO~ EMISSIONS DATA FRO~1 THE P1<.XVE FUEL :PROPJlNF AIR TEMP :OVER 250 F BURNER VOLUME: 33.0 CU IN BURNER 0.07 0.08 Figure VI-"O image: ------- 10 - . ~~ 100.000 -- 10.000 1000 e 0.. 0.. ....... o u 100 1 0.02 00011- o oM Q CQ. 0 . 10 ° . 12.. NOMINAL FUEL AIR IaATIO -FAN o .1~ o .16 Figure VI-41 image: ------- g, ~ g, 8 1.0 COG EMISSIONS DATI. FP.Ot' 'Z'JIT. PI\XVE BUImEI' FUEL I PPOPJltIF. AIR TEMP lOVER 250 r BURNER VOLUME I 52.3 CU IN 102 10 AIR FLOW ./Hr. uDder 40 40 - 70 70 -120 120 -150 OVer 150 + o ~ D o Flag indicate. run. fraa Ho. :282 CIf CUO 0.02 0.03 IIIIS VI1II 110 CO IETEC1ED ~ Pl.Dl"rED AS 5 ".. WHICH IS THE IESOLUrICIf LIIIIT or THE GAS CRJI).TOGUPII 0.011 0.05 0.0' 0.07 NOMINAL FUEL AIR IlATIO - F. n.-. "--2 .1000 100 COG El'!ISSIONS DATA FRO"" 'rilE P~XVE BURlIEP P'OEL I PpOP1-UE AlP. TEMP IUNDER 250 F BURlmp. VOLUME I 52.3 co IN ~POR GENEU'l"OR EXiIAUST DATA AIR FLOIII '/Hr. UDder 40 40 - 70 70 -120 120-150 OVer 150 + o 6 D o 10 . Flag indicate. run. fraa No. 282 CIf J! ...... 110 8 1.0 " IIIIS VI1II 110 CO IETECTED ~ PLOnED AS 5 PPII VIlla! IS THE RESOLUrICIf LIIIIT OF THE GAS CIIJOMTOGIW'H 0.10 0.02 0.03 0.0" 0.05 0.06 0.07 IIONIIIAL FtEL AIIt RATIO rl~ n--3 image: ------- 1000 100 10 ~ ..... CIO o CJ 100 0010 0002 ,f'iO ,- 0003 0004 0005 0.06 0.07 NO~1NfIL rUEL AXR RATXO - rAN Figure VI-44 image: ------- 103 I;Jt ~ I;Jt 8 104 102 10 1.0 0.1 Q02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 NOMINAL FUEL AIR RATIO - FAN RtifS WITH NO CO DETECTED WERE PLOTTED AS 5 PPM VHIaf IS THE RESOLUTION LIMIT OF THE GAS CHROMATOGRAPH - - : ~. :. i:.. .1- \- - -. o .08 0 .09 F1gU1'8 VI-4S image: ------- 103 :.. ;.;: ., ['; . HP~S:~s~~O;; ~YA ~ROM THE PAXVE BUmEp. FUEL I KEItOSEliE AIR TEMP lOVER 250 P BURNER VOLUME I 52.3 CU IN 0> ,.I( " 0> o .U . ,.h. r"""' 10 &XR 1?W::-J O/M~o Uffi)~Q~ <10 <1!! = 70 70 =120 !20 =150 0\70&" 150 + o t:::. o o 17109 !~d!co~o ~~o !::ZCD WOo 202 O:J 1.0 1:1II:JS tJX'ill 110 CO ~CU:J) Im:\I .10 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 .llo:JXNI\L FUXL AU RAYXO - FAtJ Fia- YI-1J6 1000 COG EMISSIONS DAT~ FROM THE FUEL :KF.POSENF: AIR TEMP :UNDEP. 250 F BURNER VOLUME: 52.3 CU IN :~--- BUR..~E" r 100 EXHAUST DATJI. :.~ :: f : : : : I : : :: ., - - -f"-'" +;~:--+:-.: : : 10 C) '" ..... C) 8 1.0 0.10 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 NOMINI\L nIEL AIR RATIO - rAN - 0.07 Figure VI-"7 image: ------- 1000 t1> ~ ...... t1> o U , ." COG EMISSIONS DATA FROM THE PAXVE FUEL I KEPOSENE AIR TEMP lOVER 250 F BURNER VOLUME: 52.3 CU IN -'E' 10 under 40 40 - 70 70 -120 120 -150 OVer 150 + o 6 o o 1.0 Flag indicate. run. fraa No. :l82 011 RtifS VItH 110 CO IETECTED WERE PLO'I'TED AS 5 PPII WHIOI IS THE RESOLUrI08 LIIiIT OF THE GAS atJOIlATOGaAPH 0.10 0.02 0.03 0.011 0.05 0.06 0.07 IIOIIIIIAL FUEL AIR RATIO - FAIl rig- VI-'" IiC EMISSIONS DlITl> FROp.! THE PJI.Xvr: FUF.L :PROPANF. lIIR TEr~ :UNDEP 250 F BURNER VOLUME: 52.3 CU IN BURNER VAPOR GDfERATOR EXifAUST DATA RUfS FROM 282 ON 10 1.0 s p. co ~ 0,1 0,01 t ~ o ,O::? 0,03 0,011 0,05 0,06 QO !"10'11'1AL ~Ur.L AlP. R.\TIO - FAN Figure VI-Ij9 image: ------- 10.0 EtUSSIOIJS 01\T,., FI'ClM TI:r: RIBIS noM 282 (If FIJrr. : I'rop-",ur AIR TEMP :UNnE~ 2~n V IJUT:NEH VOLlJ/'1': : N.S n;, IU 10 1.0 AIR FLOW . /Hr. Under 40 40 - 70 70 -120 120 -150 OVer 150 Flag indicau. run. fr08 No. 282 ON + o 6- o o RtIIS VITH ZERO HYDROCARBOII IlEADIIIGS ARE PLOTTED BELOII THE SCALE OM SEMILOG PLm'S c:: p., ..... u :r 0.10 0.02 0.03 IIOIIIIIAL mEt AIR RATIO - FAM 0.011 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 O.O~ FJc- VI-50 IIC EMISSIons Dl\TJI, FFOH TlIr I'1'}"'VE FUEL' :PROJ>l'tIE AlP TE~T :OVER 250 F BURNER VOLUME: 52.3 CU IN VAPo~ GENERA~'OR LXliJ,t15T DATJI, BURNER RUNS FROM N' 282 ON 10 E C, C. U :r 1.0 - o .10 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 o .05 0.06 o .07 ~!mlnIAL rUf.L AlP RATIO - FAM VI ,i,'.51 image: ------- .HC EMISSIONS DJ.TJ. FROM THE PI.XVE FUEL :JeEROSENE J.IR TEMP :UNDEF. 250 F BURNER VOLUME: 52. 3 CU IN BURNER BURNER DATA RUNS ArTER N9 282 1000 ,C/ ..., I' . , . .1. ,I " 100 .: I ~ I ' , 100 AIR FLOW '/Hr. Under 40 + E : 40 - 70 0 t:.. A t:.. , L 70 -120 (oj 120 -150 0 g 10 OVer 150 0 F1aq indicate. run. 10 frC8 No. 28~ 011 E: I1r p. Po U x 1.0 ~ 1.0 a 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.0" 0.05 0.06 KOIlIIIA!. nEL AIR RATIO - FAIl VI Fig.52 10" - fie EMISSIONS DJ.TA FPml THE P~XVE BURNE? FUEL: KEP,OSr.tJI' , AIR TE~~ :OVE? 250 F BURNER VOLUME: 52.3 CU IN 103 .. I .. .-.. . -~ : 2~! . 0.1 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0,06 :! image: ------- VAPOR GBHBPA'fOR B~US'f M'fA RUMS AFTER R. 282 . HC EMISSIONS DNrl'. nor.! THE I'l'XVE FUEL I KJ:POSF.rJr. AIR 'fEf.W lOVER 250 1" BURNER VOLU!"E I 52.3 CU IN LOQD IJATA RUNS ArTER ,,~ 282 Bl'P.NU~ HC BMISSIC8S DA'fA FROM 'fIlE PAXVE BUIINER l'UEL a KE1IQ6ERZ . AIR 'fEMI' aUNDER no F BURNER VOLUME I 52.3 CO IR 10 10 0.01 o .02 0.03 0.0.. 0.05 o .06 0.07 1.0 1.0 AIR FLOW ./Hr. Under 40 + under 40 + 6 40 - 70 0 40 - 70 0 P. 70 -120 L::. Ii! 70 -120 L::. u 120 -150 0 Po :x: OVer 150 Po 120 -150 0 0 u OVer 150 0 :x: 1"1aq indicates runs - 1"1aq indicates runs 0 .10 from No. 282 Oil frma No. 282 OJ( 0.10 . 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.0" 0.05 0.06 0.07 NOMINAL F1JEL AIR RATIO - FAIl BomBAI. nEL AIR IlATIO -FAX VI Fig.S" VI H~,.5~ image: ------- 0.02 fICG EMISSIqns DAT/, FROf.! THE PAXVE FUEL :l'ROPJ\NI: hIR TE~T :OVER 250 F BURlIER VOLUt'.E : 52.3 CU IN .- 'r -" RUNS AFTER 282 . 10 1.0 . OJ' -" ...... t~ <..J ::r: 0.1 RtlfS VITH ZERO HYDROCARBON READINGS ARE PLO'M'ED BELOIl THE SCALE OM SEMI LOG PL01'S 0.01 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 NOMINAL ruF.L AIR RATIO - FAN 0.01 n 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 o . Or. 0.07 0.08 O.O~ ~1()tHK".L qJr./, AIR RATIO - FAN VI fJ.~c;.~f. YT .,.::.. .,:;.', image: ------- 1000 - -- - - -- --1-1-++-+ f-t I I r -- -t. + l".T -+- + t- - 100 :r . .1 :ttt1-$- -- if -1 :~~ -r H.t: ~-t..;.. t f-rt. t-+ -t+ 10 -- -- - - - - - e - - Po Po ~+'+- ...... - -t- -- U -... ,. ::c +- ...,. -- -+-- T +- +- -t-+ 1.0 l+=t~ - -- 0.1 - o .01a,02 o 0 03 L)j~ IU 13104 ,6, F~ f'- - - -r . - -- c - . --f-rH- . j -I I r i j I - +-1 - I i1 i t. , 11' ; 14 : - . -- 'tl! "" t- ,1 - .. j:" +- j' t i1 .. -- - n -¥~'fTlt-i I -I i --_'i~ _._1 - .-- :~ ~- 3 -- - AIR FLOW t/Hr. - Under 40 ~o - 70 10 -120 fE 120 ~150 ++- Ovar 150 -n- + o t::. o o 'I fo - l .1 t .. -- : : I - -1:=rn. j.. ~ 1 t + ~.: i!- -~ ~j' : -t { ~ . ~_: :-: tl~-.tt J;+- 1~~_1_.._- ~- c- - - --. - - - - --U-IT I 'I 'in :1..- I 1'1 t! I I t-rl 'Ll - J-j Flag indicates runs fram No. 282 ON - - - - -- .- --- - - --f- :Vt if t:-~1 -'-1 j ! J 41=- - fIT :=Tf11:'t- ---i j :- -7~ 'l-l=tT1L- ,ji~, + -I - t ~ 1 :tt i 1 t- ~ ~! j t i -1 :t-; .1 t ; ~t -j-;:i:t 't j t I, r t j- t- I" T -t -+ .. + \1 I ,t t II \ .\- -,. { --t ~ - t .. .. 1 i . - ~ -~- + --=;::rrt~-f+=t He. +-1"- n--H- - rtt:-;-=r:t .1~t1:Hj' i. t .1" ....-+....... \-. f-\-w + +,.. - - - -- -- -3 ,',Of- -- - - - - -- -- - -ej: ---~_. ~-::'I-:- -- < -ih- - -:J - - - - - - -- n - - :- -J::fft- 1 ; -- - -- - ff=- -1- -~! ~-:tll- t J -1- -,. -+ -.,..- - - -r l- - - - -- - -- - -- -- - - ~ -- -- RUNS WITH ZERO HYDROCARBON '¥E READINGS ARE PLOTTED BELOW ~ 'ft{E SCALE ON SEMlLOG PLOTS -"'" - - :::t=t:- - - -- it - --+ t- +- -t-~ - - -t :1 -+ t- + 0 .05 0 .06 0.07 - - - o .08 o .09 NOMTNAL F'IJF.T. Aa RATIO - FAN VI Fig. 58 image: ------- oc .>: "- b.' t) x 0.1 ~s VI'ftI zERO HYDROCARBON ~ADIJGS ARE PLOrTED BELOW 'ftIE SCALE OJ SEMILOG PL01'S 0.01 , 0.02 0.06 0.07 0.03 o .04 0.05 NOI-:INAL ruEL AIR RATIO -FAIl VI FiB.59 t1> .>: " tr> ~ 0.1 0.01 HCG I:~USSIOns DlITl, FRO/I THE PAXVE FUEL :PROPHn:: JI.IF TE1IP :UNDE!' 250 F BUFNER VOLUHE : 52.3 CU IN VAPOR r.ENEPATOR EXIIl\UST DATJI RUMS FROM 282 OM 10 1.0 BURNER RlIfS WITH ZERO HYDROCARBON. READIKGS ARE PLOrTED BELOW , THE SCALE ON SEMlLOG PLOTS " , o .02 0.03 0.05 NOl.fINl.L I:UJ::L J'.I P. RATIO - FAIl 0.04 o .06 0.07 VI ~i "Tf,,) image: ------- 100 BCG EMISSIONS DATA FROM THE PAXVE . FUEL :KEROSENE AIR TEMP :UNDER 2SQ F BURNER VOLUME: 52.3 CU 'IN 10 1.0 0> .J( ...... a> ~ 0.1 0.1)1 0,02 , +- O. JfJ 0.04 0.')5 0.% 0.1)7 0.03 O. 'J': NOMINAL FUEL AIR RATIO -rAIl VI Fig.61 1000 !lCG ErUSSIO!IS Dl'.TA FRO!~ THE PJ\XVE FUEL: KE!'()SEJ:E AIR TErlP :OVI;P 250 r BURNER VOLunE : 52.3 Cti IN BUm;F.r - -,. . . -. -,... , -~..>~. .-...,-... r~::.+~ :~. ~ : ~ . .,-- 100 10 .. .>< "- .. tJ X 1.0 0.1 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 _,VI _.- . i.',. NOMINAL rt'r.!. An RATIO - FAN ------ image: ------- 10 10 BCG EMISSIONS DATA P'ROM '1'HE PAXVE HCG EMISSIONS DATA FRCH THE FUEL I ItBROSBHE FUEL :J{ER~F.NE AIR ~ IUNDER 250 P' AlP .TEUP :OVER 250 F BURNER VOLUME I 52.3 CV III BURNER VOLUME : 52.3 CU IN VAPOR GEllEUTOP. EXHAUST DATA VAPOR GENERATOR EXHAUST DATA - :- . AIR now AIR FLOW 1.0 '/Hr. 1.0 '/Hr. Under 40 + undar 40. + 40 - 70' 0 40 - 70 0 70 -120 ~ 70 -120 ~ 120 -150 0 120 -150 0 OVer 150 0 III OVer 150 0 .. ,>( " ~ Flag indicate. run. lID 118 frC18 110. 2U (If ~ g 0.1 0.1 0.02 0.05 Q,CMI 0.07. IIUIS VI1'H ZE1IO HTDItOCAIIION 7 IlEADIles ARE PLOTTED BELOW - THE SCALE ON SENlLOG PLOTS ... 11m ZDO H'fDlOr.AJllOll IIEADDIGII dE PLOftED IELOII 'IBE seALE (II SEJlJLOG 'LOrI 0.01 0.0 o .02 0.03 0.05 °.06 0.07 MONDAL FtEL AIR,RATIO - FAIt NOMINAL FUEL AIR RATIO - FAN Fi~f\3 VI ~ -, ~~, '. image: ------- ~. P: Il. ...... >< o z 100 100 '", : . .~. . , , , I ' 10-: "i I ' '}i ,; ii' , ' ; ; i ' i ' lU'i ..., ' Ql 0.02 , i I , , , ;' ': ! ~:-..: n : : i .i... I r ' ' I , i ' !, i :,." NOX EMISSIONS DATA FROM THE PAXVE BURNER I '...: ':' ' , i FUEL: PROPANE : I /' : AIF TEMP: UNDER 250 F : " BUMER VOLUME: 66.5 CU IH 'T !'+'W~11HT"r :i .;, ' i :oLI.L .0 ; :. I' ':: !,;: :': ," i . i. 1 , , i ! ' I , ; , 0.03 o A /:1 ,600 o A [] A A ;A :9 ~ o , , Cib : '&I:(: .'~UILIBRruM N02 ' AIR FLOW t/Hr. Under 40 40 - 70 70 -120 120 -150 OVer 150 I ! ~ 0 cf ci ~ (j L1r + o A o o Flag indicate. runs from No. 282 ON 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 H0!1INAL rUEL AIR. RATIO - FAN ; t : ~ i i~ 1 ! 0.08 0.09 VI Fig.55 , image: ------- :;: D- p.. ...... >< o ~ !lOOO 100 10 1 0.1 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.05 0,07 0.00 0,09 NOHIllAL FUEL AIR RATIO - FAN VI Fig.56 image: ------- - P: r. ...... x o z 100 10 1.0 0.1 .01 .001 .02 .04 .05 ~lor1INAL rUEL AIR .05 .08 .09 .07 .03 VI Fig.57 image: ------- 1000 100 ..,. ~ c.. ...... >~ ~ 10 1.0 '~ 0.1 0.02 ';][£1: r ~ 1- 0.03 o . 05 @ . 0\3 . @ .0.' NOMINAL FUEL AIR i image: ------- r--- I :II: CI. CI. "" >C o ~ 1. o. 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0,09 NOMINAL FUEL AIR RATIO - FAN .VI69 F1.g. image: ------- Xo. EJaSSIOIIS DATA FW)IIJ !IE PUYE Imam . nEL I PIIOPAIrE AIIt TEll' I tlllEIt 250" F IURKEIt.VOLURE I 66.5 CU IX tIC) .>c "& ~ :Ie 0.01 0.001 0.02 0.05 0.08 0.09 0.06 0.07 0.03 0.03 XOIIDAL nEL AIR RATIO - FAX VI Fig.70 ':0.10 ..... tIC) ~ :Ie 10 DATI>. tROM THr: PAXVE FUEL :PROP,a.NE AIR TEMP :UNDEP. 250 F BURNER VOLUJ.tE : 52.3 CU IN .r ':. -"'I. -. ~ 1.0 0.01 + o [::. o o Flaq indicates runs from No. 282 ON 0.001 0.02 , ' 0.03 0.011 O,r,:: 0,06 0.07 NOMINAL FUEL AIR RATIO - FAN YI r1,~, 71 image: ------- 0.1 . I: . r ., , . " , ::; :;. J ..' . -.' , , - -, ; . /..::,' : ~ -: r : ... ; J--H ,- - ~ 1"~"E: ~:: ~ . .... . . - - .. -. tIC) ~ ... "' "' !;, tIC) ~ >C o Z z 0.01 + o ~ o o + o ~ o o Flag indicate. run. frOlll No. :182 OJ( Flag indicates runs t from No. 282 ON - 0.001 0.02 0.03 0.04 °.05 0.06 0.07 .001 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 ()06 0.07 0.08 0.09: NOMINAL FtEL AIR RATIO - FAIl NOMIANAL FUEL AIR RATIO - FAN 'VI Fig.72 VI F~-... 73 image: ------- 0.001 0.02 10 1.0 0.10 0.01 11 } ~ . 0.03 0.0" 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 NOMINAL rtJEL AIR RATIO - FAN vt Fig. 7.. image: ------- 1000 - - .. .. ... 'u - .. .. 100 10,000 t ~ ~ '" >< ~ - .. - .. j. -;, -. I I I I i! ! i I! ! I ; ~ J I; I I I ." ..-..---~ I I ' I I ! i i i i i i j i I i I II! i .. - - -- -~ .. -.. NOX EMISSIONS DATA FROM THE PAXVE BURNER .. - I i i I! i ! ~I.. '! I I! 1 I .. FUEL: PROP 1-NE AIR TEMP: UNDER 250 F BURNER VOLUME: 52.3 CU IN I' 11 .- - VAPOR GENERATOR EXHAUST DATA - -- .. .- AIR FLOW i/Hr. I I - " , - - -- .. -. .. .11 L " - .- - Under 40 40 - 70 70 -120 120 -150 Over 150 + o ~ o o '. - ... .. .. --- - -- .." .. -.. :+-.. .'.!-' .. 'L:'f i! L " il :.J,-,+ I_-:i-.;,~tl 11 -- IJ;f:.=t~ ~l'-f ~I:~:: -.j+:"i.i-f:' .. - - t:':. t 1::.1 -L-i- . -t+. .- .::!-" Flag indicates runs from No. 282 ON - -- - -. - .. .. .- - .- -- H - - .'._,,-~ - - .. - - - .. - .. ,:"-r ~- ...t~1 .. .- -- ,. -..-t -' .:+=m - -- 10 +-H+ -t-I-t+I - -- - .- - . - - -.. - - .-- . - . . ::=i=!=:t:Io_. - -.- -. ::to:t ",~ ~-=::.:::I= 1.0 - - 0.1 0.02 -----r-'- .f o 08 0.09 0.06 0.0', 0.04 0.05 O. 3 NOMINAL FULL AIR RATIO - FAN YI Flg.75 image: ------- 10,000 t ~ ~ .......... >< ~ 1000 - - r! 11 100 10 1.0 0.1 &02 0.05 0.06 0.07 NOMINAL FUEL AIR RATIO - FAN o .03 o .04 0.08 0.09 VI Fig.76 image: ------- 10.00 100 1000 ~ Q. Do -. >< o z 10 0.1 o .02 0.03 0.04 o . 05 (106 NOMINAL FUEL AIR RATIO -FAN 0.07 0.08 o VI .09 Fig.?? image: ------- 10,000 . t A. ~ ....... >< i 10 1000 100 1.0 0.1 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.0' 0.07 NOPlINAL FUEL AIR RATIO - FAN VI Fig.78 image: ------- I ~ ...... 110 )( g 0.1 NOX EMISSIONS DATA FROM THE PAXVE BURNER FUEL :PROPAm: AIR TEMP :UNDER 250 F BURNER VOLUME t 52.3 CU IN VAPOR GENERATOR EXHAUST DATA 10 1.0 II. 01 0.001 0.02 0.03 0.011 0.05 0.06 0.07 1I0000JlAL nEL AIR RATIO - FAIl rYl.79 NOX EMISSIONS DATA FPO~ THE PA~~~ BU~;~~ FUEL :PFOPlINI AlP. TE!.1p : QVO 250 F BURNER VOLUME: 52.3 CU Itl VAPOR Q;:~ERATOR ~;~iAUST DAH 1.0 . -- - . ---- - - + o fj. o o bI ..>< ...... bI )( g 0.1 0.01 - ~. :r . -- -- +------- ---. -'- .. - - - . . ------.- - -- - ~- -- - - . ------ 0.001 - --.- - . - .----. - - -- 0.02 0.03 0.011 0.05 0.06 0.07 NOMINAL nEL AIR RATIO - rAN VI -=-:.-.S0 image: ------- DC .>C ..... DC- 0.001 0.02 0.1 t;.' x ..... bf gO.Ol :z: ~ 2:0.01 0.001 0.02 '.03 0.05 0.011 0.06 0.07 1f000IIIAL nEL AIR RATIO -FAIl Fig.Sl - - FROM THP PAXVE BUlINE!>; ; ; -. . FUEL :KEROSE!:E 1'.IF. TEMP :OVER 250 F BURNER VOLUME: 52.3 CU IN .. . . - .. . . - VAPOR GENrFATOR EXHAUST DATA 1.0 0.1 0.03 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.011 NOMINAL nJEL AIR RATIO - FAN fit .82 image: ------- VII. ANALYTICAL INVESTIGATION During the course of the program Paxve conducted several analytical studies related to burner operation. The purpose of these studies was to model the performance of a burner to determine which parameters affect the stability limits, the completeness of combustion, and the burner emissions. It was found that a simplified. well stirred reactor model could be used to correlate some of the experimental data. The background for that analytical study is presented in Section A below. The analysis itself is presented in Sections Band C. A. Literature Survey Combustion theory has been the subject of a wide variety of analytical and experimental investigations for the last several decades. Analyses have included ignition theory, . flame stability theory for flame holders and enclosed burners, and analysis of operation and stabilization in recirculating burners. 1. Ignition Theory Quoting Frank-Kamenetski (Reference I), tiThe basic idea .of the theory of thermal ignition is due to Van't Hoff (Reference 2). According to it, a condition of thermal ignition consists in the impossibility of a thermal equilibrium between the reacting system and the surrounding medium. The qualitative formulation of this condition as contact between the curve. of heat supply and the straight line of heat removal was first given by Le Chatelier (Reference 3). The mathematical formulation was given by Semenov (Reference 4) who obtained an expression for the relation between the explosion parameters (temperature and pressure at the explosion limit) which was later confirmed by Zagulin and a number of other investigators." The essence of the thermal iqnition theory is illustrated in Figure 1 which shows the heat release and heat loss from a vessel in which a combustible mixture has been placed. The walls of the vessel are.heated to a temperature TW and the combustible material inside the vessel undergoes chemical reaction governed by an Arrhenius type equation of the form . 01 - I e -EA/RT where OI . rate of heat release in the gas I . a constant which takes into account the concetration of the fuel and oxidizer within the vessel and other parameters siqnificant to the rate of the ?hemical reaction. image: ------- EA = the activation energy of the combustion reaction T = the gas temperature R = the universal gas constant The gas mixture in the vessel loses heat to the walls in accordance with an equation such as OII = hA (T-TW) whe re .Orr =.rate of heat loss from the gas to the wall h = heat transfer coefficient from gas to wall A = wall surface area TW = wall temperature Semenov examined these two curves, Or the heat production curve, anQ Qrr the heat loss curve. When the two curves intersect (line 3 in figure 1) the gas exists at a temperature slightly higher than the temperature of the wall .('1'W3) with heat production in the gas being carried to the wall as a result of the minor temperature difference. .For a higher wall temperature, TW2' the t~o curves are t~gent~ and (c~se 2) the. temperature of the gas r1ses, but there 1S st1ll a p01nt, TA' at which. the rate of heat production and the rate of heat loss to the wall are equal. Hence a stable system can exist. At still higher wall temperature, TWl, there is no point of intersection (case 1). The rate of heat production in the gas is now always greater than the rate in which heat can be lost to the wall. Thus in case 1, if the gas starts out initially at the wall temperature Twl' the temperature of the gas will increase and although the rate of heat loss will also increase the heat production will always exceed the heat loss rate. Once the point TA has been reached, the rate of heat production will accelerate and the temperature of the gas will increase at an exponential rate. Semenov termed the value of TW2' for which the tangent point case occurs, the adiabatic explosion temperature. The adiabatic explosion temperature depends not only on the factors influencing rate of heat liberation, but also on the surface area of the vessel. The time required for the gas to reach the exponential temperature rise situation is called the induction period. Semenov examined these factors mathematically in some detail. 2. Stability Theory for Combustion Chambers Vulis (Ref. 5) performed an extensive analysis of the problems of furnance combustion using Semonov's thermal VII-2 image: ------- ignition theory as a starting point. Vulis argued that, just as the rate of heat production and the rate of heat loss could be used to compute the ignition temperature, one could also compare the rate of heat production with the heat required in a flowing system to analyze the cornbustion process. The heat required is that needed to heat the inflowing gases to the chamber condition and to make up heat losses from the burner. Vulis analysis is very extensive and covers a great many of the cases of interest to us, and goes beyond those cases to consider in some detail the influence of heat loss by radiation and convection. He only considered first order reactions, however, which limits but greatly simplified the analysis. 'Tulis also considered the flow case in which heat is transferred back to the incoming gases by radiation and mixing. Vulis' analysis for burner stability follows substantially the same lines as the analysis presented in Section VII B of this report. It differs from our analysis in two respects. First, Vulis considered only first order combustion kinetics. This greatly simplifies the analysis, but at the same time it restricts the validity of the results. In partiuclar, the influence of pressure on stability tends to be lost with this approach. The other difference bebleen Vulis' analysis and that presented below lies in the grouping of parameters used in the solution. Vulis defined a considerable number of non-dimensional parameters whose arrangement was convenient for his analytical work. Vulis' parameters, however, tend to obscure the heat release and the sensible heat requirements of the analysis. In our analytical wor)c we have used parameter groupings of a more conventional type. Our analysis in this regard follows more closely the work of Longwell and \'7eiss. . yulis' analysis, in cornmon with Semenov, assumes that the rate of the combustion reaction is given by an Arrhenious equation. Vulis writes 01 = ko c q e-EA/RT where 01 ~ heat release rate ko . a con.tant c . concentration of reacting material q . heat relea.e of the reaction EA' R, T . a. before This heat relea.e i. a.8umed to take place within a chamber as shown in Figure 2. Here combu.tible material enter. the chamber from the left while burned material leave. the chamber on the right. It is assumed in the analysis that mixing of the unreacted material with the burning material in the chamber takes place instantaneously and continuously with zero mixing time and distance. It is a180 assumed that the concentration of r.aeti~q material varies VII"] image: ------- linearly with t~e temperature. In other words, as C goes from its initial value Co to zero, the temperature increases from the inlet to the theoretical flame temperature. The heat supply required to raise the incoming material to the temperature at \-lhich it leaves the chamber can be expressed in terms of the sensible heat of the reacting material QII = W Cp (T-To) where QII = sensible heat increase in the exhaust products W = flow rate of reacting material into the chamber Cp = specific heat of the exhaust products T = temperature in the chamber which is the same as , the exhaust temperature TO = inlet temperature Figure 3 shows the heat release (QI) and sensible heat (QII) curves as a function of the temperature in the combustion chamber. These curves are similar to those drawn by Semenov in his ignition theory analysis. There are two differences, however; in Semenov's analysis, only the lower portion of.the heat release curve was considered. Vulis, on the other hand, considers the entire heat release curve from below the inlet temperature up to the theoretical flame temperature. The other difference is that the straight line in Semenov's theory represented heat 10S5 to the wall. In Vulis' theory, the straight lines represent the sensible heat of the exit flow. A stable situation for both Vulis' and Semenov's analyses is represented by an intersection of the two curves for which the heat requirement curve, QII, increases more rapidly to the right of the intersection than the heat supply, QI. An intersection for which QI increases faster than QII is an unstable point which cannot correspond to a steady state solution. This matter is discussed more fully under Section VII B below. Vulis considered a number of concepts important in burner operation which can be understood by reference to the balance between the heat release rate and the sensible heat required. Figure 4 shows the influence of changing the inlet temperature. The effect here is very similar to that discussed by Semenov when he discus'sed the influence of changing wall temperature. At some sufficiently high inlet temperature, TIl' there is only one intersection and hence only one operating point for the system. That intersection corresponds to stable combustion taking place wi thin the chamber. This inlet. temperature represents and gives rise to the situation in which spontaneous ignition occurs as the gas flows into the chamber. . VII-4 image: ------- If we lower the inlet temperature to the value labeled TI2' spontaneous ignition no longer takes place. If there is no combustion occuring in the chamber, the gas will flow through the chamber and, the stable intersection to ,the left of the figure which represents only a small temperature rise, will pertain. If on the other hand, combustion has already been initiated, then the stable intersection to the right will pertain, and the system will continue to burn even though' we no longer have a temperature above the ignition temperature at the inlet. If we further reduce the inlet temperature sufficiently, we can in principle cause the burner to go out. The incipient extinction condition corresponds to TI3 in Figure 4. Here, there is only a single point of tangency between the heat release curve and the heat required curve that corresponds to combustion within the chamber. A further reduction in inlet temperature will eliminate this solution which permits combustion to continue, and the burner will go out. In a similar fashion, Vulis observed that air flow could be varied in such a 'fashion as to allow ignition or extinction of the chamber. Figure 5 illustrates the influence of varying the flow rate. Here the lower straight line labeled WI corresponds to the flow through the chamber for which spontaneous ignition will take place. The flow line W2 allows for stable combustion to continue, provided it has somehow been initiated. The flow rate corresponding to W2 will not, however allow the burner to spontaneously ignite. A further increase in flow to W3 corresponds to incipient blow-out. Any further increase in flow will result in a situation in the burner for which no stable combustion solution exists, and the burner will be extinguished. Another feature of combustion chambers which was noted by Vulis, is that for a sufficiently high inlet temperature, the critical phenomena of ignition and extinction do not occur. Such a situation is illustrated in Figure 6. We see that for a continuous variation flow rate from a very low value to a very high value, no tangent points exist between the straight line family of curves (011) and the heat releases curves (01)' At this inlet temPerature, only combustion solutions are possible since there is only one intersection between 0u line and the QI curve. The combustion becomes increasingly eff1cient as the flow rate is reduced, but even at high flow rates ,some combustion takes place. Vulis considered not only variations in flow and inlet temperature, but also variations in other significant parameters such as the heat of reaction (q). Additionally, he considered the influence of factors such as heat loss and flow recirculation on performance of combustion systems. By restricting himself to first order reaction kinetics he was able to handle the mathematical details of his analysis and provide generalized curves which are of great interest. VII-S image: ------- 3. Gutter Burner and Can Burner Stability Dezubay (Reference 6), Scurlock (Reference 7) and others have conducted experiments on .flame stablization on bluff bodies. They were able to show that the flame holding action of a bluff body such as a disc or V shaped gutter can be correlated in terms of the flow velocity by the flame holder, the dimensions of the flame holder, the pressure level in the burner, and the fuel/air mixture ratio. Dezubay's empirical correlations were of the form shown in Figure 7. The ordinate in Figure 7 is the fuel/air ratio at the flame holder. The abcissa in Figure 7 is a combination of burner parameters given approximately by V/PD. Longwell and Weiss (Reference 8) conducted experiments similar to those Dezubay except that their flame stabilization testing was done for a can type burner. Burner stability correlations for can burners are generally similar to those for gutter type burners. Figure 8 shows a typical can burner flame stabilization curve. The ordinate again is fuel/air ratio. The abcissa in this case is the burner intensity parameter I = WA/Vol p2. Longwell and Weiss also conducted analyses similar to those of Vulis. They considered second order combustion reactions. Longwell is generally considered the author of the .phrase "well stirred reactor theory" which covers the case which Vulis called the "zero dimensional case" in which rapid mixing of the inlet flow with the burning material in the chamber is assumed to take place. Because we will use "well stirred reactor" theory in Section VII B, we will not deal extensively with the details of this type of analysis here. It is interesting to note however, that Dezubay's correlation parameter and the combustion intensity parameter of Longwell and Weiss are closely related. Figure 9 shows how each of these resembles the well stirred chamber considered by Vulis. On the left hand side of Figure 9 we have a sketch of the front portion of a can burner, the air flow WA enters first row of holes and circulates within the pilot region of the burner, mixing with the burning gases which are contained therein. The volume of the pilot zone and its pressure level are the other parameters of significance in the intensity parameter. On the right hand side of Figure 9, we see a sketch of the recirculation region behind a gutter burner or disc type flame holder. As illustrated here a separated region exists downstream of the flame holder within which the material flowing past the obstruction is recirculated and mixed with burning material which has been stabilized on the baffle. The length of the separated recirculation wake will be proportional to the characteristic dimension of the flame holder, D. If we now consider the rate of air flow into the recirculation volume we can write WA ex PVD2 Similarly, the size of the recirculation volume should be given by VII-6 image: ------- Vol ex 03 Thus, if we form the ratio for the combustion intensity parameter with regard to the separated wake on the baffle type flame holder, we see that. . WA . PV02 V Vol p~ ex p~ O~ = PO and therefore the two combustion parameter expressions are equivalent. 4. Comments on Well Stirred Reactor Analysis Analyses of the well stirred reactor concept have been carried out by many investi~ators. References 9, 10, 11, and 12 as well as many others deal in various degrees of sophistication and elaboration on the concepts set forth. in the works of Vulis and Longwell. It is interesting that this type of analysis is applicable to virtually any type of chemical reaction process in which heat release and a thermally controlled reaction rate are significant. Zwick and Bjerklie conducted analyses on the thermal decomposition of a monopropellant in a gas generator. Their analyses included a well s.tirred reactor approach as well as one dimensional kinetics approach. The well stirred reactor type of analysis was shown to give a means of correlating experimental data which agreed very well with the experimentally observed behavior of the monopropellant gas generator. Well stirred reactor theory is quite useful in that it provides a means of correlating experimental data and predicting the influence of various parameters on burner operation. It is not in general "an accurate description, however, of the actual situation existing within the chamber. In a well stirred reactor analysis, we assume that the temperature, pressure and compositon everYWhere within the region being analyzed are uniform. In practice, of course this is not, and in fact cannot be true. It is not surprising therefore that real chambers show deviations from the predictions made by well stirred reactor analysis and that the variation. depend on the extent to which the processes in the chamber lead to inhomogeneity and non-uniformity. ~ngwell and Wei.. fabricated a reactor which was designed to be a. 910.e a Phr.cial embodiment of thorouqh mixing a8 they could acheive. The r analy.i. proved capable of c9rrelatinq their experimental data quite clo.ely, which i. not too surprising since they had attempted to phy~ically .imulate the mathematical model. More recently however, Reference 13, ha. .hewn that even in an experimental well .tirred reactor comparable to that. used by Longwell and Wei.., detail. .uch ,a. the .ize and location of the injection port. and the magnitude of the injection velocity influence the behavior of the .y.tem. Thi. is of course what one might expect a. a re.ult of non-uniformity within the chamber it.-H. We mu.t expect therefore that well stirred reactor theory VII-7 image: ------- will provide insight, but not complete detailed information on burner performance. In this regard it was inevitable that the simple "well stirred reactor" theory developed by Vulis and Longwell would lead to more elaborate treatments of burner behavior based on the same basic concepts. Several of the references cited above attempt to refine the analysis by examining in more detail the internal flow pattern, the chemical reactions, or the character of the combusiton products leaving the burner under conditons of incomplete combustion. While the merit of these refinements can be argued, it was our purpose in the present program to use this analytical method as means of understanding and interpreting the experimental behavior of a real burner. With this aim in mind, we decided to use the simplest model and analytical method which would involv~ the parameters. of significance in our experimental program. The analysis itself is prese~ted later in this section of the report. The numerical constants requi,r~d _for _the chemical reaction rate expressj,ons were, obtained from Reference 14 which gives a review of the various analytical procedures devised by other investigators and also presents equations and constants which give the best fit to available experimental data. 5. Recirculating Flame Stabilization Analysis In addition to well stirred reactor theory, there is another simple model of burner performance which also provides some interesting insight into burner operation and yet is relatively simple in basic concept. In the analysis by Zwick and Bjerklie (Reference 9) this type of process was defined as recirculation theory. ' Vulis distinguishes betwegn the well stirred reactor and the recirculation'cases by identifying one of them as the zero dimensional case and the other as the one dimensional case. The mode of analysis is illustrated in Figure 10. Here we assume instantaneous mixing of the recirculated portion of the exhaust products with the incoming stream of combustibles. After the mixing takes place, we follow the combustion process in the mixture as a funcion of time. The material which finally emerges from the chamber differs from the material present at the initial mixing point because of the reaction which takes place during passage through the chamber. This material now represents both the effluent from the chamber, and input to the recirculation pattern. Recirculation theory leads to predictions of chamber performance which are similar to those of well stirred reactor theory. They include, however, an additional parameter, the degree of recirculation. When the degree of recirculation approaches infinity the two analytical procedures yield the same result. Recirculation theory has an advantage over well stirred reactor theory in that it allows one to' consider a wider variety of cases. Staged combustion which is common in many types of VII-8 image: ------- gas turbine engine burners and two stage and multi-stage combustion industrial and public utility boilers are burners for which recirculation theory provides additional insight while still allowing for a simple and straight forward analytical procedure. The true picture of what goes on within a combustion chamber is of course quite complex. Multi-dimensional analysis involving both space and time are required for an accurate model of any real system. Unfortunately such analytical procedures are extremely complex and further handicapped by the fact that the flow patterns and mixing patterns which actually exist in a real apparatus are sometimes unknown and almost beyond reach of any reasonable analysis. B. Burner Analysis 1. General For the work conducted here it was decided to perform a well stirred reactor type of analysis rather than to " engage in a more sophisticated recirculation type of study. The Paxve burner has considerable internal mixing and hence should be fairly well modeled by well stirred reactor theory. The purpose of this analysis was two fold. First, we wished to investigate the influence of various parameters such as fuel/air (mixture) ratio and inlet temperature on the stability of the burner. Early observations led us to believe that the Paxve burner was stable over a wider rang~ of operating. conditions than other burners with which we were familiar. The possibility of exploring this analytically was therefore desired. Secondly, we hoped that the analysis would shed some light on the relationship between burner operating conditons and the production of air pollution type emissions. In particular, the degree of completness of reaction was to be determined to see if this concept could serve as a means of correlating the experimental data. The model for the burner analysis is illustrated in Figure 11. Here the burner is represented by a chamber into which the combustible mixture flows and from which the combustion gases exhaust. within the burner a homogeneous mixture is undergoing chemical reaction. The rate of that reaction is assumed to be given by an Arrhenius type equation. Because we were principally interested in lean combustion we restricted our analyses to mixtures which were "leaner than stoichiometric. The heat which is being generated by chemical reaction within the chamber serves three purposes. First it raises the incoming gas to the temperature ~ithin the reaction chamber. Secondly, it sustains the reaction at a rate which is dependent on that temperature. Thirdly, it supplies the heat which leaves the chamber both in the form of hot gases in the exhaust and also in the form of heat loss to the surroundings. Chamber heat loss is potentially an important parameter VII-9 image: ------- in the analysis. If the walls of the chamber are radiating to the outside there will be heat loss which must be supplied to those walls by convection and radiation from the combustion gases. The chamber can also lose heat to the outside by conduction through the chamber walls. This heat loss must be made up by extraction of heat from the combustion process. Because the stability and efficiency of the burner are very sensitive to the combustion temperature, any heat loss will be significant. The Paxve burner is a relatively well insulated chamber. To a first approximation, therefore, we have ignored heat loss from the burner. . 2. Basic Flame Stabilization Analysis The fundamental concepts involved in combustion within an enclosed space such as the burner of a gas turbine engine can be understood by reference to Figure 11. Here we see a volumne with a fuel air mixture entering from the left at a given set .of initial conditions and combustion products leaving on the right. The simplest method of analysis for such a system involves the so called well-stirred reactor concept. The idea is that as the material on the left enters the reactor, it mixes instantaneously and uniformly with the material contained in the volume where the combustion process is taking place. The material which leaves the combustion chamber is assumed to have exactly the same properties as the material contained within the chamber, and the exit flow rate is assumed to be equal to the inlet flow rate. The analytical method involves equating the rate of heat release in the chamber, determined by chemical kinetic considerations, to the rate of heat release required to raise the gaseous exhaust products to their final temperature. In performing this heat balance. we make use of a concept which runs through the entire analytical scheme; that one can consider the reaction as only being partially complete. We use the Greek letter £ to symoblize the "reactedness" of the material passing through the combustion chamber. It corresponds roughly to a combustion efficiency. For a reactedness of 1.0, all of the material which enters the chamber from the left leaves in the form of theoretical combustion products and temperature in the chamber is the theoretical flame temperature diminished by any heat transfer which occurs from the combustion gases to the outside through the chamber walls. If £, is less than 1.0, a portion of the exhaust products is unburned material and the combustion temperature is correspondingly less. The analysis is subject to various degrees of sophistica- tion depending on how one treats the unreacted or partially reacted material which leaves a chamber. The simpliest treatment, and the one which will be followed here, is to assume that it leaves as vaporized fuel. A more sophisticated approach which more nearly fits the facts for lean mixtures of hydrocarbon fuels with air, is to assume that the unreacted material leaves as the partial reaction products which are water and carbon monoxide. The degree of unreactedness is then represented by the failure of the carbon monoxide formed to convert to carbon dioxide before leaving the VII-10 image: ------- chamber. While this more sophisticated approach is in closer agreement with reality, it introduces some difficulties in the analysis which do not help to clarify the points which.we wish to make in this report. We will adopt the simpler approach here. 3. Hass Balance . . Entering the burner are a flow of air, WA, and a ftoW of fuel, Wf. Flowing out is a mixture of combustion products, WB, together with the unburned material, Wu. The chemical reaction involved (at stoichiometric mixture) is A + F ... B + 6HB The unburned material exists in a state which may be different from the original, perhaps involving only vaporization of liquid, or possibly involving partial reaction. Let e = stoichiometric f/a cfI .. (f/a) "' e £ .. fraction reacted Then for lean operation, the air which can .burn with WF is . WAB .. ~ leavinq WAX. WA -~ which i. exce.. air. The fraction of the combu.tible mixture which burns pro- duce. exhau.t flow . ~.t{~F+~) of the The exc... air fraction toqether with the unburned portion combustible mixture yi.ld. . ~ -(WI. -~) + (;, + ~)(l-') . If we divide the above expre..ion. by the air flow, WA' and sub- sU tute and :dmplify we obtain. VI 1-11 image: ------- ~= €(l+8) . Wu- ~ - (l- (1+8) (l-€) . The unburned material may be thought of as unburned air, WAU' plus unburned fuel, WFU' then . . WAU = WA(l-(l-€) = WA(l-€8 (l-€) 4. Heat Balance The heat release will be assumed to be given by . Or = WBllHB = WAllHB€ (1+8) For no heat loss from the system, the heat balance in terms of mean specific heats is . . . On .. t'lBllHB = (WBCPB + WAU CPA + WFU CPF) llT + WFU llHV = WA [(€(1+8) CPB + (l-€SCPF)llT + (l-€)~SllHV] where llHV = latent heat of vaporization of fuel WFU' WAU = total unburned fuel and air in exhaust CPB' CPA, CPF = mean specific heats of combustion products, air and fuel This yields a combustion temperature of TB = Tl + €(l+S)llHB - (1-€)8llHv CPB €(l+S) + CPA (l-€S) + CPF (1-€)8 5. Reaction Rate The reaction rate for the combustion reaction in the volume is given by WB = K [F]x [a]n-y (..L) n Vol e-E/RTB . ~B. VII-12 image: ------- where K = K(T) = collision factor [F], [a] = concentration of reactants in mole fraction . -- x = fractional order ~ 1 n = order of reaction ~ 2 vol .= volume- of chamber E = activation energy of the combustion reaction We can easily show that [F) = ~BlMB + WF7MF + WF/MF J WAV MA = (1-£)419 (1-£)~9 £~(1+9) :i + (1-£ ) ~ + - A and [a) . (1-£)~9 + (1-£1) ~ (1-£~ !!l + MA £~(l+9) ~ -118 where MA' Ma, MF - Molecular weight. of air, combustion ga8es, and fuel vapoJ; This gives us Wa . 6. Stability Re~uirement :. . Stable operation will take place if the rate of heat release is equal to the heat production necessary to heat the exhaust product.. There are several way. to approach this last equation. Perhaps the c1eare8t i8 the one which involves plotting the heat relea8e rate and the heat production rate required against temperature in the burner. The result is two curves of the sort shown in Figure 12. . In Figure 12 there are two line8, one labeled 011 and the other 01. 01 is the rate of heat relea8e ba8ed on the reaction VII -13 image: ------- rate equation while QII is the heat flux necessary to achieve the indicated temperature. In general these curves will have 3 points of intersection, one close to the origin and the other two as noted in Figure 12 and marked a and b. The intersection at point b represents a stable operating point for the burner. For temperatures higher than Tb, the heat flux necessary to achieve the indicated temperature is higher than the rate of heat generation available in the burner. As a result, if .the burner is initially at a temperature slightly higher than Tb' it will corne back' to the operating point indicated by.b. On the other hand, if the temperature is slightly less than the temperature corresponding to intersection b, the rate of heat flux in the system is greater than that necessary to heat the products to the indicated temperature and hence the temperature in the combustion volume will increase until the stable operating point b is reached. Point a is an unstable point. If the temperature is slightly less than that indicated by the intersection at a, the rate of heat production is less than the heat necessary to achieve the indicated operating temperature. The temperature of the combustion gases will fall towards zero and the burner will go out. If the termperature of the gas in the burner is slightly higher than Ta, the rate of heat production will exceed the rate of heat required for the temperature in question and the temperature of the gases in the burner will increase until stable point b is again reached. It is interesting that in practical combustion devices the phenomena discussed above can be observed, sometimes with unusual results. For example a small gas generator with which we have had operating experience, could be inadvertantly placed into operation at this partial reaction point for a matter of many minutes before it would either jump up to point b and operate stable and efficiently, or else quench ~d go o.ut. The heat release rate indicated by the curve QI depends on the volume of the system, its pressure and temperature, but does not depend directly on the flow rate through the burner. The curve labeled QBal' on the other hand, is directly proportional to the flow rate through the burner. If we increase the flow rate, new points of intersection between the two curves will be achieved. Figure 13 shows the limiting case where the two curves are tangent at only one point which in this case is labeled c. Point c is the incipient blowout limit of the burner. The burner may operate at this point for an extended period of time, but it has no stability margin. Any minor shift in conditions in an unfavorable direction will cause the reaction to die away. It should be noted that there are two ways in which one can reach a point of incipient blowout in a given burner. We can change the conditions of the line affecting QII by increasing the air flow, or we can change the factors affecting QJo The principal factor influencing Q React in an otherwise stable s1tuation is the equivalence ratio~. One might also, however, VII -14 image: ------- change the reaction rate as a result in change of pressure. the experiments conducted by Paxve on the Paxve Burner for APCO, we have determined incipient blowout by reducing the air ratio until the lean limit was reached. In fuel/ A factor which was not introduced in the above equation, but which is significiant in a real burner, is heat transfer from the gases. Heat transfer has the effect of reducing the heat release indicated by the curve QI by an amount which depends on the temperature of the surroundings and the mode of heat transfer involved. In particular, heat transfer to the wall of the burner has a dramatic affect on the stability of the burner. A burner of the type utilized by Paxve has very little heat transfer to the walls under steady state operating conditions. During startup and shutdown, and when changing operating conditions, heat exchange between the gases and the wall plays a significant rble. As incipient blowout is reached, the burner will remain lit for a matter of 10 to 20 minutes even though the equivalence ratio has been reduced below blowout limit. The difference between the heat required and the heat available in these conditions is quite small, and the warm walls of the burner provide the necessary difference during the time the burner takes to go out. If we equate the heat production required to achieve a given temperature with the heat production available as a function of reaction rate, we obtain the following equation. I=. WA = p" Vol' .!:!£ E/T. k (I-e:) (l-e:~) e MA e- .B R B E: (1 + e) [ cp (1+ e ) e: ME. + ( 1- E: 4> ) . ~B ~ +(l-E:)E:4>J"TB 1.5 rotA The reaction rate constant K here has been related to temperature by. K = k TO.s and x = 1 and n = 2 are assumed. The equation for I can be solved if we have values for,all of the parameters and TE. The equation for TB requires th~t we have values for.the average specific heats of the air, the fuel and combustion products. For the present analysis, equations were generated for these specific heat values using data from reference 15. The specific heat data (in metric units) and the averaging equations (in English units) were: Air cp = 6.557+1.477 x 10-3 T-2.148 X 10-6 T2 cal/~'!ole oK CAavg = 0.22618 + 1.4147 x 10-s(T+Tq) - 7.8229 x 10-10 (T3_T03) /(T-To) BTU/lboR' . VII-15 image: ------- Fuel cp = 0.02 + 1.51 x 10-3T - 7.7 x 10-7T2 + 1.5 x 10-10T3 Cal/gmOK CFavg = 0.02 + 4.194 x 10-" (T+To)-7.9218 X 10-8 (T3_T03)/(T'-To) + 6.43 x 10-12 (T"-To")/(T-To) BTU/lbOR co, C = 18.036 - 4.474 x 10-5 T - 158.08 1fT P. CC02avg = 0.40991 - 2.8245 x 10-7(T+To)-9.6403 (fT -{io)/(T-TO) BTU/lboR Cal/moleoK H20 Cp = 6.970 + 3.464 x 10-3 T - 4.833 X 10-7 T2 CH20avg = 0.38722 + 5.3457 x 10-5 (T+To) .:. 2.7623 x 10-9 (T3-T03)/(T-To) BTU/lboR ~ Cp = 6.529 + 1.488 x 10-3 T - 2.271 X 10-7 T2 CN2 = 0.23318 + 1.4762 x 10-5 (T+To) - 8.3444 avg (T3_T03 )/'{T-To) BTU/lboR . . For purposes of the analysis , the reaction taking place was assumed to be that of octane with air. The reaction was given by C8 HI8 + ¥ .(02 +' '3.77 N2) + SC02 + 9H20 + 47.125 N2 Cal/mo1°K Cal/mole oK X 10-10' This gives an exhaust gas composition of N2 - 73.489 Mole% - 71. 966 wt% C02 - 12.476 r~ole % - 19.198 wt%. H20 - 14.035 Ho1e% - 8.8356 Nt% The average specific heat of the combustion products is therefore: . CBavg = 0.28072 + 1.5293 x 10-5 (T+To) - 8.4458 x 10-10 (T3_T03)/(T-TO) BTU/lboR -1. 8508 (rT - .[fu) I (T-To) 7. Limitations on the Analysis The theoretical analysis performed here was limited in two major aspects. First the influence of heat loss on the stability and performance of the burner was not investigated. Secondly, the performance and stability of the burner for fuel rich operation were not investigated. ,The failure to investigate heat. loss effects was the result of a lack of available funds on the program rather tha~ a l~c~ of interest in the VII-16 image: ------- . . subject. Failure to investigate fuel rich operation \'las. due primarily to a combination of lack of interest and the factors sighted above. The influence of heat loss on burner performance and stability is a subject which should be studied closely. It may be that the outstanding performance of the Paxve burner is in some measure attributable .to the low heat loss characteristics of this device. Fuel rich operation is of some interest for burner applications to systems in which two stage combustion would desirable feature. Fuel rich operation of the Paxve burner not contemplated for automotive Rankine cycle or automotive turbine applications. be a is gas C. Computer Analysis The theoretical burner analysis equations presented above were programmed for analysis on a digital computer. The programs were written in APL, a new programming language devised by IBM and made available on a time sharing basis through Proprietary Computer Services, Inc., of Van Nuys. A number of programs and sub-routines were written. The purpose of each program and the results of the analyses are discussed below. 1. Program CAL Program CAL, shown in Table 1, is the basic computation program used in the burner analysis. This program was used as a subroutine in a number of the other programs. For given input'values of air inlet temperatures, (TI - degrees Rankine) and equivalence ratio (PH), CAL computes the combustion temperature (TB) and the combustion intensity parameter (INT). CAL includes a correction to the heat of combustion which allows for the heat required to warm the fuel up to the initial temperature, and an iteration procedure for the specific heats of the air/fuel and combustion products. Initial values for these three specific heats are assumed in order to make an initial estimate of the combustion temperature. The specific heats are then corrected for the average value between the inlet temperature and the combustion temperature and the process iterated until the computed combustion temperature agrees with the previous value to within one degree. CAL returns values of TB (the combustion temperature), and INT (the combustion intensity parameter) to the other. programs. 2. Program HOT Program HOT" shown in Table 2 was used to compute tables of TB and INT for sets of inlet temperature, equivalence ratio, and combustion. efficiency values. HOT calls CAL as a subroutine. HOT was used to generate the results presented in Tables 3 through 8. During the course of the contract, we frequently found VII-I7 image: ------- it desirable to be able to compare the predicted efficiency of the burner with the experimentally measured values of carbon monoxide and unburned hydrocarbons. In this regard, curves were made of the so-called "unreactedness" which is defined as . <5 = 1 - E where E = Burner Efficiency Figures 14 thru 19 show the,unreactedness plotted against the intensity parameter I for various values of inlet temperature. parameter in the curves is the equivalence ratio PHI. The 3. Programs BURN and STABILITY BURN is the computer program which was used to compute the stability of the burner. BURN accepts an inlet temperature TI as its input. It then examines the value of the combustion intensity parameter, INT, over the range of burper efficiencies from 0.3 up to 1.0. It uses the subroutine CAL to perform this calculation. BURN then selects the maximum value of INT, and calculates 10 new values, five on either side of the maximum. It returns this value of INT together with the corresponding value of burner temp. (TB) and combustion efficiency (E) . . STABILITY is a small program shown in Table 9 which was used to vary the imput' temperature and accumulate the output for the combustion stability calculations. It used BURN as a subroutine for the stability calculation. Tables 10 and 11 show the results of the stability calculations made using STABILITY and BURN. The output columns give the equivalence ratio, the efficiency at the stability limit, the predicted combustion temperature at the stability limit allowing for the inefficiency, and the combustion intensity parameter at the stability limit. Figure 20 shows a plot of the combustion stability data. In this figure, the limiting value of the combustion intensity parameter is the abscissa and the equivalence ratio is the ordinate. The parameter for the curves is the burner air inlet temperature. 4. Program INTPLOT. In performing the combustion stability analysis with Program BURN, we assumed that the intensity parameter would show a local maximum with varying efficiency. This is not always the case, as was pointed out in the earlier discussion of combustion theory. When the inlet temperature is raised to a sufficiently high value we find that the critical conditions which normally characterize burner operation are no longer VII-l8 image: ------- present. The normal phenomena in a burner involves both ignition and extinction limits. For a given value of an inlet temperature and equivalence ratio there are normally two air flow rates (combustion intensity parameter conditions) which correspond to these two critical values. At a sufficiently low value of air flow rate, an adiabatic burner will spontaneously ignite. At some higher value of air flow rate the burner is unable to sustain combustion. and the burner blows out. This form of ignition only occurs in practice at hiqh inlet temperatures. It is not the one which is used in most conventional burners. It is nevertheless a concept which is readily apparent from the combustion analysis. High flow rate flame-out is, however, a common occurence in any burner system. In order to examine this question further, the values of combustion intensity parameter corresponding to various. values of combu$tion efficiency and equivalence ratio were computed using computer program INTPLOT, shown in Table 12. It uses CAL as a subroutine for computing temperature and intensity parameter. The results from INTPLOT are.shown in Table 13. This same information is plotted in Figure 21. The ordinate of the figure is the fraction burned or as it is more generally termed, the combustion efficiency. The abscissa is the intensity parameter. Examination of the curves in Figure 21 reveal clearly the nature of the critical conditions which normally exist within' . a burner, and how, for some values of burner operating conditions, these critical phenomena no longer occur. Referring to the curve for equivalence ratio 1.0, we see that the ignition condition corresponds approximately to INT = 371 which occurs at about 10% combustion efficiency. This means that for an inlet temperature of 2000°F, .with a stoichiometric mixture, we will achieve spontaneous ignition in the burner if we reduce the air flow level to the point where the itensity parameter is below the value 371 which corresponds to the ignition critical point. The blowout condition, on the other hand, can be seen from'Figure 21 to occur at I = 982, at an equivalence ratio of 0.5. This means that once we have ignited the burner, we can then increase the flow rate through the burner to approximately 2.5 times the flow rate at ignition before the burner will blowout. Examination of the other curves in Figure 21 show that these two critical conditions, which correspond to the vertical tangents of the constant equivalence ratio curves, ,exist for those curves for which the equivalence ratio is 0.3 or higher. For ~ < 0.3, the curve has no vertical intercept. The curve for an equivalence ratio of 0.1 does not even approach a vertical slope. For this set of burner operating conditions, therefore, we cannot speak of an ignition or a blowout condition. Some reaction will take place within the burner at any value of flow rate. In a manner of speaking; the hurner is always ignited and cannot be blown out. This is apa!ticularly interesting phenomena VII-19 image: ------- in view of the fact that the combination of high inlet temperatures and low equivalence ratios which lead to this situation may ari.. in burners for regenerative gas turbines. It should be appreciated that the stability analysis which was conducted using program BURN was not able to evaluate .tability limits when in fact none existed. To prevent the compu~er from encountering this situation two safeguards were put in~o program BURN. First, no efficiency values less than 0.3 .were~exandned by. the compQter. Secondly, if the maximum value of the in~ensi~y parmeter within the region of the analysis was carre.ponded to the first point analyzed (~=0.35), the computer skipped tne remainder of the calculation and.went on to the next point. in the t.able of values that it was computing. The . ".' .COft4i~ions in Table 11 for which no critical phenomena occur are indicated by *.*... ,'.: .' '1'.' 0"'..,'. ..:,. ,".' . .' '::' ," ',' ~ .,' ,":: . I . "'-. VII-20 image: ------- Q Q I HEAT RELEASE CURVE H t.. po.. "\ LO 55 C.URV£.~ . QII 'w, TA TOAS S~OV'S THERMAL IGNITION THEORY Figure VII-l W --+- '0 .. , T SIMPLIFIED COMBUSTIOM MODEL !i'igure VII-2 image: ------- Q TI VULIS' COMBUSTION THEORY T jo'1gure VII-3 Q QII Q. TII TI2 TI, iFFECT CF INIEI' TEMP&RATUR& ON CRITICAL PHENOMENON , Io'1gure VII-IJ image: ------- Q ~ o ~ v .~ J..- ~ 4J QII TI t;Ii'}o'iC'!' (Ii' FLOW RATE ON CRITICAL P~O~ON 1 .F1gureVII-.5, QI Q Wa 11 COMBUSTION SYSTEM WITHOl11' CRITICAL (IGNITION AND EXTINCTION) PJOOiOMii:NON. QI T F1gure VII-6 image: ------- 111 "- .... o H E-- ~ ~ H « ~ e .., .... gq ij It < H H I -.J 0.16 0.14 - "'...... . - ". - . .. .. 0.12 0.10 ".. . -. ... . ":W :: I 0.08 ..- -- _... I i' r' , 0.06 i I . ~'- +=-:,:::._. -t-- I , I i . . .-.. 0.04 0-"--'-'-' , -'-.--...' -_.. I '.. t ; ,,-..~._..I,:,.. o 1 , ' , : !'i ,; 1 :~';"TtiTTY.-CWtVE: ."" i,I~ER ' I . . I. . j '! . ',i I , , , '. ! i ---+--- : j I' I, , --'-"~-:--l-T:T ! . ~------ ; I ' ; : I , ; i " ' ii' j " ' ,i i -~._- "-I;...-~--II' "'-~"'''!'-+~''i- . : '. I ~ I ' ' ! : , i j I t I i! i .....t..--... t...-.. -." ... , " i ; I I I +-- '" , I , ' " : . 1 ,:, " ; .. - - I .--.. on . . . .--+--.-..- image: ------- 0.28 0.26 o .24 0.22 0.20 o .10 0.08 0.06 i ..., ..-. I)q ~ It <: H H I CD 0.04 O.O? -+~-_: .... '.-, _A' , .. -- .- .- -. ..,..-~. - -- -. -." - ~_~_~--L .' : -~~-, ._-!. i- .~ ~._. .. " '. .. -. ... - -- -- .. - .-~. .,.., :..... . .- ..- -<-.-. .L -"J ,-- ... -.--. -'-.. -. ..- l -. ..- -,'.. , -. ~J]f ~. -~-' .~: .~ :._- .=:-~-= - :,-:..- :~?-T~:':---/~-~ ~t--- ,-. ." --. .. -... - ..- .. --. - .. .--. --.-..-. . .-.-..,... -_.-:-L.. -. -' .".,0 - .....--~~_.~._; - -, --~-0'~~ ~ ...: ~..: .. ... ..-, ~. -. OU' -.. .. -. --.- ..... -.,...-. ,.. -no' - -,--, ..J -.- .--. .------ .- -S..-J .- .. .._.._- --_.. '.. :.': =-... _L-=~~..~ ~ ~ .:::-:!f-tTfi:- . .: I' ,. ~ . ;: ; .-.-:.- :: [SiE_: h - .- .-. -._- - )n..i - _.- - -.. -. .- ......-- -.--'-.--.--.-.. ....:..-. __h_" -- ---h' -- --.--.i.: ....-.- ,- .. -, .. -" - ,".. --~. J :.~ L~ .:-:. .:: o .. .-.-- ..' . .-.-. .~I'-' -- , , , . , +..-;--t" -: . - .'~F.'- ... - - - -t-- ..-- : r-- ~. :.. -- - .---- ... .-- -- -' . .. .-. - -. - :::1 ..!. .- .. 1-:-- -.- - .-- i =--= - i . :' T I I i r:-- ..- J j I , -.-t-- ! ~L. ; i . I i. I .. II ..1 ',- 1'-' II I I . . " ~. f+-.~- ; ~ . . ! . -. I ; I-r i . i I ::1 J ~'~-j---~~!-:r. I i! ::1' ; . I. j 1 :d .- ,. -.- - ----..i ! ) .i , ! I ! ~ , : I" .. ! I : fCURYE--: .. ... , i t I ; ! , . , ; i i.1 ," ~_.- --- i I .. i '.;"l: : . _:~. -~ ..: ~---~ ; i ! i -.. :---:--;--T ! WA = AIR FLOW VOLUME 1# -- see - i , I '-----:-'---'-T----- -. -." '-- ..-- ft3 I I --+- I ;! I! !-..~ +"',-, It: : il : , ,I I i . J -' ! I! I : _L~; f-r : . ! . ; ~ (U8 .--.." .._~ :iT + 'H , c Q.16 ~. - '-. -- ._.,~ . H ~ p,:0 .14 H < ....:I ~ O. 12 "" ! i. '; II. , I! ! i : II V a PRESSURE ATMOSPHERE - - - I:,;,: I;' , , . 1..- .1. i. , --+- .1 I ..I j... ..'.j'.' .,. "1' -t- ...!. .t t "1 --i- p = r---, i' I ! I I ...--- ~ I ~.;:..I: - i~--!:FC+ .... -:---1 -'.+-~---h-._:_.-t----------~- 1.._.__.------ : [ -. ! : J i --..-. .1 -.. --- L -. . : ! ~ I &l i.. ! . ; ~ - i''': . i ! I - .>- ! . . j .- ... j ! -. 'i J i ! , i i 6 ..-_0---' .-- --- ..-.---..-.. CHARACTERISTIC NUMBER - WA/vp2 8 i." T ! ! ! 10 .~-- ...-- .-. " I I , ..--1.----.--.- i - -- 70 - .-_U ... ---..0..-.-.-- .. ' -' .' ..0 60 , , , . i - ""'R_' I ! i I . . j. .1',+ " I I i ,. ! I' ..,. .J j:. -j : I I.. I i i .. . +. .. 1:.-1: .j:t i---r i ...\ - I ! I J ! "1 , !. - j ~--.~~::- i . i --..--- ---7'.'- .. 80 100 image: ------- v ( ~ f~C)~ ~~C)/ o p CAN BUJOO:R AND GiJrTER BURNER CONCEPTS Figure VII-9 W VOL -- W .. (l + K) W . p. ~ .. o'W ~ RECIRCULATION MODEL Fi~ure VII-10 BURNER ANALYSIS TECHNOLOGY P TB VOL . . . . VA , Wr T1 TB WB + Wu = WA + Wr .. ... E..= FRACT. BURNED INLET FLOW EXHAUST FLOW BURNER Figure VII-ll image: ------- Q / T 5\~~\..'i.. O?t...'i'..JIo.\\t-\(:) ""t..'-'" 't>"'\..M'~C.£. Q Figure VII-12 QII T \ ~('\~\'t:..~\ ~\..OW QUi \-\t."'" 'O"'L"'NC.~ Figure VII-13 image: ------- II) II) ~ ~ CJ -< ~ ~ THEORETICAL BURNER- ANALYSIS 10"' ! ~_:t: I.' -:~~-.-:;~ .~~: ~ ~ - - ~ -+ ~- ~ ; -L ' .: ; -~_._-'~~-=-- ::.:.:' ::::=:. I " i ' . ; t i._~__~_.._-, h____- .._.. + .. : r 10- -.-._.~-..;._~_..---+-------.. ------.. - . ,-: l' \'. ....--!-_. : t '.------.- + -.-' -,-- .'-'~"'"'' .' -...- -.--.->.. -.- - _h__'~__--- . , , "'-1- '--'--'-"'~-"'-- .-.. . ~.. ',- . , 10- ---.--... ~-------- '--~"i-. . -- 0" - .- . - -- ,. --.. ."-- - .-- -- -.-.-... -,' INT = WA/VOL p2 o = 1-Eff AIR IHLET. TEMP. OOF 10- 10-1 10 102 10-3 1 COMBUSTION INTENSITY PARAMETER - INT * See ft3atm2 Figure VII - 14 image: ------- U) U) ~ J.:J t < ~ !5 10-3 10-1 THEORETICAL BURHER ANALYSIS - .. ; +f-+ i-t:"=-r1::i) ::;-! --"'-~i-"_..' :~:~t=g!~t,--.:~:~~:..jf"":' ; ;.' ;::; '7~ ':. . . .' "-~1;l:..+...-::==E;~ftGt::)?~rL::~:~-~~i<, : . : .., i,,: : ."". . :' : :' -t+tJi i,.I.. . - : . -1--'; I ''''''--r--rn.n~.+-:-+Tt .. H +~:;.;........ 1- ... ,- .J. ...,; '/:!. I, ,-, 7 -::. ~" "', ~ 'ill :.',,: .', , : ..\::1/. t:. . .c-'~-k+I', .. .'~.:, :; 0"" ~,j'c~c:l'f;,~:,:TtH~J .. ,. ". -~~,l i':" .. /:: ::;;'~.,; . ii,; V ..!,...U~ . '.,. .. 1 t i l--tI . ,+-,+++ :+t 10-2 ~.. ~ ~~. L4W' ,.':t. 'To f"'~ .,' .. .:: '.. n._'. o' ,":. '. i,. ." '0:' ... ." .' ,::'~ .. :~: '..1 -f=-;-. 1.,', . ',;". -+-' ~- L...: ..~.I: ! - + '" ~ i~~ :!. i :j' ... .. ,i", ! : , ,r ":J.. n I' :1.' .. . , , ..... .. ."" .. ,,,., ~.L ./ (~: n "/.i' i I:. " . i !IK:f.. : ',: J /~ v. : : ': .. T' ~ ,)'Il+- ..' .-;pl-t. ~: .,-"c-..';" , . k: "\" '- ., ;{ ';I ~. . + '" - ~~~ --~.~ I _....,::L/l2~~.riin!- -~"f~~' !'1.1.~,ll t- i': 'Y'. I ~ ~ ", /'f'. : Y./: . I ';: INT = WA/VOL p2 WI' "II ~: I' . '/ - ''I. .:~~--.-i,.:" . . -r 'J I""''' ", ~-h-' . '1-' . . i !'N ,V/y'. ::.1 :! f -W,~ 1 u:: I;j/: I' y. lA'~h'lI'iI'l'''TT'I!' '! .' : . 0 l ,~V ..':'7)'''¥'" ,.' .' ~: ;:,-,.,,, ...,. ..-r~iT; ~~ AIR. INLET TEMP. - 1/00 F ~ '.~ - -- -/7t' ,:., ....;i., !' L~~'~ ~ : i~Ti' ':':+fr'--:---:~~~'T:T-~-:~-n"---"-"u I) : I ! V : .t--w'--; ',: l'r,-,~--"-~,,,,:,,:,,:u'-"'T-' ..,......_-;---,.. . . ,- ..,' Y'. ~:'I'-' '''';-''''I~:.:.t''l(..t II' .., .".. .. .;':' . :'" ., ,. , ., '. . I . '.': 1:; ~ ~ : 10-~I",... . ,.J i . I. .: " i . 10-3 10-2 10-1 u ... : T -- '''-'1-- ; ,.!.. I' ';'1 " 'j I j-I '-.. n~ttttTt -L ..:U:. !.. :.f ~;'~:: :r' c " ..1:." - .. . . r . ...lJ :.i-h.' ''J ':':!-~1~1-' ~:jm1r:, .. '1::,: ":L;,.. :: : :!~lIl I "I,.o~ -;, /. , L.,. ~ '. '.. j~:- .:t-- ~,~Uc_, ..: .. ., , - , -- " : V, -..- :-~: cfr: 1 - Eft u .. :' , i : ....:..J.. , I' : :" I,: , y.: i' " .::! 100 1 10 COMBUSTION INTENSITY PARAMETER 1# See ft3atm2 INT Figure VII - 15 image: ------- THEORETICAL BURNER. ANALYSIS 10- en en ~ ~ ~ t < ~ ~ -L-L . . ;!~i. 10" :. - ... I . . I I I I I ...-+ ----~_.t--~ . ! 1 INT ,rAlVOL p2 ". = cf= 1 - Eff AIR. INLET TEMP. 80QO F .. 10-3 100 101 10-2 10-1 COMBUSTION INTENSITY PARAMETER - INT * See ft3atm2 Figure VII - 16 .. ,. '., ::i ......; . . .,'':''" ..' ~ . , 10 2 image: ------- 10-1 .b', t", ,. .:' ..- .. -. 11fEORETICAL BURNER ANALYSIS I I - .. . Ir .!: '::::,:::: .... --. ~:/ .:.1 u:f.-, . ll: l-1t-- '::-~I...'- on. ,;.,- . ~- .:-:: -+-~- - '--, i!! :2 -," i",:' "'- -jllbl. ", ~"--- '- i I '. i "---- :...---- -.- .. -' .. ~"",;:. , r -. ... 10- --. .i : fH.. g 1:::: ,. j:: ...~1;;T' ~..- . . ..:i:!,.. --,' en en ! w t < t! ~ ;1 I . . ,.: .. u ':t J - ~ ". r: ," -, -, 10- I::::. ..- ~- .u -. ~ .... V --' ~.+._- --~: .J, -- .;', . . . i' .. . ).' :--V._.L ~/ ! i 10- ~ 10-3 'r :~ --._,. .~ .. -- ---... .. .. --_u- .. ..i.j 1 ii. "-~'4 D5 ~ -- ... 'III ~ .. y LV~' .)' L;' --; ! f: ~ ;,.. I ~-- I I --r(J~)'t k:' ~,'VV'!: - .._~-. -, --. - -- - ..... ---- -------...-.-.. , ---.0- -j- ~ -- -- -- - . ..... " ..... -- .-- t. i'+~-+ .u. t-- .- ~I/ : ~ 141 t- -t :~r-~~ 0 -- :-t'7..~-~.i O. ),1-'1.' I ''1'1 I 'i,; I.; '~ ", -- 'c" -- -- .-- - .j~f~ L .~.v ' ,. "., - :...,. '.-" - i ,:~ . :- "'--'-- ~-:i' "I .. 'u -- " , -;: j )' - ---~ n~ -- :';-~ t -.z: i , ~-'~'~/V1'~ .,I. Ib O' .(. -- 1 I , 10-2 10-1 - .-. ... .. ,- -- fi lSf- . .,.. . , ';-'~'1'.' - ., ._- ! . I ; , -- COMB(J)TION INTENSITY PARAMETER - IIn' _..n -- -.. _.- -- -- - -- -- - ---.-- -- _u- ". __n .. ..- --- .._-- .... .- --. . - ." ..- -'-.. --. ~ o-! --- .-is) ~ . -------~. - INT . VA/VOL p2 d . 1 - Eff AIR INLET TEMP. - .. 100 101 * See ft;'atm2 -- -- -- . ..- - 12000F 10 2 Figure VII - 17 image: ------- THEORETICAL BURNER ANALYSIS 10.1 10.2 (0 " q) ~O' ~O' *0' &&& . ---t- +- --4-+- -=t._~.~~r-I~::-~i ; .. II) II) ~ f,.:I t < ~ ~ 10.3 INT = WA/VOL p2 cf= 1 . Eff . AIR INLET TEMP. .1bOOoF 10." 10. 4l 10.1 10° ~01 ~o 2 103 COMBUSTION INTENSITY PARAMETER - INT II See ft:3atm2 Figure VII - 18 . / image: ------- THEORETICAL BURNER ANALYSIS 10- - -.-"... ----"- . 10- I- en en w ~ ~ ~ .,: -< ~ ! .- ... .:J" 10-3 . ,'j , . ; I ~ ! Ii: . j " ~~,mmtc~~,. --.' I- .-+-Wl ~. - . . - 17-+',- . : 1 - :1--iT 1+"-' -., 'Ii '.;"-. !; : f t I ~--T.-::T1i-r: ~, , ":' !!. ! , ' : r It ! : - r,-j ! - i r"ll - - . i - ~-: J . r'; i ; l L-_-_~.- "".T~t--- ._--~._-_.--.-.;-~-~-..l-L ' .-t--T:t-._~_._;.J !,~ : '-~~_:':~~t:-i==~lNTi~:~'IJA;'J:J }i ~.' ' ~ .' '<.;1 n "'.~:_~~L~-;.l' rf. 1 - Eff . , , - ,---'~;r AIR INLET TEMP. lOOOoF i . , i<. .i. J.: , ! . -..- -.------ - -,".-- 10-4 10-2 10-1- 100 i01 1'02 103 COMBUSTION ItrrENSITT PARAMETER - INT * See ft3atm2 Figure VII.- 19 image: ------- CUF:r:Ep. STArlILlTY LlnlT I\llt.LYSI': ~ n.704 , ~ o , ~ ~.Cr.4 :! : t! 0 . ~0t+ ~ ... o o w 0.01 r- 1.00r ~ n. ()O4 - . IrITEfJSITY Pt.RAIlr.n:r. TNT = I-IA!(VOL.P*2) O.lD 1.00 10."10 100.00 1000.00 I -+----+- f'\.8n4 ; ; C.11"~ .., ... :IQ ~ - - - < ... .... I '" o L':UI V ;-~-- rT' '+..o.. ...., ",..... ,. .~+ ,..... - .'''~1' '--~-'''In'" .., ...-.+ ".("11 '1.1," 1.r.Q J.0.0''''1 ]0';.0'" 1'!0r).0("'1 T':'Tr":'STTY r/\i.,.j': T- r rt:7 = "I\/(V""L.P*'2) C! I :JSTWf, Ii'TI'~ SI,':' rfJ:';:rT::r L':r. 'LnT T! = 2!H"!"';" n:TEi.~ ITY r,ll.r.n:LTU' !lH I.or 3.1' I~.~- 31.(? I~r.n~ 3J(.23 10f'\D.nr ,-+ -. "~"'..-f--'" ..-+."*.. ......1--.. .--." +-.-- --..1-0.-- + 1.'"'0~ ~'.! r; , ',.~1:.1~: 0.C~~. 0.7~f+ lr w co ".I">~- 0.2 ~ ."'. s~f-" 0.3 III 0.4 ~ 0.5 ... '"'.111++ ~ 0.6 ~.:;1f+ 0.7 ( 0.0 , -::.207+ 0.9 1.0 (! . 1 ':'\ "7t- :T/,C ~\~. -'.Jr: :~~~.:.:- "-~:;-r'-" ...;: !~'r."'''.'--'3'1':;:'''' ";~,~;:'~'~ -" '~'1'/,~"~' -.. ~'.'~-~!"., n:T:TrITY r,~r:J''''H:r T!'T . , , image: ------- VCAL(O] V CAL CA+-O.27 CP+-O.7 Cn+-O.32 TBI+TI . HP+(O.02xTI-537h(O.OOOIf194x«TI*2)-537*2»+(-7.9218E-8x«TI*3)-537*3»+6.43E-12x(TI*4)-537*4 BB+HBO-(O.81+0.633)xBFxTHf1+Tll TENP:TI+-TI TB+TI+«HBxPHx(1+TB)xE)-(PHxTilxBVX1-E»f«CBxPHx(1+TH)xE)+(CAx(1-ExPH»+CFxPHxTHx1-E) +«ITB-TBI)$1)/CONT TBI+TB . CA+(O.22618)+(1.4147E-5xTB+TI)+-7.8229E-10x(TB*2)+(TExTI)+TI*2 CP+(O.02)+(O.0004194xTB+TI)+(-7.9218E-8x(TB*2)+(TBxTI)+TI*2)+6.43E-12x«TB*4)-(TI*4»+TB-TI CB+(O.28072)+(1.5293E-5xTE+TI)+(-8.4458E-10x(TB*2)+(TBxTI)+(TI*2» CB+CB+(-1.8508x«TB*O.5)-(TI*O.5»fTB-TI)-88.356fTB-TI +TEMP CONT:TBI+TB IRT+Kx(1-E)xTllx(1-ExPH}x(MFfMA)x(*-EAfRxTP)f(1+Tll)xEx((PHxTHx1-E)+«1-ExPH)xMFtMA)+PHxEx(1+TH)xMFfMB)*2 INT+INTx(TB*O.5)x(29x2116f1545xTB)*2 .. . [ 1] [2] [3] [4 ] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] V [19] ... So ... . < M M . ... image: ------- I I [1 ] [2] [3] ['I J [ 5 ] [6] [7] [8] [9] [1f)] [11 ] [12] [13] [14] ~ v HOT[ r] 17 'V l:tr~~;J;!: J'llA+O.1x\10 ~IJ+460+ 0 400 800 1200 1600 2G00 E+ C.g 0.99 O.U99 O.~999 /i.rr+( (p;2IA). (pPilA ). (pI:'). 5) pO /.~+1 PUT': 'i'I +'1' IA un J+1 JUT': T'/l+FHAr J] ~~ . A J;"n[N ; J ; ; ] +~ ( 5 . ( p E) ) n ( ( r t:) p~' J - 4 G C. ) . ( ( f1 r) p i)f!) .77. ( ~ j, -I~ C, ;j ) .I t"~' J+J+1 . +(J$pPIIA) /JUP If+I.{+l +( !.{Sp~'I I!) /!:U:~' Table VII-2 image: ------- TA ~. ()OOr.L~:) (,).OQ001:0 ;). r. ~j 0l;~.: U ;.CCijO:O (;. [)C.OCi;ij \!.OcuCDC c..v()()()~;U f: . e 0 C' 0 1~ C 0.000::;0 ~. 0000;::0 v.COOOl,Q 0.0000;:0 0.0000.".'0 o.aOQOro O.(\()01):70 1).0000'-::0 ': i 0.0000;:'0 o.noooF.O a. no 00::0 O.OOO{)f,Q 0.00001,'0 o.oocoro a.aoooro a.ooooro 0.00001;'0 O.OOOOi;O o.ooo:>ro o.ooaOEO o.ooooro O.OQOO£'O O.OOOOEO 0.0000F.'0 O.OOOOEO O.OOOOEO a.ooooEO o.ooaoEO a.OOOOi:'O 0.0000£'0 o.ooaoro a.ooooEO THEORETICAL BU~ER ANALYSIS Effect Of Equivalence Ratio and Efficiency On TnperatUN and tnten8ity pazo_ter Ail' T8IIIP. . OOF PHI 1.0Cr.~.:'-1 1.000U,-;;-1 1.0000;'-1 1. 00 0 O~' 1 2.0000z.;-1 :.00002;-1 2.00Dor-1 2.000CZ-1 3.0QDOr 1 3.0000:"-1 3.0000[.'-1 3.0000['-1 4.0(JCOI:-1 11.0ooor"-1 . 4.00 OOL;'-l 1+.0000':::-1 5.0000;:::-1 !i.0000/;'-1 S..00002-1 5.0000[;'-1 6.00CO£'-1 c..oooor-1 (;.OOCO;:--l 6.00001'-1 7.0000E-1 7. aOOOi;.'-l 7.0000Z;-1 7.0000!.'-1 D.OOOOZ;-l 8.0000E-1 8 '-0000E-1 0.00001:-1 9.0000r-1 9.00001;'-1 9.0000L'-1 9.0000E-1 1.0000l.'0 1.0000EO 1, OOOOEO 1.0000£'0 ETA 9 . (\~) 0 C::--1 ~I. 9000['-1 '].9'JOU";'-1 :; . ':! (j rJ C.. 1 S.0UOOl.-1 ~.S'O()OL'-l 9.99('0::-1 'J.9~:~O,::'-1 (J.onOOD-l ~.9000;.-1 :1 .g!100~.'-1 9. ~~!90i:"-1 ~.O:J:Jor-l 9. !J 0 00.:.. -1 \,).9noor-l ~J.'j990L-1 9.00002-1 9.9000r,-1 9.9!;OCoI;-1 ;.91)9C[,-1 9.00002-1 9.9000,;'-1 !).9900'::-1 9.9990i:-1 9.0000E-1 9. 900 0 L~-l 9.9900E-1 ~J.9990L'-1 9.0000£'-1 9.9000E-1 9.9900[;'-1 9.9990L'-1 9.0000[.'-1 9.90002-1 9.9900£'-1 9.9990=-1 9.0000E'-1 !).9000S-1 9.99COE-1 9.9990[.'-1 TA - Ail' Inlet TemperatUN or ETA - Efficiency lIT - Burner lnteneity Parameter TB L~.(:9:'1~:~2 r..1 S4 ,.;.1."2 ~.:: r:D 7 ~.,':: 5. 2':.IS2;:'~ j. :j~7~..'2 ~!. 89 CFL"2 ':1.'.)7F7;':-: 9 . ~ ~ S ~;:2 1.3041l,2 l.l!~G71::l 1.l!3':iO:3 1.4402;,'~ 1.670:)[.'::: 1.831+1.',3 1.A4\JCL-73 L8!;11,"::'3 ~. "2.7'JT'~ :.214~r.3 :.233~:;3 2. :3S4:~3 :!.3!iG~";3 :.S729t3 ~.59104,-:-3 2.59Cfif3 2 . 6 Ei 7 3~' 3 ~. Q10A;"3 2.9:!SH':) 2.'337!:b'3 :!.9611L'3 3.2309£'3 :3.25771;'3 ~. 2£,04(:3 3.24!J1!:'3 3.S349!:'3 3.5GI+3£'3 3.!i672r3 3.5055:':3 3.8246f3 3.nS(,4L:3 3.B596t3 IN! 3.2:::1'::f 11 :2 . 1 :: S ('.- - 11 :'.:; ':1::. 1.:' 2 . C :: 4 ~! ::: 13 1'; . r: 1 r. r- ,~,- f', 3.['84G:-r, If . 2 :;. 5 t~.: - i LI,.27~~~: B 2.!)1.~7:"-:} \,).5409,:'-4 1.0(:10:;--4 1.i)731L'-~ A .4:!r-,2:.~-2 ;.: . 177':,i:.'-2 - 2 . ~ 7 3 3 ,:~ .3 ~.39~6n'-1.4 6.':941+'::'-1 1.5211P-l l.f:30F-2 1. G 1+ 13E-:\ 2.0731+z:'0 5.30nl:-1 5.GB67E 2 5.717C£-3 7.1+900[.'0 1.2110'::'0 1.2GOOr-1 1. 26~9L'-2 1.39111:'1 1. 88A9L'0 1.921+~[.'-1 1. :12B3E-2 1.9331+L'1 1.909~z:'0 1. A5 £2F.-1 1.8503.:' 2 1.8103::'1 2.97S9V-1 3.117.1E-3 3.12S9E-S PHI - Equivalence Ratio TB - .COIIb\&8t ion Temperature of Table VII - 3 image: ------- TA 4.0000E2 4.0000D2 4.00001.'2 4.0000E2 4.0000S2 4. r.0 00'::'2 4.00001'2 4.00001:'2 4.0000E2 4.0000£'2 4.0000E2 4.0000E2 4 . 0 0001'2 4.0000E2 4.0000E2 4.0000E2 4.00"OOF.2 4.0000E2 4.0000E'2 4.0000::'2 4.0000F.2 4.0000 E'2 4.0000E2 4.0000E~ 4.0000E2 4.0000E2 4.000082 4.0000E'2 4.0000E2 4.0000E2 4.000082 4.0000E2 4.0000E2 4.000082 4.0000E2 4. 000 OE2 4.0000E2 4.0000E2 4.0000E2 4.0000E2 THEORETICAL BURNER ANALYSIS Effect of Equivalence Ratio and Efficiency On Temperature and Intensity Parameter Air Temp. = 400°F PHI 1.0000E'-1 1.00nOz.:-1 1.00002:'-1 1. OOOOr-1 2.0000r-1 2.0000£-1 2.0000r-1 2.0000E-1 3.0000i;'-1 3.00001;-1 3.0000E-1 3.00001'-1 4.0000r::-1 4.0000E-1 4.0000E-1 4.0000['-1 5.0000[,'-1 5.0000[;'-1 5.0000r.-1 5.00008-1 6.0000r.-l 6.0000[,'-1 6.00008-1 6.0000E-1 7.0000E'-1 7.0000Z;-1 7.0000E'-1 7.0000E-1 8.0000r.-1 8.0000P-1 8.0000E-1 8.0000E-1 9.0000E-1 9.0000E-l 9.0000E-1 9.0000E-l 1.0000EO 1.0000EO 1.0000EO 1.0000rO ETA ~.OOOO,:::'-l ~J.90GOD-l 9.9900E-1 9.99':)Or-1 9.0000E-1 9.90002-1 :J.990rC-1 9.9%0::'-1 a.oooor-1 9.9000;':-1 9.9900r-1 9.9990E-1 9.0000L'-1 9.9000E-l 9;990Cr 1 9.9990;:-1 '.1.0000::;'-1 9.'3000£-1 9.9900[,'-1 9.9990r-l 9.0000E-l 9.9000;:-1 9.9900E 1 9.9990£-1 9.0000["-1 9.9000Z;-1 '3.9900r-1 9.9990£'-1 9.0000F-l 9.9000[-1 9.9900r-1 9.9990F-1 9.0000['-1 9.9000r-r 9.9900[,'-1 9.9990['-1 9.0000E-1 9.9000£' 1 9.9900D-1 9.9990E-'1 TB D.l~52lJL:2 R.r.<::09r2 n.934Cr2 e.93~O,~2 1 . 2 ~ 7 Ii::: 3 1. 2lltJ3: '3 1. :11fnr;,';:) 1. 34~!4:~3 1. f,409E3 1.7591C3 1.7712E~ 1.7724!-'3 1.9993r:3 2.15~j7r3 ::. if; ~ P. :,'3 2.1G73E3 2.335',';:3 2.5179[:'3 2.53GE3 2.5379L,1~ 2 . r, 5 3 I, E 3 2 . 8 (;1;:; ['3 2.P.853~3 2.8874L'3 2.95311.::'3 3.1'j17E3 3.21S5D3 3.2178:;'3 3.23CO:73 3.5025E3 3.52881:'3 3.5315E'3 3.5086Z3 3.7982':3 3.827L-:'3 3.8300E3 3.7E,64E3 4.080323 4.1117E3 4.11l~8r3 INT 3.0n5'JE-G 6.6389Z; 7 7. 1E4 'J::' 3 7.219S::-9 1.'?1!8l!E-3 11.117Gl,::-4 4. n4~;9L'-5 4. 87 r. 8 ;7- G 7.2L451:'-2 1. 5 3(j5,-:;-~ 1.64~r,2-3 1.6£il0r.-ll C.':925[;,-1 1.31121E-1 1.4248:':-: 1.4333;:-3 3.1672:'0 5.50'.::4':'-1 5.7913E-2 5. P. 20Q,t;-3 B . 9 SSG T'O 1.4092:>'0 1.460['-1 1.4719E-2 1.822221 2.5G01EO 2.6312.r;' 1 2.6382£'-2 2.8599d 3.4434FO 3.47372-1 3.l~764E-2 3.4912£'1 3.1274£'0 3.01'47E-1 3.0025E-2 2.9755L'1 4.49992-1 4.6720E-3 4.6894."'-5 TA - Inlet Temperature of ETA - Efficiency INT - Burner Intensity Parameter PHI - Equivalence Ratio TB - Combustion Temperature of Table VII - 4 image: ------- THEORETICAL BURNER ANALYSIS Effect of Equivalence Ratio and Efficiency On Temperature and Intensity Parameter Air Temp. = Booor TA PHI ETA TB INT e.00GOE2 1.0000E-1 !J.OOOOL.' - 1 1.?2:' 1;,'3 1. 111381:-:1 8.0000.:.:'2 1.0000E 1 9.9000E - 1 1.263SF,3 2.1~EE - 4 n . 00 00;:'2 1.0000E-1 9.'3900['-1 1.268110'3 2.2071.'"' - S 8.0000[2 1.0000L'-1 9.9990F 1 1.208:::1:.'3 2.215CD-F 8.0000L'2 2.0000[.'-1 g. OOO(ji' - 1 1.6143['3 r.. r. 5 r,4;' - .2 8 . 00 0022 2.0000E-l 9.9000': - 1 1.69392;'3 1.1 (J 002: - :: 8.0000E2 2.0000F'-1 9.99001 - 1 1. 7() HE 3 1.153J? - 3 8.0000['2 2.0000E - 1 9.9990£'-1 1.7 02(:L'3 1. 15<;: 5l: - If 8.0000E2 3.0000[.'-1 I).OOOOE - 1 1 . '3 807:: 3 7.2310£ - 1 8. 0000 Z2 3.00001:,' - 1 9.9000E-1 2.094SZ.'3 1.1(\422-1 8.0000E2 3.0000F - 1 9.99001.: 1 2.106223 1.211011E' 2 8.0000E2 3.0000E-l 9.9990T.' - 1 2.107423 1.24£,11.'-3 O.OOOO['~ 4.0000['-1 9.0000E-l :? . :1:; If 3 [' 3 3.5343EO 8.0000['2 4.0000E-l 9.9000L' - 1 2.4705r3 5.5If:2T - 1 8.0000E2 4.0000E - 1 '}.9900r - 1 2.48Sn::1 5. 7771IE--;. f!.OOOOL'2 4.0000E'-1 9.G990:':-1 2.48E6F3 5.8013E-3 8.0000£2 5.0000£'-1 9.0000D - 1 2. 6C178L3 1. 0595;;1 8.0000E2 S.OOOGE 1 Q.90GO}'-1 2. 824~Z.'3 1. 5671L'D 8.0000E2 5.0000E-l g. 9 900~:-1 2.841f1E3 1.[,2352" - 1 8.0000P2 5.0000E-1 9.99901:-1 2.fJ43CI:'3 1.629~L' - 2 8.0000E2 G.oooor-l 9.000Q;':-1 2.:1S35;3 2.2G55!:'1 9.0000E2 c.OOOO£'-l ~.900C2-1 3.15847:3 1. llf 7 SEO fl.OOOO£'2 6.0000l' - 1 !J.090(L~7 - 1 3.178[1:3 3.23f3: - 1 e.OOOOF.'2 6.0000r-l 9. 99~.IOi:'-1 3.1f'O~,D3 ::! . :? I~ 5 1 ~- 2 0.0000E2 7.0000L' - 1 9.0000':: - 1 3. 21~31j73 ::!. fJ 3A2,n1 8. COOOL'2 7.0000'::-1 S. 9 oro;: - 1 3.47511:2 4.81lR7FO 8.0000'::2 7.0000':: 1 ~.9~,OO,"7 - 1 3.4:)8:3:.3 4.9:145:: - 1 0.0000E2 7.0000E - 1 9.'3990j: - 1 :\ . 500 E;' 3 l;.g429L.' - ~ L 8.0000::2 n.OOOOS-l ~!.GnGor - 1 3. 510 2 i.' 3 5.2922.-1 8.000022 a.OOOOE' 1 ~j.9COO:; - 1 3.771;3]'3 5.7:3:'9['0 a. 0000E2 8.0000E - 1 9.9900J:' - 1 3 . 802 O}-3 5. 7n4i: - 1 0.000 OI,' 2 O.0000E-1 9 . 9 9 9 0 ~-' - 1 3.804(;£'3 5.7981.::' - 2 8.0000E2 9.0000[' - 1 ~.OOOOE - 1 3.78017'3 5.0432:'1 8.0000£'2 9.0000E-1 9.9000[' - 1 4~0633E3 4.8237EO 8.0000E2 g.OOOOE' 1 9.9900P-l I,. C9 16.';'3 4.61672' - 1 8.0000E2 9.0000E-1 9.9990['-1 4.09441:'3 Lt.5~4RE - ., L 8 . 0 0 00;'2 1.0000DO 9.00QOP' - 1 4.03 (\ 0:~3 4.r,110[,'1 8.0000::2 1.0000IlO 9.9000;--1 4.3375i'3 (>.4936I1 - 1 O.OOOOE2 1.0000£0 9.9900D 1 If . 3 5 0 3 :.: 3 6.700:\[-3 8.0000E2 1.0000['0 9.9090r - 1 4.37131:3 C . 7 211L'- 5 TA - Inlet Temperature of ETA - Efficiency INT - Burner Intensity Parameter PHI - Equivalence Ratio 18 - Combustion Temperature or Table VII - 5 image: ------- THEORETICAL BURNER ANALYSIS Effect of Equivalence Ratio and Efficiency On Temperature and Intensity Parameter Air Temp. = l2000r TA PHI ETA TB INT 1.200023 1.0000E - 1 9.00002:' - 1.f,OOlr3 1..J.G?,t~:~~ - 1 - 1.2000£3 1 . () 0 0 0;: - 1 9 . 9 0 0 0 I,' - 1 l.E3:J9F.'3 8.2::9L' - 3 1.20007':3 1.0000[' - 1 9.9900L' - 1 1. 61~39,""3 R . L~ 0 C 3 j' - L! 1. ~D002'3 1.0000E'"":1 0.9990E-1 1 . 6 II 4- 3:73 8.4~4::E - S 1.2000E3 2.0000E - 1 9.00001:.' - 1 1.9735E3 7.8S85L' - 1 ... 1.2000E3 2.GOODE - 1 '3.9000[' - 1 2.C495F.'3 1.07G7~ - 1 1.2000£3 2.0000E - 1 9.9900£-1 2.057L.:3 1.1031;,' - :;: 1.2000£3 2.00001' - 1 '3.9990L' - 1 2.05791'3 1 . 1 (J 6 3~: - 3 1.2 000E'3 3.0000I-; - 1 g.OOOD£' - 1 2.3231E3 4.0466['0 1. 20001'3 3.0000E - 1 9.9000L' - 1 2.4328;J'3 5.6029:: - 1 1. 2 00 01:.'3 3.0000E - 1 9.9900£-1 2.4437E3 5.7781[;'-2 1.2000£3 3.00 O,OE,' - 1 9.9990[' - 1 2.441182:'3 5.7958[' - 3 1.2000E3 4.0000E - 1 9.0000F - 1 2.6521["3 1.2627£1 1.2000E3 4.0000E - 1 9.9000g-1 2.7931E3 1.7176EO 1.2000E3 4.0000E - 1 9.99002.' - 1 2. 8071E3 1.7674£ - 1 1.2000£3 4.0000L' - 1 9.9990E - 1 2.808523 1. 7725£-2 1.2000E3 5.0000£ - 1 9.0000E-1 2.9627£'3 2.8295E1' 1.2000E3 5.0000E - 1 9.9000E-1 3.1331E3 3.7092£'0 1.20001:.'3 5.0000E - 1 9.9900E-1 3.1501E3 3.80123'-1 1. 2000E3 '5.0000E-1 9.9990L'-1 3.1518E3 3.8104£'-2 1. 2000£3 6.0000E - 1 9.0000['-1 3.2567£3 4.9972£1 1.2000E3 6.0000E-1 9.9000E 1 3.4552.:'3 6.2081EO 1. 2000E3 6.0000£-1 - 3.4750L'3 6.3242E-1 9.9900::' 1 1. 2000E3 6.0000E 1 9.99901'-1 3.4770E3 6.3358E-2 1.2000E3 7.0000E-1 9.0000E-1 3.5358E3 7.3095E1 1.2000E3 7.0000£ 1 9.9000E'-1 3.7610E3 8.4038EO 1.2000E3 7.0000E - 1 9.9900£-1 3.78351-,'3 8.4847E-1 1.2000E3 7.0000E-1 9.9990£-1 3.7858£3 8.4925E-2 1.2000E3 8.0000E - 1 9.0000E-1 3.8013£'3 9.0145E1 1.2000E3 8.0000E-1 9.9000E-1 4.0523E3 9.1346EO 1.2000E3 8.0000E 1 9.9900E-1 4.07741:'3 9.0758E 1 1. 2000E3 8.0000E-1 9.9990E-1 4.0.79983 9.0691£-2 1.2000E3 9.0000E - 1 9.0000E-1 4.0544E3 9.1763E1 1. 2 000E3 9.0000E-1 9.9000E-1 4.3302£3 7.0746EO 1.2000E3 9.0000E-1 9.9900E-1 4.3579£3 6.7302E-1 1. 200,OE3 9.0000E-1 9.9990£-1 4.3606£3 6.6943E-2 1.2000E3 1.0000EO 9.0000£-1 4.2959E3 6.79541'1 1.2000E3 1.0000EO 9.9000E-1 4.596123 9.0065E-1 1.2000£'3 1.0000EO 9.9900E-1 4.6262E3 9.2436E 3 1. 200 OE 3 1.0000EO 9.9990E -i 4.6292F.3 9.2675E-5 TA - Inlet Temperature of PHI - Equivalence Ratio ETA - Efficiency TB - Combustion Temperature of INT - Burner Intensity Parameter Table VII - 6 image: ------- THEORETICAL BURNER ANALYSIS Effect of Equivalence Ratio and Efficiency On Temperature and Intensity Parameter Air Temp. :: 1600° F TA PHI ETA TB IKT 1. f,0'JO~3 1.0000F - 1 9.001,0."-1 1. :-:7 ',' 11;'3 '.) .1:-)[ l,"" - 1 1. :000.""3 1 . 0 0 0 0 E' - 1 9.90CO~: - 1 ~.017'.:.r3 1 . ,; 1 ~ c '" - 1 1.COOOi'3 1.0000:' - 1 C:.Cjr':00T' - 1 ~.I".:?jIJI'3 1.0~71.; - , 1.(i()(10I:3 1.0000.::7 - 1 9.9?'?O.:' - 1 ~.0214~~-3 1.0::83,~ - 3 1.C:OOOF3 2.0000R - 1 9.00oa: - 1 2.33ILl:F:2 4.P200:~,; 1 . E () 0 OL' 3 2.0000I~ - 1 ~.~JCOE - 1 2.1t~7:'r3 5.11 16 71:' - 1 1. f. ':::0 0T'3 2.0000F - 1 (1.99001" - 1 :>. L1145:'3 5.S2LiL'--:;:. 1.GOOOL'3 2.0000L" - 1 S . ?:) ~J 0 I; - 1 :.415L3 5.<.}314(",:-' - .., 1.60002.'3 3.0000r - 1 'J.OCCO:' - 1 2. Gf.:.J4;':'; 1.S3£:2T'1 1.COOO.::3 3.0000T - 1 9.9(\00£ - 1 2.7735:'3 1 . 8 (! 7 (> ~ 0 1.COOO:.'3 3.0000I: - 1 9. :)9(:C':::'-1 ~.7840r:J 1.:):1S :,[ 1 1. G 80 0:'3 3 . 0 ° 00 I: - 1 C;. J'J':' 0,':' - 1 :.785r;T,';! 1.~'3:':4:' - 2 1.£)000173 4.0000i: - 1 ~. or,oct:' - 1 :~ . 9 n 3 '.,,-' 3 3.5174; 1 1.£r:OO,.'3 4.0000r - 1 9.900CE - 1 3.1187;'3 11.3171::0 l.GOOO1:3 4.0000F - 1 ':'!.:J :Jon T,' - 1 3.1322:.'3 4.400LJE-l l.GOOO£3 1t.0000D - 1 9.99:)0[' - 1 3.133ff3 ll.40~:7[-:: 1.60002.'3 5.0000E - 1 9.0000'::: - 1 3.2rO'.;!:'3 6.3775E1 1.600023 S.OOOOE - 1 9. 900cr - 1 3. LIlf52r3 7.6323.::'0 1. GO 00 173 ,5.0000r: - 1 9.990CiE - 1 3.4Gl€i,'3 7.7SfGE-1 1.('000T.'3 5.0000[' - 1 9.9990J7-1 3.4632.:-'3 7.76'::OE 2 1. 600 0E'3 6.0000£ - 1 9.0000P-1 3 . 5 C 3 LI i:' 3 9.684721 1.600023 [,.OOOOE - 1 9.90r)O~ - 1 3.755123 :1 .1100r! 1. 6000E3 6.0000r. - 1 9 . 9 9 0 0 Z" - 1 3.7742L'3 1.1225£0 1.600023 6.0000'::: - 1 9.99902..'-1 3.7761 E3 1.12370 - 1 1.6000E3 7.00002 - 1 9.00001"-1 3.8319173 1.2669:'""2 1.6000F.3 7,00002 - 1 9.90002-1 4.0499T'3 1.3SSJF.1 1.6000E3 7.0000T.' - 1 9.9')002-1 4.0717~~ 1.3G02fO 1.6000E3 7.0000E - 1 9.9q~OF 1 1t.07391"3 1.~6P6L' 1 1. 600 OE 3 8.0000£' - 1 9.0000F - 1 4.0077L'3 1. 43!.iOT'2 1.6anOE3 8.0QOOE - 1 9.9000[; - 1 4.3311E3 1. 36lJ.1L'1 1. 6000E3 £3.0000E - 1 9.9900J:' - 1 4.3555£'3 1.3476EO 1.6000E3 O.OOOOJ.' - 1 9.9990[.'-1 4.3579T3 1. 3l1592-1 1.6000E3 9.0000E - 1 9.0000E - 1 4.33161:'3 1. 36G9£'2 1. 6 00 O}: 3 9.0000£' - 1 ~ . :) 0 0 ot' - 1 4.5998'::'3 9.9520['0 1.6000E3 9.0000r. - 1 9.9900;::"-1 4.e:67],:,3 9.4195['-1 1.6000E3 9.0000E - 1 9.99901' - 1 4.62~4},'3 9.36452 - 2 1.6000E'3 1.0000£'0 9.0000i:' - 1 11.5(iItR1'3 9.6(\3121 1.6000E3 1.0000L'0 9.9000F - 1 4.057373 1.2008EO 1. 600 OE3 1.0000EO 9.990 OZ:'-l It. 880['3 1.2350£ :: 1. 6000E3 1.0000EO 9.9990:: 1 4.8£397['3 1. 23762 - 4 TA - ETA - INT - Air Inlet Temperature of Efficiency Burner Intensity Parameter PHI - Equivalence Ratio TB - Combustion Temperature of Table VII - 7 image: ------- TA :2.0000E3 2.0000E3 2.0000E3 2.0000E3 2.0000E3 2.0000E3 2.0000E3 2.0000E3 2.0000E3 2.0000E3 2.0000E3 2.000CE3 2.0000E3 2.0000E3 2.0000E3 2.0000E3 2.00001'3 2.0000E3 2.0000E3 :2 . 000 OE 3 2.0000E3 2.0000E3 2.0000E3 2.0000E3 2.0000E3 2.0000£'3 2.0000E3 2.0000E3 2.0000E3 2.0000E3 2.0000E3 2.0000E3 :2.0000E3 :2.0000L'3 2.0000E3 :2.0000E3 2.0000E3 2.0000E3 2.00001:.'3 2.0000E3 THEORETICAL BURNER ANALYSIS Effect of Equivalence Ratio and Efficiency On Temperature and Intensity Parameter Air Temp. = 20000r PHI 1.0000E'-1 1.0000E-1 1.0000E-1 1. OOOOE~l 2.0000E-1 2.0000c;-1 2.00001:;-1 2.0000E-1 3.0000E-1 3.0000E-1 3.0000E-1 3.0000£'-1 4.0000E-1 '4.0000E-1 4.0000£'-1 4.0000E-1 5.0000£'-1 5.0000E-1 5.0000E-1 '5.0000F-1 6.0000E-1 6.0000r-1 6.0000r-1 6.00001'-1 7.0000E-1 7.00001'-1 7.0000.7-1 7.0000E-l 8.0000E-1 8.0000r-l 8.0000E-l 8.0000E-l 9.0000£'-1 9.000017-1 9.0000E-l 9.0000E-1 1.0000EO 1. OOOOEO 1.00001'0 1.0000EO ETA 9.0000£'-1 9.9000E-l 9.9900E-l 9.9990E-1 9.000QE-1 9.9000F-l 9.9900r-1 9.9990E-1 9.0000E-1 9.9000E-1 9.9900P-1 9.9990E-1 9.0000'::'-1 9.,9000£-1 9.9900P,-1 9.9990E-1 9.0000r-1 9.90COL' 1 9.9900E-1 9.9990P-1 9.0000E-l 9.90COE-1 9.990uE'-1 9.9990E-1 9.0000r-l 9.9000E-1 9.9'3001F1 9.9990E-l 9.0000E-1 9.9000[-1 9.9900;;-1 9.9990E-l 9.0000E-1 9.9000E 1 9.9900D-1 9.99901'-1 9.0000E-1 9.9000E 1 9.9900E-1 9.9990E-1 TB 2.3~99E'3 2.3959/,'3 2.39~)5E'3 2.39913:':3 2.6978L'3 2 . 76 7 2:: 3 2.7741!:'3 2.7748':-:'3 3.01G3::3 3.1169£'3 ,3.1270E'3 3.12nOT'3 3.3174I:3 3 . 4 4 7 5 .:..' 3 3.4604£3 3.4r,17E3 3.6027L:3 3.76082:3 3~77C6;::3 3.7782£:3 3.8738~'3 4.0S87,773 LI.0772E3 4.079H'3 4.1318:-:3 4 . 3 II 2 F. D 3 4.3637E3 4.3658E3 4.3777D3 '+.6137E3 4.6374r3 4.6398L'3 4. r,124:"3 ll.8727173 4.8'H19P3 4.9015;;'3 4.8369E'3 5.1241E3 5.1531£3 5.1560E3 INT 6.01f.6J,'O 6.2951i.' 1 f.3251E-2 6.3282Z-3 1. 92:9E1 2.1415EO 2.1645E-1 2. if, f) 8'~- 2 4.4326E1 5.0493I:~ 5.1129£ 1 5.1192E-2 8.13'j7El 0.25<::5EO ~J.371!iE 1 9.3827Z-: 1. 2Ei 16E2 1.4080E1 1 . ll21 7 EO 1.4231E 1 1.7059£2 1. C3'~7E1 1.8446[:'0 1.0455.:'-1 2.0431E2 2.0€30E1 2~OS9SEO 2.0590;':-1 2.1f.04E2 1.9486;"1 1.n59fO 1.9125[.'-1 1. ~4 B1E2 1.35171:.'1 1. 273820 1.2659E-1 1.3093E2 1.5013EO 1.60971'-2 1.6125[.'-4 TA - Air Inlet Temperature or ETA - Efficiency INT - Burner Intensity Parameter PHI - Equivalence Ratio TB - Combustion Temperature or Table VII - 8 image: ------- [1] [2] [3J [4J [5 ] [6 J [7J [8J [9J VSTABILITY[O]V V STABILITY;I '1'IL+460+ 0 400 800 1200 1600 2000 A/lSR+OpO 1+1 '1'I+'1'IL[I] BURN ANSR+ANSR.(.ANS) , , . I+IU +(I1.pTIL)/4 v VDURN[U] V V BURN;I;.! ANS+ 12 5 pO +(PRIN'1'=O)/SXIP , [1J [2J [3J [4J [SJ [ 6) [7] [8] [9] (10) [11 ) [12) [13) [14) [15) [16) [17) (18) (19) (20) (21) (22) V '1'1 - '; (TI-460);' of' ETA '1'11 PHI SXIP:PHA+0.1x\10 .7+1 . .7UP:PH+PHA[.7) COUN'1'+O E+0.3+0.05x\14 I'1''1':COU/l'1'+COUNT+1 CAL INTM+r/IN'1' I+INT\I/l'1'N +(1=1) /OUT +(COUN'1'=3)/OU'1' E+E[I-1)+(O.1*COUN'1'+1)x\10 +1'1''1' OU'1':+(PR1N'1'-O)/S'1'OR 12 3 12 4 12 1 12 6 DF'1' PH.E[1].('1'B[I)-460).1NTr1J S'l'OR:ANS[J;)+«'1'I-460).PH.E(1).('1'E[!)-460).1NT[1)x1-1 .1+.7+1 +(.11.10 )/JUP INT Table VII-9 image: ------- THEORETICAL BUJafER ANALYSIS Stability Limits TI = 0 of PIlI E7'A ,,,..., I;~"'T .Li.. 0.100 0.9480 494.1 O.OOOO'JO 0.200 0.9390 940.2 0.000el0 0.300 0.9250 1338.3 0.003139 0.400 a.noo 1695.4 0.08Q9S!:i 0.500 0.8';) E'O 2019. r, 0.70010'J 0.600 0.8790 2306.2 2.936463 0.700 0.8500 2555.6 8.03(!9(;5 0.800 0.32')0 274~1.7 1(;.408577 0.900 0.G000 ?90~),R 27.0838(,5 1.000 0.7600 3004.9 38.E6CJ8:; PI = 400 of PilI E':'A PI: IlIT 0.100 0.8900 840.4 0.000003 0.200 0.8980 1255.5 0.001949 0.300 0.8900 1627.6 6.073046 0.400 0.8770 1960.5 0.7156:31 0.500 0.8600 2254.6 3.347339 0.600 0.8450 2523.7 9.n.50050 0.700 0.8200 2740.1 21.800524 0.800 0.7990 2939.1 38.516837 0.900 o.nGO 3074.3 57.941062 1. 000 0.7280 3162.3 77.320775 TI = 800 op PHI ETA ",... IliT . L'; ,, 0.100 0.7900 1170.8 0.001762 0.200 0.83130 1559.3 0.074312 0.300 0.8400 1904.2 0.805498 0.400 0.8300 2209.8 4.038581 0.500 0.8200 2490.0 12.647126 0.600 0.8000 2724.2 29.034448 0.700 0.7000 2931.6 53.657546 0.800 0.7550 3099.8 84.558451 0.900 0.7200 3210.6 118.1G0823 1.000 0.6870 3299.2 150.905892 TI - Air Inlet Te8peHture of PHI - Equi.alence Ratio ETA - Bumer Efficiency TB - Co8buad.on T8IIPerature OF lIT - Oombuation Intenaity Parameter ..... - No Critical Conditions Aria. Table VII - 10 image: ------- THEORETICAL BURNER ANALYSIS Stability Limits 7:I = 1200 of PliI D7'A PI': I,'m l~ J. 0.100 O.5~00 14C2.3 0.126897 0.200 0.7480 1044.3 1.11817'J 0.300 0.7700 21f4.'J 5.476:?56 0.400 0.7700 2447.3 17.2333L~6 0.500 0.7I:'OQ 2695.13 40.177244 0.60C 0.7480 ~919.4 75.838458 (). 7 00 0.72130 3102.'J 1 ~ ~ . C I~ 5197 D.800 ().7000 3240.9 176.5513030 0.900 0.6700 3347.? 232.570(,LI9 1.000 0.63'30 3425.2 2G6.23913~; 'j"I = 1C80 oF' j) i!1' ETA TI" . T~1m ....l. ~ 0.100 ***"* ".",,* ..."" 0.200 0.51300 2074.2 9.724018 0.300 0.5570 239LI. 4 27.133C38 O. 4,00 0.6870 266:.3 60.721746 0.500 0.606C 21387.9 113.124843 0.600 O.57G0 3083.G 183.183256 0.700 0.G590 3245.6 26E.4063B3 0.800 0.6360 3372.0 356.503031 0.900 0.6('90 3405.3 447.141329 1. 000 0.5800 3530.4 533.26t36()1 TI = 2000 OF ,7'HI ETA m':'"' INT .i.J 0.100 ".."" *"*"* It*".. 0.200 "".." ***". .it"". 0.300 0.4060 2458.5 113.805829 0.400 0.54CO 2801.9 1'30.508831 0.500 0.5700 3019.4 295.597717 0.600 0.5700 3192.6 4 2 2 . 1 L~ 2 911 0.700 0.5650 33u5.7 562.614364 0.800 0.5450 345G.8 708.456281 0.900 0.5270 3540.1 851. 9~.69.71 1. 000 0.5000 3587.8 988.1011951 TI - Ail' Inlet T8111p8l'atU1"8 of PHX .. EQuiv.18nol ~tio ETA.. JUfftU J:ft1ailftoy TI .. ConIbU8don T..,.ratUN .r 1'" .. Combut1on Int.n.1ty '.r..tll' ..... .. No CrIt10al ConditIon. ArL.. Table VII ....1. image: ------- [1) [2) [3) [4] [5) [6) [7) [8) [9) [10) [11) v. VIllTPLOT[[j] v V INTPLOT 170+1 PINT+OpO PE+OpO PIIN+0.1)( \10 E+ 0.01 0.025 ITT:PH+PHN[NO) CAL PINT+PINT ,IlIT PE+PE,E NO+NO+1 +(NO~10)/ITT ,0.05)(\20 Table VII - 12 image: ------- THEOJETICAL BlmfER AMALYSIS co~1n U!; T I r.t! H:TEUS lTY PJlPI'.tTTH' H~T(TJ, r, PH) TI = 200~ F E. ~~ 0.1 0.2 0.3 a.1I 0 r: o.G 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 .J 0.011 921.08 ~22.'(, ?~3.7 921J.79 n~. 74 92(.5( ~;:'7.2( 9~7.83 o21?29 ?2C.(~ 0.025 i "1~.92 '2f.5~ '3:;.7~ 1I~2.53 l:611.n9 47(.f5 48E.3S 119~.:=:3 ~1().2? "5?:),.(5 t 0.05 r 212."5 230.(:3 2'9.1;.1 2(j7.9l 2~(..7( 30~.66 321~.G~ 3l:JoCE 3f2.3b. 380.83 0.10 . 112.37 13" 1!;8.on 18lJ.~8 211.C8 241.33 272.4C <,...; l~ r:"O 337.8 371.92 . ...J -" .. ~_. ~ 0.15 I; 78."23 102.72 131.25 1IJ3.92 200.(./1 2111 .?7 :,85.(9 333.()( 383.34 1I3f.13 0.20 I 61.1101 67.61;( 120."3 1~9.92 20(.19 25:'.11 310.4( 3C3.14 1152.87 52(.91 0.25 50.978 78.92" 115.CS H:.32 21f!.r4 20lJ.71 3(0.11 l!li3.33 533.66 r2~). 75 0.30 . 113.809 73.227 IH.13 H7.50 2311.1~ 3i3.f9 1:0 ~ .11 2 5C7.17 517.51 734.1~ . 0.35 . 38.11511 t;9.1 113.73 173.95 250.53 3LJ3.17 "5" .119 5(~.31 (97.11 830.28 0."0 I. 311.192 65.783 113.7!: 180.25 266.15 370. 7E 1I~1.P,3 624.7:- 7(.5.53 908. E5 . 0."5 30.616 f.2.P.211 1l3.': 18~.(' 279.6 3)lJ.27 526.15 ((8.82 21(..45 961.71 0.50 t 27. "e 59.92' 1l2.83 18).21 2P.9.5~ IIll.6l1 550.4( (97.4 f44.59 932.46 0.55 . 2".62" 5".8f.(; 111."~ 19r..3) 2911.89 1121.01 5F2.12 7j)7~14 84~.1)5 9E7.C7 0.60 I 21.938 ~).lIn 107.~1 1eC.1I7 294.42 420.75 ::5Q.02 (95.71 818.72 911:.33 0.65 19.3"3 "!'.C2 lCJ.ll H~.e!) 287.17 II09.~2 539.71 (.(-1.:.8 lt2."P ?OC.7f! 32~.7r ')?2."2 2(;'>.71 0.90 (;.01192 19.212 "1I.2~J R1.122 12(..1f IT':.l'P 2"t.9t: 2}( .1!7 J-:'5.~2 130.~J 0.95 ~ 3.1005 10.201 23.P3 "3.7rl ~7.152 fl9.122 103.r2 10].('" 23.023 Y .44~ 1.00 0 I) j t) c c r, " " r TI - AIR DIIEf TEIIPEJtA'n8 8r lIlT - c(.lIn.6TI~ IftEIISITY PAlWE1"D PH - EQmVAlDCE 1tATIG- E - COIIIUSTICII EmCIDlC'f Table VII - 13 image: ------- VIII. CORRELATION OF THE EXPERIMENTAL DATA NITH A THEORETICAL HODEL The experimental data obtained in this program would be of value by itself without additional theoretical analysis, since it shows the remarkably low emissions which can be obtained by proper operation of the Paxve burner. The value of this data, however is irnrneasureably increased by our ability to interpret it in the light of the theoretical burner analysis presented in Secion VII of this report. We have been able to use this. analytical background as the basis for data correlations. Nith those correlations, we can predict performance of burners having widely different sj,zes and operating conditions. Such cC?rre1ations and the theoretical understanding of burner operation are of particular value when new operating conditions are of interest. The Paxve burner tested here had a maximum air flow rate of 180 Ibs/hr. The highest flow rate normally tested was approximately 140 Ibs/hr. At the nominal operating condition for the burner (f/a = 0.038) this yields ap~roximately 100,000 BTU/hr of heat release. The volume of the burner was on the order of . 0.03 ft3 and hence the nominal heat release rate was approximately 3 x 106 BTU/hr. ft3. The main thrust of the EPA program, of which this research work was a part, deals with burners of considerably' larger heat release; on the order of 2,500,000 BTU/hr. The first task of data correlation, therefore is to be able to predict the influence of increasing the scale of the burner by at least a factor of 25. There is also a great deal of interest at the present time in low emission burners for application to gas turbine engines. Gas turbine burners operate at higher inlet pressures and temperatures than the burner under test here. It is therefore desirable to have a means for designing a burner which will have low emissions at elevated pressures and temperatures and to be able to predict the influence of these parameters as well as scale si~e on both burner stability and emission characteristics. In order to accomplish the goals outlined above, several types of experimental data correlations were investigated. The stability data was correlated with the theoretical prediction of the burner theory outlined in Section VII. The corr~lation is presented herein. The carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions from the burner were correlated in terms of the efficiency predictions of the burner theory outlined in Section VII above. Correlation of the oxides of nitrogen data is discussed herein. The combustion temperatures used in that correlation are those predicted by the combustion theory. A. Correlation of the E~erimental Stability Data Figure 20 of Section VI, shows the experimental blowout data from the Paxve burner plotted against air flow; this data can be compared directly with the pre~ictions of the burner theory image: ------- discussed in Section VII. In order to accomplish such a comparison, a computer program, PREDICT, was written which examines all of the lean burning experimental runs in terms burner theory outlined previously. . of the 1. Program PREDICT Program PREDICT is shown in Table 1. An examination of this program will be helpful in discussing the experimental data correlations which are to follow. Because of the limitations of the analysis, only equivalence ratios of 1 or less were considered. For each of the lean runs, a value of the combustion intensity parameter, INTD, at which the burner was tested was computed. Using the burner air inlet temperature and equivalance ratio, a subroutine, Program LIMIT was called. Program LIMIT, shown in Table 2, finds the limiting value of the intensity parameter INTL corresponding to the stability limit of the burner. Program LIMIT in turn called CAL, discussed previously, which finds values of combustion temperature and combustion intensity parameter as a function of the burner efficie~cy. Program LIMIT performs essentially the same calculation as that performed by Program BURN described previously. Program LIl1IT returns values of the limiting intensity parameter, INTL and the efficiency and burner temperature which exist at the blowout limit, EL and TBL. Program PREDICT now. 'compares the intensity parameter at which the burner was operating with the value of the intensity parameter at the stability limit. A stability prediction parameter is. formed given by INTR = INTD INTL INTR greater than 1.0 implies that the burner will not stay lit. The air flow rate and hence INTD exceeds the limiting value for stable operation. INTR less than or equal to 1.0 implies .that stable burner operation should occur. We must now compute the operating efficiency and burner temperature. To accomplish this Program PREDICT uses, EL, INTL, and INTD to make an estimate of the operating efficiency of the burner. It then calls Program CAt and uses this estimated efficiency to compute new values for burner intensity parameter and operating temperature. The new value of intensity parameter, INT, is compared .with INTD and the estimate of efficiency revised. The process is iterated until the value of INT agrees to within 1% with INTD. The efficiency EFF and operating temperature TP of the burner are now stored for this run and the next set of operating data is examined. The process is repeated until all of the data has been exhausted. type s . The results of Program PREDICT are seen to be of several First, we obtain a value of INTR for every lean run, and VIII-2 image: ------- 1- hence a prediction of whether or not the burn~r will be stable. Secondly, for those conditions where the burner will be stable, we obtain values of EFF and TP: the predicted effic~ency and operating temperature of the burner. Finally, for all runs including both stable and unstable runs, we obtain values of the efficiency and combustion temperature at the stability limit. The use of Program PREDICT for comparison of burner stability limits with theory requires some ingenuity as to how one should present the data. In this regard it was decided that a plot of the experimental observations of burner operating condition versus INTR would be of some interest. A variable named BURN was devised to assist in making this comparison. For those runs in which the burner was considered to be operating normally, a value of 2 was assigned to BURN. For those runs for which the burner was definitely going out in a reasonable period of time (less than five minutes), a value of 0 was assigned to BURN. Those runs for which the burner was operating in an erratic fashion, or for which the burner eventually went out . after a long period of time, were assigned a value of BURN equal to 1. Figure 1 shows a plot of BURN versus INTR. The upper line represents conditions for which the burner was stable. The middle line represents stability limit operation. The bottom line represents test runs for which the burner was going out. Clearly the assignment of a value to BURN is a matter of judgment, and hence it is not surprising that there is some scatter in the data. Figure 1 shows a surprisingly good correlation for the predictions from the values of INTR and the BURN = 0 and BURN = 2 lines. Virtually all of the BURN = 2 values lie below INTR - 1.0. Of the runs for which BURN = 2, only 12 of these have values on INTR greater than 1. The highest is run No. 223 for which INTR = 1.96. Similarly, of the runs for which BURN = 0 was assigned, only one run, No. 391 had a value of INTR below 1.0. For run No. 391, INTR = 0.84. The runs for which BURN = 1 was assigned do not show quite such good correlation. Here there are lean limit runs for which It~R = 0.25 and other lean limit runs for which INTR = 2.5. Most of these lean limit discrepancies appear to be a result of the difficulty associated with obtaining accurate fuel/air ratio data. While the volumetric gas analysis equipment is quite accurate for normal burning runs, it becomes less valuable near a blowout condition. When the burner is near blowout, the efficiency of the burner may drop to as low as 90%. Under these conditions, the fuel/air ratios based on the volumetric data should be in error by about 10%. While this may seem like a small error, a change of burner temperature of 200°F has a pronounced effect on the computed value of INTR. 2. Stability Tests From Program PREDICT The stability predictions obtained from VIII-3 image: ------- Program PREDICT are tabulated in Tah1es 3 through 18. The first column in each of these tables shows the run number. Next we see volume of the burner under test, then the inlet temperature and the air flow rate. In Column 5, the equivalence ratio at which the burner was operated is shown. This is based on the nominal fuel/air ratio discussed previously. Column 6 shows the burner intensity parameter based on the flow rate and volume of the burner. Column 7 shows the limiting value of intensity parameter at lean blowout as, computed from the equivalence ratio and air inlet temperature. From these the stability parameter INTR in Column 8 is computed. Column 9, labeled BURN, shows the estimate of burner stability provided by the burner operator or the data in the burner notebook. As explained above, 2 represents stable operation of the burner, 1 represents lean limit operation and 0 corresponds to operating conditions for which the burner will go out. Examination of Table 3 through 18 provides additional into the validity of the burner stahility theory. We see many instances where it was difficult to judge how close to the stability limit, the value of INTR is in fact close insight that in we we re to 1. Another interesting observation from the Table deals with those values for which the burner was at or near lean limit operation while the value of INTR is low. Here, the computer program predicts that the burner will have some considerable margin of stable operation, while in fact it was near or at its blowout limit. These were usually runs at low air flow rates in test Stand 2. This burner is more subject to heat loss than the other burners tested., The influence of heat loss on the stability of the burner can be significant, par~icu1arly at low air flow rates. Since the burner stability analysis program did not take this heat loss into account, it is not surprising that there are some differences between the prediction and the experiment at the low flow rates. 3. Correlation of Stability Data with Theoretical Stability Curves In addition to the information obtained from Program PREDICT, the stability limit data previously obtained from Programs STABILITY and BURN can be used to correlate burner blowout data. Figures 20, 21, 22, 24 and ,25 in section VI show blowout data for the paxve Burner. Superimposed on these figures are theoretical stability limit curves based on the analyses of Section VII. It is clear that the theoretical limit curves agree well with the experimental data. The propane curves are more complete than the kerosene curves because it was easier to run the propane tests. Figure VI 20 is for propane at ambient temperature in a 33 cu. in. burner. This figure shows that all of the blowout points (squares) lie to the left of the theoretical limit line, while all but two of the stable burning points (circles) lie to the right of the line. The lean limit points showing marginal stability (triangles) are scattered around the theoretical limit VIII-4 image: ------- line. Another way of showing the same information is to plot the data on a curve of equivalence ratio versus burner intensity parameter. Figure 2 shows such a plot for the ambient temperature data. Superimposed on the data is the theoretical limit line for 75°F inlet temperature; we again see that the data and the theory are in substantial agreement. 4. Final Comments on Burner Stability Correlation The experimental stability data from the Paxve burner agrees quite well with the predictions obtained from the' burner theory, particularly at high flow rates. There are several matters which bear further investigation. a. The stability of the burner is particularly sensitive to extraneous heat loss. Incorporation of a heat loss term in the stability analysis should improve the correlation between the experimental and theoretical predictions, particularly at low flow rates. The interpretation of such a burner heat loss parameter in terms of burner construction considerations would be of great value in the improvement of burner design. b. The burner stability 'prediction program assumed that the fuel entering the burner was at ambient temperature. A correction was made for the heat input necessary to raise the fuel to the air inlet temperature. During many of the runs, particularly those with kerosene, the fuel was at an elevated temperature. This seems to increase the burner stability. The burner stability prediction program could be readily modified to take into account the fuel inlet temperature. c. The burner analysis was limited to lean operation. This was primarily a result of the limited funding available for this effort and a corresponding limited interest in this area of burner operation for automotive application. Some industrial processes utilize staged combustion with rich mixtures in the first stage. An extension of the present work to investigate rich operation may reveal procedures that would assist in reducing the level of pollutants emitted from these sources. d. The stability of the burner as well as its emission characteristics are influenced by the uniformity of the fuel/air distribution within the burner. Burners which have highly homogenous fuel/air mixtures at the. inlet are generally somewhat less stable than burners which have non-uniform fuel/air distribu- tions. This is due to the fact that the flame can stabilize in a locally rich portion of the flow and then spread through the rest of the stream. ~.: .",1", Non-uniform fuel/air distribution is also a factor ~n burner emissions. The problems of hydrocarbon emissions from the top of the vapor generator stack, which caused so much trouble during VIII-S image: ------- the course of this program, was finally traced to a badly distorted fuel/air profile in the air/fuel mixture ahead of the burner inlet. Once this non-uniform fuel/air condition -had been corrected, the hydrocarbon emission problem was immediately cleared up. Unfortunately it is not possible at this time to go back and establish a uniformity of the fuel/air mixture during the early stability tests. If the indicated improvements in the burner theory were made, it seems clear that the theoretical analysis will be more than adequate to serve as a basic tool in burner design and development. The burner stability theory predicts the influence not only of flow rate and burner volume, but a180 air inlet temperature and pressure. Verification of the validity of this analysis at high inlet pressure and temperature is a task of great importance. That work was beyond the scope of this program. B. Correlation of the Oxides of Nitrogen Data It is clear from an examination of the experimental data that the oxides of nitrogen emissions from the Paxve burner ex- haust are a strong function of fuel/air ratio and not strongly dependent on air flow rate through the burner. An examination of comparable data from cold air and hot air runs shows somewhat higher NOx levels at the elevated inlet temperatures. Although the data scatter makes an exact comparison difficult, it appears that the influence of inlet temperature is what one would expect if the NOx were a function of combustion temperature only. Figure VI-l9 shows all of the NOx data from the burner plotted against burner temperature. Despite' the scatter it is' clear that a correlation between these two variables exist. It seems reasonable to presume that the oxides of nitrogen in the burner exhaust are formed in the burner by a chemical reaction whose rate is given by an Arrhenius type equation ~ (NO)= I< [02] a Vol e-E/RT \'here: NO = Nt of NO formed Vol = burner volume E = activation energy of the over-all reaction Since the NOx concentration in ppm is the ratio of the NOx weight flow to the air weight flow, we might expect that the NOx in parts per million would be given by an equation of the form [NO] = 1<[02]a e-E/RT WA/vol I. . Exa~ination of the data, however,' shows that the predicted inverse dependence of NOx with air flow rate either does not exist, VIII-6 image: ------- or else is dependence be further reciprocal suppressed by the data scatter. The predicted on temperature however, is clearly evident, and characterized by plotting the NOx concentration combustion temperature. can against Figure 3 shows such a plot for all of the data~ Figure 4 shows a similar plot for the small sample of the data in which the fuel type and general operating conditions were relatively fixed. In both cases, we can draw a straight line through the data and obtain an empirical correlation. Paxve has examined several approaches to the correlation of the NOX data obtained during this program. The possibility in involving the air flow, and the oxygen concentration in the result was investigated. We found that a better correlation could be obtained by using the combustion temperature alone than could be obtained by including these other factors. The ambient temperature data appears to be well fitted by an equation of the form NOx = 4.38 X 105 x e-E/RT with E = 36.7 K cal/mole Figure 5 shows this equation superimposed on the summary NOX curve, using the theoretical flame temperatures for 70°F and 400°F inlet temperatures. It is clear that the curves give a reasonable fit to the data, although the 400°F curve is somewhat conservative as compared to the bulk of the high temperature data. . . C. Correlation of the CO Emissions Data The theoretical burner analysis described in Section VII of this report provides a basis for correlating the CO emissions from the burner. The theory yields values for the burner efficiency as a function of the inlet temperature and the burner intensity parameter. If we subs tract the efficiency, from 1.0, we obtain the unreactedness, 6, which should be proportional to the emissions of unburned or partially burned material in the burner exhaust. Program PREDICT gave an evaluation of each lean test point. Tables showing ~1e predicted burner efficiency, the predicted emissions, and the acutal values of the CO, HC, and NOx emissions, are presented in Tables 19 through 31. Examination of the data in those tables show that the CO emissions are generally less than the predicted values. In order to examine this further we have taken some typical sets of CO gm/Kg emissions data and superimposed the predicted emission levels based on .the analysis. Figure 6 shows the CO emissions from the burner for the small burner (33 cu. IN.) on test stand 1 with ambient air and propane. The CO emissions are obviously strongly influenced by the air flow rate. Curves VIII-7 image: ------- through the data for air flow rates of 25 lb/hr, 50 lb/hr, and 100 lb/hr have been drawn on the figure as solid lines. Predictions based on the theoretical burner.analysis are shown on the figure as dotted lines. Two of these theoretical prediction lines are shown, one for 25 lb/hr, the other for 100 lb/hr. Figure 7 shows a similar set of data for later runs in test stand 2 burning kerosene with elevated inlet temperatures. again, the predicted values are substantially higher than the experimentally determined CO emission levels. Once We do not have a simple explanation for the low levels of CO emissions observed. We suspect, however, that this is a consequence of the oversimplification involved in arriving at the predicted values. The theoretical analysis was based on the assumption that the unreactedness (the combustion inefficiency) was represented by vaporized but unburned raw fuel. The predicted heat release was therefore reduced directly with the unreacted- ness. Experimentally, however, the unburned material which is most significant in the combustion chamber under lean operating conditions is not raw fuel, but rather carbon monoxide. In order to correlate the CO data, we therefore assumed that the CO levels would be equal to. the predicted unreactedness. This is clearly inconsistent. If we had refined our analysis to allow for partially reacted material leaving the chamber (the fuel converting into water vapor and carbon monoxide), then the heat release used in the analysis at low efficiency points would have been greater and the predicted emissions would have been less as the blowout limits were approached. A revision of the analysis to account for this partial reaction process would be desirable, but it was not feasible within the financial limitations of the present contract. In any case, it seems clear that the CO emissions to be expected from the Paxve burner will be less than those predicted by the present theory. This gives us a method for obtaining CO emission estimates which will be conservative for burner application studies. Figure 6 also shows the dramatic reduction in CO emissions which occur as the exhaust gases pass through the vapor generator stack. This is undoubtedly a result of the continued oxidation of the CO to C02 which occurs as the gases cool off during their passage through the heat exchanger. The rate of the CO oxidation reaction is still substantial at temperatures over 2000oF. As the gases cool, there is time for the combustion reaction to come closer to completion. There is also time for CO which arises from the high temperature equilibrium dissociation reaction to recombine as the equilibrium shifts during cooling. The theoretical predictions are thus. even more conservative for a burner coupled to a heat exchanger. VIII-8 image: ------- < ... ....., ~~ .... BURNER STABILITY CORRELATION BURlIJIG LIMIT BLOWOUT 2.0 1.0 Q 0.5 ...-. ---- - - . . ..-..-. --.-. . .- o 0.5 BURNER STABILITY PREDICTION PARAMETER 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 .. . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . ... . . . . 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 BURNER STABILITY PREDICTION PARAMETER INTR 3.0 . 3.0 INTR 3.5 3.5 4.0 . 4.0 image: ------- o ca.. H 5 ,6 . ~ > 0.6 S a w .., H Q . < H H H ~ L.O 0.- 0.2 o 0.001 ~: I", "'I]""'_::;-~- - " . I. 1,1, .1" I . . .' I!. 'j' I.' , ) i ".I . . 1 ' . , .' ! J , ~ . I ;, 1 I 1 -"j! ji~ '.H! 11 .~-=-..:... --- ........:~.!,d;.jJi.... - - -,- --~ -- -- ~,-. ,', .. ._.. - . ". -. . " I, ! -- --...... .~- ... " --'-"- ..- ,Ii':!.'.: .." .j ::'! -~ .- -----. I .H --- '--:"1':':'': 't~. INTENSITY PARAMETER ::~~ ;~~. ~:" .. VS " .,:' - -I--..._~. . "I' :rt ~~ ' . ;':~; 1 ~' EQUIVALENCE RATIO : ~,:, :'::IFI" : -;...:..c~ --" .' I -. =--."-. :.::, ....~".::, n+ . . b. - ... ,'PI' ' . . " .., ,. : :_- - -:"" -.- '; ,,~;~ ~I ,,' ;f.1:" ,:, '-, """":: I,' .'" ,.~- ",,;.;:, :' ,. .., ,I '" ~~:, . ~-~: -- I~, ... ,::" ,:-- ':" :,,: ,::.:" ; ~ " , ~,::;,,:::;.'-~~<=~~:~ .-~.~- ;.:.' ~ ;-~-- h~'; ,:,," .,-!; ,.; '. i.. :: I '1 '1' ': :>':;:,': ,'''':,,: ~~ ~~~-~~ --~I:~- .-' -~t~~ :~:-'i:'::; "., " ", -=- =:.::_-= 111-'-'"" -.':' "ill~'::'.: .:.::. '::'. --- rlli/, --. 8 '. . ., , ' . - -. -. --- 1- . 1 ' I: 'j .' -'. ..Ij . . ,i - - ~ H 'r" - - ~,~I .. -.. a-r='-' 1=- " - -. -" "::.: . - t . . - - " I ' -- - ~ ' , ".' -- , ,II' I. ~ --- - J ~ -.--.-- ,. BURNER STABILITY CORRELATION " '.. " . .. -... ---- . .- - - ..,. -~'.. ...- . .- -. -- ---- - . .. - ---- _.~. _u- -. - I I .. " .f --. -- . = n~~~: ::~: '. ::v:: ::::I:~:~- -I. I - 0..' ....- --.- _0 ,. -- -.... -.. "U -- -.. --.-. .-- _0- - : I ~ , -.. ..+- . -..- .._.0- - - ....- .--- -., ... - -.- _::: ::::::~:::t -- .. . .-n .... - -.-- .. 0.- .nO - u. !$ + ii! -I"- Titt~1:; " Iii, ::::;:_:-=t~i :::: :_::h ~ <--On h. nO---' - ... 0-.- h- .. h ,. --. --. .. ::: :-;.-t -. 0.01 0.1 INTENSITY PARAMETER IHTD 1.0 10 image: ------- rot I '" o II rot ~ ,. I o rot I I' ~ I ~ 15 ~ I:! ~ .... t; :> 01: :IE o U ~ i Do .... U ./il coaaUATION Of' QJU~S (:# HITII05EN Dl'TA VITH aECIPaocAL COMIUSTIOH T~eIATu.e . . . . . . . .' . . .. . . . , . .:- . . .. 8. . . ...' .::: 8.-. ~.. .. . 1.- . . ,. . . . .". ..- . .... 8'.. -. .. . 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 OXIDES O~ NITROGEN EMISSIONS FROM THE BvaNE. 1000.00 NDB PPM rlc. VIII;'! rot I a: o ..' II.GO.f+ .. ,. o rot I II . ~ ~ 50; II! ~ 3.1 z o ~ ft B 0.. .. to: 'f;! 3.5 I 2.50t I/TE'~P COR.fLATICN (:# OXIDfS ~ NITP.OGfN DATA , . ICF.ItOS eNf'--+tOT--fI UPHER DATA ~ . 0.1 0.22 . 10 0.116 1.0 2.15 11.611 !fOX COJ8CDf'!Uno" /fOB PP/f ri~. VIII-II image: ------- a..ELATION OF BURNER OXIDES OF NITROGEN DATA 0.10 (X10) CORRELATING PARAMETER 0.22 0.-6 1.00 2.15 NOX/02 4.64 10.00 -.0 2.7 r4 I.G 0 r4 . ... 3.7 - ~ 0 . r4 . ~l ~ . ~ 3.5 (oJ ~ ~, . :;r; c .... ... 3.2 (I) '::> ~ 0 u ~ . < u ~ 3.0 It .... u t! < """'1 .... ... ...... . . (II I 2.5~ I/TEMP . 0.10 I I I , 0.22 0._6 1.00 2.15 (X10) CORRELATING P~P.AMETER I It.fiIt NOX/02 I ]0.00 image: ------- 10" 1.0 - - = ~ ~FFof='~ ~ - :~; -- --- :P n- - -- 1- } 1 - -;:-;-1 : -- u :eEf:'-LLJi"- oj? - -- ,- -- - --r- - -01 H J fU~--f- -. -- COG EMISSIONS DATA FROM THE PAXVE BURNER' -- +-1 : :-1 , !"UEL IPROPANE :: -- --,. -;~f-~~-: AIR TEMP :UNDER 250 F -- tl' -1;- '-I! BURNER VOLUME I 133.0 CU IN -'~ -f j- -i -[-,--;-.-. -- -- t - .-- rl-11'1- i'-r_-, T:-u-- : -- -; ~;. : + -j~w- -P!~ ~ l - Ii t i-" ,,- - "-, ..- - .: t~I-H!ii WiJ 103~~~ -~---~-~ - -. :.-- ,-<~::~_..- <~-=---- :--- ,i I :_' -~ - -- - - --, '-, -- -- ~- -- '?f:? ~~ -_:.- -- -. - n - I 8> -->-~<--~-' " - --~;::_~._:--;- ~ -~--:~- --~n :;: -- I - --ltt.~:l+h- --.0..--- 102 ::_:'i>:I~~ :", ".iIIi:1 ::"1~HHiJ.tOMO I':" -' ';j- :.::, - ,I ;,'T": ,',f'J-,}l:., - "to ;~:iC Ow ~, -:;;, - --, ,,:e'(;~..;;.f '1'. :cF: -- - -- - .- -. - -j _n -- -- -++: --- n- - - - -- -' UDder 40 + --,- ~- - - --: -- -- -i-1- -- -~ n- j 40 - 70 0 -- - - - ..-: - -- , - " " ..;,>- ~, -' illr :i!: g ,: _<'810... -: ,;'~' ':'11,__- -' - P1t;'ti7W-;08t.j ~I ~~I::I' .'111~f: >:-1 o~ "" - i:A~--- - - 1--, J. I I' I , " : . "I -':':, d : 1 !ilfl ! Iii j11'1: - ,: -, .- ~L ,- -u -- , :! I - 1,1 - - u -- -- -- = . = : -- _:: ~ :-: - - -- =~~IIIT or THE GAS r -- I j I 'II. , . " ,- lhtffFffl1mmnTffiTIII i ' ) II ! - -- - - - .- -- ~".-:' I'" .,., - - r: n -- - -- o .,,, .8 10 o. 0.02 0.0" 0.0& 0.08 9.10 0.12 0.1" 0.16 MOMMAL FUEL AIR RATIO FAt Fia. VIII-I image: ------- 10 tIC .¥ ..... ~ . i!:} 1-4 >< o. i :z: ~ 1.0 PAXVE BURNER CARBON MONOXIDE DATA KEROSENE DATA VOLUME 52.3 cu in AIR TEMP OVER 250 of 100 AIR FLOW f/Hr. Under 40 40 - 70 70 -120 120 -150 ;-: Over 150 Flag indicates runs from No. 282 ON RUNS WITH !f0 CO DETECTED WERE PLOTTED AS 5 PPM WHICH IS THE RESOLtrrIOM LIMIT OF THE GAS CHROMATOGRAPH 0.1 0.02 0.03 o.o~ 0.05 0.06 NOMINAL FUEL AIR RATIO FAN + o ~ o o 1- 0.07 Fig. VIII-7. image: ------- PROGRAM 1)RI:DICT (1] (2] (3) (~) (5 ] (6] (7] (8) [9) (10) (11 ] (12) (13] (n) [15) (16) (17 ) (18) (19) (20) (21 ) (22) (23) . V V PREDICT;I;PH;TI;INTD;LIT;CA;CF;C~;TE~T NL+ppnIG 1+1 - INTD1+INTL+INTR+TBL1+EL+EFP+TP+(pPHIC)pO GO:PH+PHIG[I] TI+TAG(I] WAD+flAG[I] INTD1(I)+INTD+WADxCONST[I] LIMIT INTR[I)+INTD+INT INTL[I]+1NT . TBL1 [I]+T8 EL[1]+E LIT+INTDsINT +(LIT-O)/OUT !RN: E+1- (l-E) x( INTDtINT)*l- (PTI=l) +2 CAL 'lfST+(1- I NTD+ IRT) +«I'~ST»0.61)/BRN OUT:EPF[I)+LITxE 'P(I)+('BxL1T)+(1-LI,)xTI-~60 I 1+1+1 +(IsRL)/GO Table VIII-l PROGRAM LIMIT I I I . I, [1) (2) (3) [~) (S) (6) (7] (8) (9) [10) [11 ) [12) [13] V V LIM1T;1;COURT;INTM COUNT+O E+O.3+0.0Sx\11f ITT:COUNT+COUNT+l CAL 1NTN+r / nIT 1+1/1' \ 1N'/.I +(I=l)/OUT +(COUNTa3)/OUT . E+E[I-1]+(O.1*COUNT+1)x\10 +ITT OU':E+E[I] 1NT+1N1'(1) TB+TB[I] Table VIII-2 image: ------- COIIPABISO. 0' PB~DIcrD ~.D UPBRIIIB.rAL BURNER STABILITY DATA PAGE 1 BU. ..0£ £IR rop ~IR P£OJI "UI" IN'r DATA INT LIN INT RAT BURN .0. I.*3 0' LBSI.. BArIO JI/VP*2 JI/VP*2 ID / IL 1 33.0 75 22.3 0."678 0.3244 0.5487 0.590.6 - 1 2 33.0 10 22.2 0.5309 0.3229 1.5621 0.2065 -1 3 33.0 15 "5.3 0."822 0.6585 0.7412 0.8875 -1 .. 33_.0 15 "5.3 0...52.. 0.6585 0.4299 1.5303 - 1 5 33.0 15 "7.0 0."&50 0.6830 0.5447 1.2526 - 1 I 33.0 II 51.1 0."501 0.8991. 0.4176 2.1505 -1 7 33.0 90 51.7 0...9..8 0.8974 0.9350 0.9588 -1 8 33.0 '0 &1.7 0.&32& 0.8974 5.4903 0.1633 2 9 33.0 90 &1.7 0.5073 0.8974 1.1420 0.7850 1 -10 33.0 90 &1.7 0."697 0.8974 0.6079 1.4747 0 11 33.0 90 61.7 0.5230 0.8974 1.4478 0.6192 1 12 33.0 90 51.7 0."322 0..8974 0.2935 3.0539 0 13- 33.0 '0 11.7 0.538& 0.8974 1. 8107 0.4951 - 1 1.. 33.0 90 &1.7 0.5073 0.8974 1.1420 0.7850 1 15 33.0 90 &1.7 0.5089 0.8974 1.1695 0.7666 2 16 33.0 90 71.1 0.5689 1.1362 2.6981 0.4207 2 17 33.0 90 78.1 0 . 51t1 7 1.1362 1.8890 0.6009 1 . 18 33.0 90 71.1 o. 551t1 1.1362 2.2311 0.5087 2 19 33.0 91 78.0 0.6115 1.1352 4.4320 0.2559 2 20 33.0 92 78.0 0 . 5377 1.1341 1.8009 0.6291 2 21 33.0 92 71.0 0."609 1.1341 0.5216 2.1721 0 22 33.0 93 77.9 0 . ..96.0 1.1331 0.9661 1.1716 0 23 33.0 93 77.9 0..5209 1.1331 1.4192 0.7976 1 2.. 33.0 93 77.9 0.5382 1.1331 1. 8199 0.6220 1 25 33.0 93 77.9 0.5631 1.1331 2.5330 0.4469 1 BURIl .. 2 --- srABLB- OPBBArIO. UNITS OF INT ARE LBS/SEC FT*3 A TM* 2 BUR. . 1 srABILIrr LIllIr BUR. .. 0 - - - BUR .BR GOBS our image: ------- COMPARISON OF PREDICTED AND EXPERIMENTAL BURNER STABI LITf DATA PAGE 2 RUN VOL AIR TEMP AIR PLOil EQUIV INT DATA IlIT LIM INT RAT BURN NO. IN*3 OF LBSIBR RATIO JlIVP*2 JlIVP*2 IDIIL 26 33.0 90 103.3 0.6937 1.5030 9.5186 0.1578 2 27 33.0 93 103.1 0.5794 1.4989 3. 097 3 0.4835 2 28 33.0 96 102.8 0.5227 1.491+9 1.4727 1.0140 0 29 33.0 97 102.7 0.5118 1. 1+935 1.2588 1.1852 0 30 33.0 97 102.7 0.5231 1. 4935 1.4887 1. 0022 1 31 33.0 102 120 . 9 . 0.5930 1.7583 3.7383 0.4699 2 32 33.0 105 120.6 0.5465 1. 7537 2.1285 0.8231 2 33 33.0 108 120.2 0.5158 1.7490 1. 3 937 1.2537 1 34 33.0 95 121. 6 0.5099 1.7691+ 1.2117 1.4587 0 35 33.0 102 120.9 0.5190 1.7583 1.4273 1.2307 1 36 33.0 112 153.8 0.5878. 2.2377 3.6370 0.6147 2 :p 33.0 117 153.2 0.5613 2.2280 2.6910 0.8272 2 38 33.0 120 152.8 0.5451 2.2222 2.201+1 1.0073 2 39 33.0 120 152.8 0.5299 2.2222 1.7910 1.2396 0 40 33.0 120 152.8 0.5135 2.2222 1. 41 0 5 1.5739 - 1 41 33.0 124 152.3 0.5470 2.2146 2.2941 0.9654 1 42 33.0 91 103.2 0.7565 1.5016 15.0328 0.0998 2 43 33.0 93 103.1 0.5222 1.4989 1.4474 1.0345 1 44 33.0 87 41.8 0.7529 0.6085 H. 5467 0.0418 2 45 33.0 85 41.9 0.6916 0.6096 9.2316 0.0660 2 46 33.0 84 41.9 0.6132 0.6096 4.4163 0.1379 2 47 33.0 82 42.0 0.5333 0.6113 1.6303 0.3745 2 48 33.0 82 42.1 0.4910 0.6121+ 0.81+97 0.7199 2 49 33.0 80 42.1 0.1+"97 0.6124 0.3988 1.5337 0 50 33.0 80 42.1 0.4997 0.6124 0.9710 0.6300 1 BURN = 2 --- STABLE OPERATION UNITS OF INT ARE LBSISEC FT*3 ATM* 2 BURN = 1 --- STABILITI LIMIT BURN = 0 --- BURNER GOES OUT < Ho-J :::~ '''' ~.. image: ------- COIIPARISO. 0' PRBDICf'BD A.D BZPBRIIIB.f'AL 8UR.BR Sf'ABILIf'Y DAf'A PAGE 3 RUlI VOL AIR f'BIIP AIR 'LOll BQUIV I.f' DAf'A I.f' LIII I.f' RAf' BURN .0. IlI*3 0' LBS IBR RAf'IO IIIVP*2 JlIVP*2 IDIIL 51 33.0 83 25." 0.6097 0.3688 ...2..0.. 0.0869 2 52 33.0 82 25." 0.5"06 0.3691 1.8068 0 .20U 2 53 - 33.0 82 25." 0."'''5 0.3691 0.5329 0.6919 1 n 33.0 83 25." 0'."510 0.3188- 0 . U"" 0.8888 1 55 1.0 83 "2.0 3.1753 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1 51 - 1.0 81 "2.1 2.6U2 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1 57 -1.0 12 "2.0 2.8966 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 1 58 1.0 85 "1.9 2.6510 -1. 0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 - 1 59 -1.0 85 "1.9 3.1812 -1..0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 - 1 60 1.0 90 "1.7 1.9"52 1.0000 .-1.0000 -1.0000 -1 61 - 1.0 90 ..1.7 1.9"52 - 1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1 62 -1.0 85 _1.9 2.6510 -1.0000 1.0000 -1.0000 -1 63 1.0 87 "1.8 3.1870 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1 6- - 1.0 85 _1.9 2.6510 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 - 1 65 - 1.0 88 "1.8 2.7692 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 - 1 66 - 1.0 85 "1.9 2.8585 1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1 67 -1.0 85 "1.9 2.7616 -1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 -1 68 -1.0 78 25.5 2.5262 1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1 69 1.0 82 2".7 2.3985 -1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 -1 70 - 1.0 85 25.3 2.9167 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1 71 - 1.0 86 25.3 3.06"6 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 - 1 72 - 1.0 90 11.7 2.3863 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 - 1 73 -1.0 93 61.5 2.""93 -1.0000 - 1. 0000 -1.0000 - 1 7.. 33.0 86 25.3 0.50"" 0.3677 1.0731 0.3"23 1 75 - 33.0 85 25.3 0.6219 0.3681 ".8599 0 .0757 2 BUR. .. 2 --- Sf'ABLE OPBRAf'IO. U.I'1'S OF INf' ARB LBSISBC FT*3 ATM*2 BURlI .. .1 --- Sf'ABILIf'Y LIllII' BURR .. 0 u- BURliER GOBS OUf' <>of ~~ .....~ . .. (II image: ------- CONPARISOII OF PREDIC'!ED AND EXPERIMENTAL BURN'ER S'!ABILIT! DA'!A PAGE 4 RUN VOL AIR TEMP AIR 'LOJI EQUIV IN'! DATA .. INT LIN IN'! RAT BURN NO. III*3 of LBSIHR RATIO JlIVP*2 JlIVP*2 IDIIL 76 33.0 85 25.3 0.8339 0.3681 22.9747 0.0160 ~ 77 33.0 85 25.3 0.9960 0.3681 41.5938 0.0088 2 78 33.0 90 51.7 0.5574 0.8974 2.3338 0.3845, 1 79 33.0 92 51.&' 0.6869 0'.8958 9.0511 0.0989 2 80 33.0 90 &1. 7 0.9927 0.8974 41.6033 0.0216 2 81 -1.0 92 11.6 1.4432 -1.0000 1.0000 -1.0000 -1 82 33.0 103 102.1 0.5050 1.4855 1.1611 1 .2781 2 83 33.0 105 101.9 0.7666 1.4829 16.5407 0.0896 2 84 33.0 100 102.4 0.7464, 1.4895 14.3647 0.1036 2 $5 33.0 103 102.1 0.9178 1.4855 33.8123 0.0439 2 86 -1.0 105 101.9 1.2812 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1. 0000 -1 87 33.0 300 59.3 0.5391 0.8628 3.8187 0.2259 2 88 33.0 300 59.3 0 .6869, 0.8628 15.3308 0'.0563 2 89 -1.0 300 59.3 1.1075 -1.0000 1. 0000 - 1.0000 -1 90 33.0 300 59.6 0.5770 0.8665 5.8483 0.1482 2 91 33.0 310 59.3 0.8222 0.8628 H.3220 0.0251 2 92 -1.0 300 59.3 1.1075 -1.0000 -1' . 0 0 0 0 - 1.0000 -1 93 52.3 250 165.3 0.4863 1. 5174 1.5676 0.9680 2 94 52.3 250 165.3 0.6478 1.5174 9.9126 0.1531 2 95 52.3 250 165.3 0 .8299 1.5174 31.5282 ,0.0481 2 96 52.3 250 132.9 ' 0.9885 1.2193 54.2496 0.0225 2 97 52.3 95 55.9 0.4881 0.5126 0.8554 0.5986 2 98 52.3 95 55.9 0.6175 0.5126 4.7821 0.1071 2 99 52.3 95 55.9 0.8087 0.5126 20.6232 0.0248 2 100, 52.3 100 55.6 0.9984 0.5103 42.9648 0.0119 2 BURN II 2 - -- STABLE OPERA'!IOII UNITS OF INT ARE LBSISEC FT*3 ATN*2 BURN. 1 --- STABILIT! LIllI'! BURN. 0 --- BURNER GOES OUT <'"i ::::~ ........ I It en image: ------- COItPARISO. or PRBDIcrBD A'D BZP~RINB.rAL BUR'ER srABILIrr DArA PAGE 5 RU' VOL AIR rBItP AIR FLOII BQUIV IlIr DArA I1Ir LIlt I.r RAr BURII '0. Ill. 3 or LBS INR , RArIO IIIVP*2 flIVP*2 IDIIL 101 -1.0 102 55.5 1.1925 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 102 52.3 102 89.0 0.7520 0.8165 14.9787 0.0545 2 103 52.3 400 50.0 0'.8359 0."593 43.4487 0.0106 2 10.. 52.3 _00 50.0 0.5406 0."593 5.4104 0.0849 2 105 52.3 8.. 49.9 0.9250 0."581 33.4897 0.0137 2 106 52.3 85 49.9 0."888 0.4581 0.8290 0.5519 1 107 52.3 85 49.9 0.3925 0.4581 0.1159 3.9481 0 108 52.3 85 49.9 0.44"8 0~4576 0.3703 1.2345 2 109 52.3 85 49.9 0 .5563 0.4576 2.2581 0.2027 2 110 52.3 400 50.0 0."039 0.4593 0.7676 0.5984 2 111 52.3 400 50.0 0.3915 0.4593 0.6090 0.7543 2 112 52.3 400 33.2 0.4688 0.3048 2.1848 0.1395 2 113 52.3 ..00 33.2 0.3891 0.3048 0.5814 0.5243 2 114 52.3 400 33.2 0.3805 0.3043 0.4912 0.6194 2 115 52.3 400 33.1 0.3883 0.3040 0 . 5727 0.5309 1 116 52.3 400 82.7 0.5375 0.7587 5.2248 0.1"52 2 117 52.3 ..00 82.8 0.4312 0.7601 1.2303 0.6178 2 118 52.3 "00 82.8 0.3861 0.7601 0.5487 1.3851 0 119 52.3 400 126.8 0.4672 1.1634 2.1364 0.5446 2 120 52.3 ..00 127.0 0."279 1.1654 1.1641 1.0012 2 121 52.3 ..00 126.8 0.4469 1.163" 1.5783 0.7371 2 122 52.3 400 126.8 0.4010 1.1634 0.7272 1.5998 0 123 52.3 74 50.5 0.7951 0.4634 18.2890 0.0253 2 124 52.3 ,80 49.5 0.4743 0.4542 0.6308 0.7192 1 125 52.3 85 "7.6 0.4930 0.4369 0.8895 0.4906 - 1 BURN =. 2 --- srABLE OPBRArIOIl UNIrs OF INr ARE LBSISEC FT*3 ATM*2 BURN = 1 --- STABILI~r LINIT BURN = 0 - - -BURliER GOES our <"'i ~t- H'" I II .... image: ------- CO/tlPARISOII OF PREDICTED AND EXPERIMENTAL BURliER STABILIT! DATA PAGE 5 RUN VOL AIR TE/tIP AIR 'LOJI EQUIV lilT DA TA lilT LI/tl INT RAT BURN' NO. IN*3 of LBS/HR RATIO JI/VP*2 JI/VP*2 ID/IL 126 52.3 95 127.3 0.5049 1.1684 1.1230 1.0404 0 127 52.3 95 119.6 . 0.5687 1.0976 2.7371 0.4006 1 128 52.3 90 17.8 0.5411 0.6226 1.8745 0.3318 2 129 52.3 80 8&.2 0.5061 0.7910 1.0758 0.73"4 2 130 52.3 80 82.8 0.5822 0.7604 3.0707 0.2474 2 131 52.3 80 66.7 0.6869 0.6124 8.7686 0.0698 2 132 1.0 80 44.5 1.0553 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 q3 52.3 80 83.4 0.5628 0.76 55 2.4145 0.3167 2 134 52.3 80 66.7 0.7036 0.6121f 10.0334 0.0610 2 135 52.3 80 72.3 0.4347 0.6634 0.2940 2.2538 0 136 52.3 88 72.3 0.5318 0.6634 1.6320 0.4061 2 137 52.3 90 66.7 0.7036 0.6124 10.2913 0.0594 2 138 52.3 95 96.6 0.6404 0.8867 6.0209 0.1471 2 139 52.3 95 95.0 0.7260 0.8715 12.3178 0.0707 2 140 -1.0 95 91.1 1.0266 0.0000 0'.0000 0.0000 - 1 141 -1.0 95 77.3 1.2099 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 11f2 52.3 95 77.8 0.5389 0.7145 1.8518 0.3854 2 143 -1.0 95 77.8 1. 2013 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1 llf4 1.0 95 91.1 1. 0266 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 1It5 52.3 95 94.4 0.7302 0.8665 12.6988 0.0682 2 146 52.3 95 96.6 0.5433 0.8867 1.9651+ 0.1+507 2 11+7 52.3 95 98.3 0.4702 0.9019 0.6261+ 1.1+383 1 11+8, 52.3 95 90.5 0.7614 0.8310 15.6459 0.0531 2 149 1.0 95 53.6 1.2873 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1 150 52.3 95 56.9 0.1+388, 0.5219 0.341+7 1. 5126 2 BURN = 2 --- STABLE OPERATION UNITS OF INT ARE LBS/SEC FT*3 ATM*2 BURN. 1 -- - STABI LIT! LIJJIT BURR = 0 --- BURNER GOES OUT < H"":J Hili 0040' ,~ I1DIt image: ------- COMPARISON OF PREDICTED AND EXPERIMENTAL BURNER STABILITY DATA PAGE 7 RUN VOL AIR TEMP AIR FLOW EQUIV INT DATA INT LIM INT RAT BURN NO. IN*3 of LBS /lJR RATIO JI/VP*2 JI/VP*2 ID/IL 151 52.3 ..00 8".0 0.7066 0.7706 22.2613 0.0346 2 152 52.3 400 79.5 0.7"61 0.7297 28.1965 0.0259 2 153 52.3 360 111.2 0."703 1.0206 1.9112 0.5341 1 154 52.3 355 55.6 0.7013 0.5103 19.364" 0.0263 2 155 52.3 270 98.9 0.50"3 0.9081 2.1939 0."136 2 156 52.3 260 103.3 0."292 0.948" 0.6331 1. 4983 0 157 52.3 260 100.0 0.5856 0.9182 5.6586 0.1622 1 158 52.3 260 100 .6 0.6375 0.9232 9.3190 0.0990 2 159 52.3 265 97.3 0.7598 0.8929 22.6992 0.0393 2 160 1.0 270 90.7 1.2226 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1 161 - 1.0 275 89.6 1.2..18 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 162 -1.0 275 87.9 1.5592 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1 163 52.3 360 22.0 0.5..6.. 0.2018 5.0677 0.0398 1 164 52.3 370 22.0 0.7565 0.2018 27.9911 0 .0072 2 165 52.3 375 30.8 0.7925 0.2825 34.0641 0.0083 2 166 52.3 365 44.5 0.6641 0.4086 15.2380 0.0268 2 167 52.3 370 44.0 0.8406 0.4036 41.7926 0.0097 2 168 52.3 370 41. 2 0.9728 0.3784 64.4761 0.0059 2 169 52.3 345 55.0 0.7296 0.5045 22.6681 0.0222 2 170 52.3 325 69.8 0.5771 0.6407 6.3214 0.1013 2 171 52.3 305 78.1 0..5162 0.7164 2.9222 0.2450 2 172 52.3 275 97.8 0.4118 0.8980 0.4885 1.8383 0 173 1.0 -1 1.0 - 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1 174 52.3 ..00 96.6 0.6507 0.8864 15.0295 0.0589 2 175 52.3 "OS 93.3 0.7925 0.8561 36.1910 0.0236 2 BURN = 2 - - - STABLE OPERATION UNITS OF niT ARE LBS/SEC FT*3 ATM*2 BURN = 1 --- STABILITY LIMIT BURN = 0 --- BURNER GOES OUT <: H -I >-<:11 HtT ,'-' 1£. (1) image: ------- COMPARISON OP PREDICTED AND EXPERIMENTAL BURNER STABILITY DATA PAGE 8 RUN VOL AIR TEMP AIR FLml EQUIV INT DATA INT LIM INT RAT BURN NO. IN*3 OF LDS /llR RATIO W/VP*2 W/VP*2 ID/IL 176 52.3 405 93.1 0.8733 0.8547 50.6320 0.0169 2 177 52.3 405 98.6 0.4239 0.9049 1.1124 0.8135 2 178 52.3 405 95.9 0.5413 0.8806 5.5355 0.1591 2 179 52.3 350 133.7 0.8388 1. 2275 39.9028 0.0307 2 180 52.3 345 134.6 0.7140 1.2354 20.5484 0.0601 2 181 52.3 340 136.1 0.6205 1.2493 9.9945 0.1249 2 182 52.3 340 138.8 0.5458 1.2743 4.7161 0 .2700 2 183 52.3 335 139.0 0.4894 1. 2754 2.2792 0.5596 2 184 52.3 334 141.7 0.4435 1.3004 1.1318 1.1491 1 185 52.3 335 139.0 0.5014 1. 2754 2.6829 0.4754 2 186 52.3 335 139.0 0.5631 1.2754 5.6213 0.2269 2 187 - 1.0 -1 1.0 -1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1 188 52.3 430 77.9 0.6830 0.7145 20.4438 0.0349 2 189 52.3 430 79.0 0.5532 0.7252 6.8132 0.1065 2 190 52.3 430 79.0 0.4885 0.7252 3.2004 0.2266 1 191 52.3 400 66.9 0.5766 0.6144 7.8786 0.0780 2 192 52.3 405 56.0 0.6896 0.5137 20.1414 0.0255 2 193 - 1.0 410 51.6 1.2578 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 194 52.3 410 113.0 0.5463 1.0374 5.9429 0.1746 - 1 195 52.3 410 113.6 0.4858 1.0425 2.8719 0.3630 - 1 196 52.3 410 115.2 0.4920 1.0576 3.1155 0.3395 - 1 197 52.3 430 101. 4 0.5304 0.9309 5.3194 0.1750 - 1 198 52.3 360 41. 2 0.6579 0.3780 14.3547 0.0263 - 1 199 52.3 340 38.5 0.9818 0.3531 62.6358 0.0056 - 1 200 52.3 410 38.5 0.6616 0.3531 16.7434 0.0211 - 1 BURN = 2 - -- STABLE OPERATION UNITS OF INT ARE LBS/SEC FT*3 ATM*2 BURN = 1 --- STABILITY LIMIT BURN = 0 --- BURNER GOES OUT ~ "".0-1 ""111 ....tr .t- 1-1» 0 image: ------- COMPARISON OF PREDICTED AND EXPERIMENTAL BURNER STABILITY DATA PAGE 9 RUN VOL AIR TEUP AIR FLOW EQUIV INT DATA INT LIM INT RAT BURN NO. IN*3 OF LBS/HR RATIO W/VP*2 W/VP*2 ID/IL 201 52.3 86 83.2 0.8221 0.7634 21.7050 0.0351 2 202 52.3 82 102.9 0.7187 0.9441 11.3179 0.0833 2 203 52.3 110 148.0 0.6216 1.3581 5.2160 0.2601 2 204 1.0 - 1 -1.0 -1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1 205 52.3 313 76.8 0.6978 0.7049 17.1035 0.0412 2 206 52.3 253 167.8 0.6498 1.5402 10.1619 0.1515 2 207 52.3 245 181.5 0.5601 1.6655 4.0754 0.4084 2 208 66.5 70 51. 5 0.8177 0.3718 20.5144 0.0181 - 1 209 66.5 70 49.9 0.9883 0.3598 39.6679 0.0091 -1 210 66.5 70 49.9 0.6666 0.3598 7.1656 0.0502 - 1 211 1.0 70 49.9 1.0852 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 212 66.5 70 102.9 0.6368 0.7425 5.4032 0.1373 -1 213 66.5 70 99.7 0.7865 0.7199 17.2529 0.0417 -1 214 1.0 70 96.6 1.0999 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 215 66.5 70 49.9 0.4845 0.3598 0.7215 0.4981 -1 216 66.5 70 48.2 0.6615 0.3479 6.8425 0.0508 - 1 217 52.3 80 83.8 0.6044 0.7689 3.9655 0.1937 2 218 66.5 100 91. 5 0.6187 0.6606 4.9179 0.1343 2 219 66.5 110 95.3 0.7845 0.6881 18.6383 0.0369 2 220 52.3 100 86.2 0.5854 0.7910 3.4036 0.2322 2 221 52.3 100 116.8 0.5761 1.0717 3.0495 0.3511 2 222 52.3 100 131.8 0.5105 1.2094 1.2482 0.9679 2 223 52.3 100 108.4 0.6205 0.9951 5.0047 0.1986 2 224 52.3 100 168.5 0.5562 1.5462 2.3779 0.6503 2 225 52.3 .100 151.8 0.6173 1.3932 4.8472 0.2874 2 BURN = 2 - - - STABLE OPERATION UNITS OF INT ARE LBS/SEC FT*3 ATM*2 BURN :: 1 --- STABILITY LIMIT BURN = 0 --- BURNER GOES OUT <: H>-:I H" HtJ" . .... ..... .... image: ------- COMPARISON OF PREDICTED AND EXPERIMENTAL BURNER STABILITY DATA PAGE 10 RUN VOL AIR TEMP AIR FLor.; EQUIV INT DATA INT LIM INT RAT BURN NO. IN*3 of LDS/HR RATIO W/VP*2 W/ VP*2 ID/IL 226 52.3 100 177.9 0.5266 1.6330 1.5866 1.0293 1 227 52.3 76 55.8 0.5796 0.5121 2.935~ 0.1743 2 228 52.3 82 58.1f 0.5761 0.5358 2.8714 0.1864 2 229 52.3 85 57.6 0.5773 0.5288 2.9431 0.1795 2 230 52.3 433 57.6 0.5779 0.5284 8.7961 0.0601 2 231 52.3 420 60.8 0.5473 0.5579 6.2023 0.0900 2 232 52.3 ~10 90.9 0.5203 0.8346 ~.4305 0.1884 2 233 52.3 407 90.2 0.6172 0.8281 11.6716 0.0709 2 234 52.3 90 76.9 0 . 67 2.5 0.7062 7.9725 0.0885 2 235 52.3 92 77.3 0.5930 0.7094 3.620~ 0.1957 2 236 52.3 89 77.7 0.6003 0.7132 3.8997 0.1829 2 237 52.3 82 38.4 0.6353 0.3524 5.5154 0.0638 2 238 66.5 79 49.1 0.4880 0.3544 0.7973 0.4445 2 239 66.5 80 48.9 0.5391 0.3531 1.7569 0.2010 2 240 66.5 82 48.9 0.6563 0.3528 6.7467 0.0523 2 241 66.5 82 48.8 0.7266 0.3522 11.9947 0.0294 2 242 66.5 78 49.2 0.7617 0.3554 15.0894 0.0236 2 243 66.5 80 48.8 0.8945 0.3522 29.7059 0 .0119 2 244 66.5 79 98.1 0.5043 0.7082 1.0409 0.6796 2 245 66.5 80 97.6 0.5994 0.7043 3.7461 0.1878 2 246 66.5 80 60.5 0.6393 0.4364 5.7049 0 .076 5 -1 247 1.0 75 - 1.0 0.4609 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1 248 66.5 85 47.2 0.5625 0.3404 2.4459 0.1390 - 1 249 66.5 75 49.2 0.8476 0.3554 24.0592 0.0148 - 1 250 66.5 85 48.8 0.8555 0.3522 25.4455 0.0138 - 1 BURN = 2 -- - STABLE OPERATION UNITS OF INT ARE LBS/SEC PT*3 ATM*2 BURN :r 1 --- STABILITY LIMIT DURN = 0 --- BURNER GOES OUT < .....; ""111 ....t:r II-' 1-'" N image: ------- COIIPARISO. or PBBDIcr.D A.D .ZPBBIII..~AL BUB..R S~ABI LI~r DA~A PAGK 11 BU. VOL AIR ~KIIP AIR rLOfI BQUIV III~ DA~A I.~ LIlt III~ RAT BURN .0. I.*3 or LBS "R RA~IO fll VP* 2 flIVP*2 IDIIL 251 &1.5 85 100.8 0."183 0.7278 0.9702 0.7502 -1 252 16.5 90 100." 0.5006 0.72"5 1.0273 0.7052 -1 253 16.5 92 97.0 0.5172 0.6198 3.0094 0.2326 -1 25" 66.5 93 1 00.1 0.6"12 0.7225 6.0290 ~.1197 -1 255 52.3 93 90.0 0.6063 0.8260 4.2127 0.1959 2 25& 66.5 85 97.6 0.7188 0.10"3 11.4080 0.0617 , 2 257 66.5 85 97.6 0.78 52 0.70"3 17.6921 0.0398 2 258 &&.5 85 . 97.5 0.900" 0.7037 30.66-8 0.0229 2 259 &&.5 85 97." 1.0000 0.7030 _2.0062 0.0167 2 2&0 16.5 85 97.3 0.9609 0.702- 37.6931 0.0186 2 2&1 -1.0 89 97.2 1.1875 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 2&2 66.5 90 1.....- 0.5167 1.0"21 1.3178 0.7900 2 263 66.5 97 1-3.5 0.5957 1.0355 3.7940 0.2727 2 26- &6.5 85 -8.8 0.4951 0.3522 0.9199 0.3824 2 2&5 &&.5 85 "8.8 0.5820 0.3522 3.1141 0.1130 2 2&6 &6.5 96 143.0 0.5677 1.0319 2.7115 0.3802 2 2&7 &6.5 96 97.8 0.5045 0.7063 1.1193 0.630" 2 2&8 &6.5 9& 97.2 0.5817 0.7018 3.2131 0.2182 2 269 66.5 96 97.2 0 "6582 0.7018 7.1329 0.0983 2 270 66.5 96 97.1 . 0.6860 0.7011 9.0735 0.0772 2 271 &6.5 180 1"".1 0.5576 1.0"02 2. ..183 0.4297 2 272 66.5 100 141.7 0.6618 1.0231 7."548 0.1371 2 273 66.5 100 143.1 0.6745 1.0328 8.3279 0.1239 2 27.. 66.5 100 1"3.5 0.7565 1.0355 15.3389 0.0675 2 275 66.5 95 1"3.7 0.825" 1.037" 22."802 0.0"61 2 BUR. ." 2 --- srABLB OPERA~IOII UNITS OF INT ARE LBSISEC FT*3 ATM*2 BURN = 1 --- srABILIrr LIIII'r BURII = 0 --- BURIIBR GOBS our < Hoof H18 Ht1' .... .... Co> image: ------- COHPARISO' 0., PR~DIC'1'~D AlID ~XPERIN~''1'A£ BUR'ER S'I'ABI£I'1'l,DA'I'A PAGE 12 RUlI VOL AIR '1'KIIP AIR .,1.011 KQUIV II'! DA'I'A II'!' 1.111. liT RAr . BURII 110. 111*3 0' I.BSIBR RATIO 1I1VP*2 III VP*Z IDIIL 271 -1.0 -1 130.0 -1. 0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 277 -1.0 -1 1"0.0 -1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 .278 -1.0 -1 -1..0 -1. 0000 .0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 279 52.3 10' 91.0 0.5791 0.83 53 3.251t9 0.256" 2 280 52.3 110 90.9 0.6808 0.83'" 9.0216' 0.092" 2 281 52.3 110 111.3 0.5932 1. 0217 3.8"30 0.2656 2 282 52.3 94 "G.4 0.6072 0."258 ".2688 0.0997 2 283 52.3 100 47.3 0.602" 0."338 4.1303 0.1050 2 284 52.3 105 "6.5 0.4239 0."268 0.2659 1.6031 2 285 52.3 116 136.5 0."873 1. 2529 0.9210 1.3590 .2 286 66.5 82 58.8 0.5010 0...2..6 1.0009 0."237 2 287 66.5 92 14".0 0.5260 1.039" 1.5258 0 .6812 2 288 66.5 90 1"".3 0.5654 1.0"13 2.5809 0.4030 2 289 66.5 95 1"3.6 0.6016 1.0366 ".0261 0.2572 2 290 66.5 99 1.42.9 0.7193 1.0318 11.8468 0.0870 2 291 1.0 73 66.0 1.3984 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 292 -1.0 75 "9.1 1. 5625 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 293 -1.0 82 "7.1 1.359" 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 29.. -1.0 90 51.1 1.2578 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 295 1.0 72 "9.2 1.3203 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 296 -1.0 81 "8.6 1. 3..38 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 297 1.0 92 "8.3 1...1..1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 298 -1.0 95 48.2 1.2813 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1 299 1.0 96 87.2 1.3750. 0.0000 o~oooo 0.0000 -1 300 - 1.0 85 49.3 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 1.1719 BURlI . 2 --- STABLBOPERATIon UNITS OF INT ARE LBSISEC FT*3 ATM*2 BURII . 1 --- STABILITl LIMIT DURN. 0 --- BURlIBR GOES OU'!' < ....0-1 :::1- I '" .... $ image: ------- COIIPARISO. 0., PREDIC'rED A.D EZPERIIiEIt'rAL BURliER S'rABILI'rI DATA PAGB 13 RU. .,0£ AIR 'rBIiP AIR PLOJI EQUIV IIt'r DATA I.'r LIII IltT RAT BURIt .0. I.*3 oP LBS1BR RA'rIO JlIVP*2 JlIVP*2 IDIIL 301 - 1.0 81 118.5 1.2188 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 302 - 1.0 92 96.9 1.11219 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 303 - 1.0 711 98.5 .1:2813 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 301t - 1.0 87 1111.5 1.31138 0.0000 0.0000 0.00.00 -1 305 - 1.0 100 12".2 1.3750 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 306 - 1.0 100 139.8 1.1719 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 307 -1.0 101t 9".3 1.1953 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 308 52.3 90 "6.6 0.5"69 0.,.279 2.0293 0.2109 2 309 52.3 98 "7.5 0.5052 0."362 l.n05 0.3820 2 310 52.3 9.. 118." 0.3"36 0."""3 0.0318 13.9791 -1 311 52.3 385 1t9.11 0.5886 0."533 8."696 0.0535 2 .312 52.3 388 "8.3 0 . 5098 0."1132 3.6137 0.1226 2 313 52.3 395 "7.2 0.39"5 0."331 0.6289 0.6887 2 31.. 52.3 3..0 88.2 0.5392 0.809" ".3720 0.1851 2 315 52.3 36" . 93.1 0."726 0.85"7 2.0056 0."261 2 316 52.3 ..00 90.5 0.50"3 0.8310 3.5181 0.2362 2 317 52.3 ..35 90.0 0."059 0.8259 0.9363 0.8821 2 318 52.3 350 137.1 0."935 1. 2582 2.5"85 0."937 2 319 52.3 350 137.2 0."150 1.2589 0.7"28 1.69"9 2 320 52.3 351 13".5 0.6..8.. 1. 23..0 13.0187 0.09"8 2 321 52.3 litO 89.8 0.5978 0.8238 "."""9 0.1852 2 322 52.3 115 90.0 0."857 0.8259 0.8930 0.92"0 2 323 52.3 105 90.0 0.""77 0.8259 0."32" .1.9101 1 32.. .52.3 95 135.5 0.58"7 1. 2..36 3.3180 .0.37"" 2 325 52.3 105 137.3 0 . 5181 1.26014 1."278 0.8827 2 BURIt = 2 --- STABLE OPBRATIOII UNITS OF INT ARE LBS/SEC FT*3 ATM* 2 BURN = 1 --- STABILITI LINIT BURN = 0 - -- BURNER GOES OUT image: ------- COMPARISON OF PREDICTED AND EXPERINENTAL BURNER STABI LITr DATA PAGE 14 RUN VOL AIR TEMP AIR FLOW EQUIV INT DATA INT LIN INT RAT BURN NO. IIf.3 of LBS/BR RATIO JI/VP.2 JI/VP.2 ID/IL 326 52.3 110 138.7 0.4796 1.2732 0.7905 1.6107 1 327 52.3 1f12 48.2 0.6017 0.4"20 10.3270 0.0428 2 328 52.3 395 47.3 0.4641 0.4338 2.0023 0.2166 2 329 . 52.3 390 47.1 0.3821 0.4318 0.4819 0.8961 2 330 . 52.3 407 90.3 0.5955 0.8288 9.6208 0.0862 2 331 52.3 400 92.7 0.4834 0.8511 2.6750 0.3182 2 332 52.3 1f35 89.7 0.1+059 0.8231 0.9363 0.8791 1 333 52.3 392 135.'- 0.1+1+01 1.2411 1.3715 0.9050 2 334 52.3 395 140.3 0.3843 1.2877 0.5173 2.4893 1 335 52.3 92 91.3 0.5556 0.8383 2.2910 0.3655 2 336 52.3 90 92.6 0.1+667 0.8498 0.5751 1.4759 1 337 52.3 90 48.5 0.5434 0.4447 1.9337 0.2297 2 338 52.3 90 49.6 0.5899 0.4548 3.4713 0.1309 2 339 52.3 100 136.7 0.5685 1.2547 2.77 70 0.4511+ 2 340 52.3 395 138.3 0.4997 1.2691 3.2593 0.3891+ 2 341 52.3 150 92.4 0.5245 0.8483 1.8563 0.4566 2 342 52.3 90 93.3 0.5472 0.8563 2.0349 0.4204 2 343 52.3 102 91.3 0.5273 0.8381 1.6153 0.5189 2 341+ 52.3 100 91.9 0.4688 0.8439 0.6253 1.3496 2 345 52.3 102 135.3 0.5445 1.2414 2.0530 0.6047 2 346 52.3 105 138.2 0.1+898 1.2682 0.9186 1. 3806 2 347 52.3 105 134.5 0.6523 1.2343 6.9392 0.1779 2 348 52.3 i07 90.1 0.6022 0.8274 4.2116 0.1963 2 349 52.3 100 91.9 0.5137 0.8431 1.3105 0.6427 2 350 52.3 101 136.4 0.5697 1.2514 2.8268 0.4423 2 BURN. 2 --- STABLE OPERATION UNITS OF INT ARE LBS/SEC FT.3 ATM*2 BURN = 1 --- STABILITr LIMIT BURN. 0 --- BURNER GOE.#) OUT < ""0-1 ""111 ....tr ..... ~Ct image: ------- COIIPARISOII OP PR~DICr~D AIID EZPERIMEN'J'AL BURliER SrABILIrr DArA PAGE 15 RUN VOL AIR rEIIP AIR PLOJI E{/UIV III'!' DArA III'J' LIN IRr RAr BURN ~O. III*3 0' LBS/BR RArIO JI/VP*2 JI/VP*2 ID/IL 351 52.3 105 92." 0.6311 0.8..n 5.6528 0.1500 2 352 52.3 110 93.1 0.,5036 0.85"8 1.1679 0.7312 . 1 353 52.3 120 137.7 0.1311 1.2636 5.9076 0.2137 2 354 52.3 It 30 81." 0 . 5379 0.7"71 5.1838 0.1292 2 355 52.3 438 82.0 0.lt309 0.7528 1.1t"11t .0.5223 2 356 52.3 It 50 1t3.8 0.5570 O. ..018 1.5311 0.0531t 2 357 52.3 1ltO 180~5 0.5053 1.6565 1.350" 1.2255 2 358 52.3 110 "6.8 0 ...673 0.4299 0.6363 0.6750 2 359 . 52.3 120 138.2 0.5022 1.2686 1.1888 1.0661 2 360 52.3 380 92.6 0.5322 0.Bltge ".6028 0.18lt6 2 361 52.3 1t00 90.9 0.lt673 0.8339 2.1392 .0.3898 2 '362 52.3 1t05 89.8 0.6305 0.82115 12.9777 0.0635 2 363 52.3 1105 90.8 0.lt981t 0.8332 3.3250 0.2506 2 3611 52.3 ..05 118.7 0 . 5691 O...lt71 7.lt2lt3 0.0602 2 365 52.3 1t05 "8.0 0.62"" O...ltO.. 12.3lt31 0.0357 2 366 52.3 _10 "7.9 0."309 0."393 1.278- 0.31136 2 367 52.3 ..05 137.0 0.5100 1. 2571 3.8"35 0.3271 2 368 52.3 -10 137.1 0."309 1.2578 1.2781t 0.9839 2 369 52.3. 1t00 136.3 . 0 . 5691 1.2507 7.3129 0.1710 2 370 52.3 1t03 90.9 0.5lt75 0.8339 5.8881 0.1"16 2 371 52.3 ..21 137.1 0.5738 1.2582 8.2811 0.1519 2 372 52.3 "25 138.7 0.5lt38 1. 2732 6.0652 0.2099 1 373 52.3 1t25 90.9 0.5325 0.83"6 5.3562 .0.1558 2 371t '52.3 -30 90.3 0.lt913 - 0.8288 3.3181 0.2lt98 1 375 52.3 1t00 91." 0."618 0.8388 1.9765 0.lt2"" 1 BUR' . 2 --- STABLE OPERArIO' UIII'!'S OP III'J' ARE . LBS/SEC PT*3 ATN*2 BUR' = 1 --- S'!'AaILI'!'r LIllI'!' aURN . 0 --- BURIIBR GOES OU'!' < H... :::1 /.'" ~. image: ------- CONPARISON OF PREDICTED AND EXPERIMENTAL BURliER S'1ABILITI DATA PAGE 16 RUN VOL AIR TENP AIR FLOfl . EQUIV I.r DATA lilT LIN INr RAT BURN NO. 18*3 of LiJSIHR RATIO W/VP*2 fI/VP*2 ID/IL 316 52.3 1+00 90.3 0.1+711 0.8288 2.2577 0.3671 1 377 52.3 1+05 "8.3 0.1+838 0...1t32 2.71t0" 0.1617 2 378 52.3 "28 "5.5 0."875 0"1+173 3.1372 0.1330 1 379 52.3 375 "7.0 0.1+650 0."311 1.8751+ . 0.2299 1 380 52.3 ..12 1+5.7 0."395 0 . ..198 1.4789 0.2839 1 381 52.3 411 138.5 0.4507 1.2710 1.71t98 0.726" 1 382 52.3 ..11 138.7 0."501 1.2728 1.7336 0.7342 1 383 52.3 403 47.1 0.4725. 0."320 2.3309 0.18 53 1 38" 52.3 76 91. It 0.5775 0.8390 2.8643 0.2929 1 385 52.3 90 91.6 0.5625 0.81+10 2.4911 0.3376 2 386 52.3 91 89.8 0.528" 0.8245 1.5705 0.5244 1 387 52.3 80 47.8 0.5255 0."389 1.""50 0.303" 1 388 52.3 81 IU.5 0.5337 0.4180 1.6331 0.2557 1 389 -1.0 85 48.2 1.233" 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -1 390 52.3 90 80~9 0.5"00 0.7428 1.8470 0."021 1 391 52.3 93 80.5 0."900 0.7384 0.8741 0.8439 2 BURN. 2 --- S'1ABLE OPERATION UNITS OF INT ARE LBS/SEC FTfr3 ATNfr2 BURII . 1 --- STABILITI LINIT BURN. 0 --- BURNER GOES OUT < Ho-f :::t- '''- ..-. CD image: ------- COIIPABISO. 0,. PRDIcrU .UB... I.1l,.'ICI..C7 A.D .ZPERINBliTAL E1USSIOliS DATA PAGE 1 RU. BUB. AIR 'U.1, AIR IlflUIV COlI. PII.D PB.D COG HCG NOBG NOTG .0. ~"P ~DlP ,UJJI .A~IO ~DIP ."'1 ... BNN ENN ENN ENN 0' 0' I,.S/.. 0' G/¥-G G/KG G/KG G/KG G/KG 1 -1 75 71 22.3 0."171 2107 0.1'71 32.1552 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 2 -1 10 71 22.2 0.5301 23... 0~1813 10.7091 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 1. 0000 3 - 1 85 72 "5.3 0."122 2011 0.1325 17.5205 -1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 -1.0000 .. - 1 15 73 "S.3 0 ."52" 112" 0.1170 103.0000 -1. 0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 1.0000 5 - 1 IS 73 "7.0 0."150 I1n 0.1100 110.0000 1..0000 -1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 6 - 1 II 7.. 11.1 0."501 1111 0.1170 103.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 7 - 1 '0 75 11.7 0."'''1 2101 0.11"1 15.1116 -1.0000 1. 0000 - .1. 0000 -1. 0000 8 2 '0 73 11.7 0.1321 27"2 0.1111 10.111'7 -1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 1.0000 , 1 90 7.. 61.7 0.5073 2215 0.1"51 n.ll07 -1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1'.0000 10 0 90 7.. 11.7 0."697 1"''' 0.1100 110.0000 -1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 11 1 90 7.. 11.7 0.5230 2303 0.'111 31.9..5..' 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 12 0 90 7.. 11.7 0."322 115.. 0.1000 100.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 13 - 1 90 7.. 11.7 0.5311 2371 0 . "'01 21.1793 -1. 0000 -1. 0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 14 1 90 75 11.7 .0.5073 2215 0 . '''51 5".9107 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 1.0000 15 2 - '0 7.. 11.7 0.501' 2225 0.'''73 52.7310' - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 16 2 '0 75 71..1 0.5689 2..11 0.1'7"3 25.703" - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 17 1 90 75 71.1 0.5"17 2369 0.9115 38.5179 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 -1~0000 18 -2 90 73 71.1 0.551t1 2_27 0."82 31.7835 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 l' 2 11 73 71.0 0.6115 2659 O. ''''1 15.9106 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 20 2 92 7- 71.0 0!,5377 2352 O. 9S11 "0.1180 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 1.0000 21 0 92 7- 78.0 0._609 1'''& 0.1100 110.0000 - 1. 0000 -1.0000 - 1. 0000 -1.0000 22 0 93 72 7.7.9 0."960 2013 0.1890 111.0000 - 1. 0000 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 23 1 93 72 77.9 0.5209 2258 0.9"21 57.9"- - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 2.. 1 93 7- 77.9 0.5312 2356 0.9597 _0.29"3 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 -1.0000 25 1 93 75 77.9 0.563,1 2_70 0 .9726 27.""82 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 26 2 90 72 103.3 0.6937 293.. 0.1887 11.3""" -1.0000 1. 0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 27 2 93 73 103.1 0.57111 2517 0 .9688 31.1919 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 28 0 96 73 102.8 0.522'7 2133 0.8800 120.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 29 0 97 73 102.7 0.5118 211.. 0.8870 113.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 30 1 97 711 102.7 0.5231 2136 0.8800 120.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 BURN= 2- --STABLB PRED B~N = 1000-(1-81'1'7) .Oll - BURNER DATA FOR NOX BURN=1- --LINIT PRED EPP7 PRON THBOR7 liar - NOX FROM VAPOR GENERATOR EXH. < 'QUR1i=O---GOIIIG OUT H~ Hilt Ht1" I"" ....~ .0 image: ------- COl.fPARISON OF PREDICTED BURNER INEFFICIENCY AND EXPERIMENTAL EMISSIONS DATA PAGE 2 RUN BURN AIR FUEL AIR EQUIV COMB PRED PRED COG HCG NOBG NOTG NO. TEMP TElrlP FLOW RATIO TEMP EFFY EMM EMM EMM EMM EMM of of LDS/HR of G/KG G/KG G/KG G/KG G/KG 31 2 102 75 120.9 0.5930 2569 0.9690 31.0396 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.00')')" 32 2 105 75 120.6 0.5465 2339 0.9353 64.7047 -1.QOOO -1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.000~ 33 1 108 77 120.2 0.5158 2120 0.8800 120.0000 - -1.0000 -1.0000 - 1. 0000 1.0000 34 0 95 75 121.6 0.5099 2106 0.8870 113.0000 .-1.0000 - 1. 0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 35 1 102 73 120.9 0.5190 2126 0.8800 120.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 36 2 112 74 153.8 0.5878 2530 0.9563 43.7293 -1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 37 2 117 74 153.2 0.5613 2392 0.9325 67.4910 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 38 2 120 74 152.8 0.5451 222~ 0.8790 121. 0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 39 0 120 75 152.8 0.5299 2175 0.8800 120.0000 -1. 0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 40 - 1 120 75 152.8 0.5135 0.8800 120.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 - 1. 0000 2122 41 1 124 75 152.3 0.5470 2282 0.9021 97.9472 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 42 2 91 75 103.2 0.7565 3127 0.9915 8.5202, 2.3336 -1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 43 1 93 75 103.1 0.5222 2140 0.8850 115.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 44 '2 87 73 41.8 0.7529 3127 0.9965 3.4990 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 45 2 85 75 41.9 0.6916 2941 0.9954 4.5711 -1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000. - 1.0000 46 2 84 75 41.9 0.6132 2678 0.9918 8.1577 -1.0000. - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 47 . 2 82 75 42.0 0.5333 2373 0.9791 20.8626 -1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 48 2 82 74 42.1 0.4910 2170 0.9542 45.8251 0.2371 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 49 0 80 72 42.1 0.4497 1913 0.8980 102.0000 22.3454 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 50 1 80 73 42.1 0.4997 2215 0.9619. 38.1283 10.1863 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1. 0000 51 2 83 73 25.4 0.6097 '2673 0.9950 5.0074 -1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 52 2 82 73 25.4 0.5406 2420 0.9892 10.7788 -1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 53 1 82 73 25.4 0.4645 2083 0.9584 41.5690 -1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 54 1 83 73 25.4 0.4510 1992 0.9356 64.3729 -1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 55 - 1 83 73 42.0 3.1753 0.0000 0.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 1492 56 - 1 81 73 42.1 2.6412 0.0000 0.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 1798 57 - 1 82 73 42.0 2.8966 0.0000 0.0000 6.4517 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 1639 58 - 1 85 75 41.9 2.6510 0.0000 0.0000 109.9697 -1. 0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 1794 59 - 1 85 75 41.9 3.1812 0.0000 0.0000 50.9444 -1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 1490 60 - 1 90 75 41.7 1.9452 0.0000 0.0000 53.2602 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 2447 ., BURN=2---STABLE PR ED EMM = 1000x(1-EFFY) NOB - 8URliER DATA FOR NOX BURN=1---LIMIT PRED EFFY FROM THEORY NOT - NOX FROM VAPOR GENERATOR EX H. BURN=O---GOING OUT Table VIII-20 image: ------- COIIPABISO. 0' PBDIcrD 'U.'.. I.."ICI..C7 A'D '8ZP..III..rA£ .IIISSIO.6 DArA PAG. 3 RU' BUR' AIR '0.£ AIR .IIUIV COli. PRD PR.D COt; BCG ,OBG .0rG '0. rap rap '£011 RArIO rnp .", .1111 .,,11 .1111 81111 BIIII 0' 0' £.8/.. 0' G/IG G/IG G/IG GlIG G/XG 61 -1 90 75 "1.7 1.9"52 2....7 0.,0000 0.0000 125".8720 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 12 -1 15 72 1Itl.9 2.6510 179.. 0.0000 0.0000 1135.752" - 1.0000 0.0013 -1.0000 13 - 1 87 72 ."1.1 3 .1870 nil 0.0000 0.0000 3.5209 - 1. 0000 0.0023 -1.0000 I" -1 85 72 "1.9 2.1510 179.. 0.0000 0.0000 910. ..0..7 - 1. 0000 0.0004. -1.0000 65 -1 II 75 "1.1 2.7192 1717 0.0000 0.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 1. 0000 II -1 15 75. "1.9 2.1515 1661 0.0000 0.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 .-1.0000 -1. 0000 17 1 15 75 "1.9 2.7111 1720. 0.0000 0.0000 284.03"5 - 1.0000 0.0013 1.0000 II -1 71 75 25.5 2.5212 1875 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 69 - 1 82 75 2".7 2.3985 1971 0.0000 0.0000 1272.6096 122.4420 0.0016 -1.0000 70 - 1 85 71 25.3 2.9117 1629 0.0000 0.0000 104.1. ..344 472.0"85 0.0007 1.0000 71 -1 81 78 25.3 3.01"1 151tl 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 72 1 90 78 11.7 2.3813 1993 0.0000 0.0000 1200.7858 151.4368 0.0006 - 1. 0000 73 - 1 93 71 11.5 2.""93 19..2 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 7.. 1 8& 73 25.3 0.50"" 2278 0.9821 17.9200 1. 21 04 9.5854 0.0014 - 1.0000 75 2 85 73 25.3 0.6219 2717 0.9955 .. ...671 0.1944 - 1.0000 0.1023. .. 1. 0000 76 2 85 75 25.3 0.8339 3339 0.9981 1.9035 0.3193 4.9987 0.4057 -1. 0000 77 .2 85 75 25.3 0.9910 3558 0.9877 12.30"1 6.6866 2.3294 0.3974 -1.0000 78 1 90 75 11.7 0.557" 2"59 0.977" 22.6080 101.7531 57.3660 0.0119 1.0000 79 2 92 79 11.6 0.6869 2921 0.9931 1.8177 0.9586 1.4905 0.2489 -1.0000 80 2 90 79 11.7 0 ~ 9927 3555 0.9812 18.7995 21. 5030 - 1.0000 0.3622 -1.0000 81 - 1 92 80 11.6 1.""32 31..3 0.0000 0.0000 188.0142 - 1. 0000 0.0000 1. 0000 82 2 103 75 102.1 0.5050 209& 0.8878 '113.0000 105.3359 7.7417 0.0000 - 1.0000 83 2 105 78 101.9 0.7611 3165 0.9920 7.9883 2.7654 3.4637 0.3348 - 1.0000 8.. 2 100 72 102." 0.7"6.. 310.. 0.991" 8.6103 3.5505 3.9463 0.4516 - 1.0000 85 2 103 77 102.1 0.9171 3..93 0.9899 10.1318 12.6460 1.3655' 0.4084 - 1. 0000 86 -1 105 77 101.9 1.2812 ' '3502 0.0000 . 0.0000 866.5566 0.97 24 0.0264 - 1.0000 87 2 300 600 59.3 0.5391 2519 0.98 59 lIt.07'" 0.13..4 1.5420 0.0411 - 1.0000 88 . 2 300 100 59.3 0.6819 3071 0.9955 .....707 1.2088 0.2238 0.3218 - 1.0000 89 -1 300 600 59.3 1.1075 3658 0.0000 0.0000 "76.8417 0.8592 0.0356 - 1.0000 90 2 300 720 59.6 0.5770 2108 0.990" 9.5539 0.4080 0.5712 0.2221 - 1.0000 BURII=2---STAB£'8 PR'8D '11111 = 1000-(1-BFF7) 'OB - BURNER DATA FOR BOX BURBzl---LIIIIT PRBD 'IFF' FRON THEOR7 'OT - 'OX FRON VAPOR GENERATOR EXB. BUR'aO---GOI'G OUT Table VIII-2l image: ------- COMPARISON OF PREDICTED BURNER INF.FFICIENCY AND EXPERIMENTAL EMISSIONS DATA PAGE 4 RUN BURN AIR FUEL AIR EQUIV COMB PRED PRED COG HCG NOBG NOTG NO. TEMP TE1.fP FLOW RATIO TEMP EFFY EMU EMM EMM EMM EMM OF of LBS/HP of G/KG G/KG G/KG G/KG G/KG 91 2 310 720 59.3 0.8222 3440 0.9967 3.3125 1.7928 0.0851 0.3795 - 1.0000 92 - 1 300 720 59.3 1.1075 i 3658. 0.0000 0.0000 - 699.7134 0.1234 0 .0915 1. 0000 93 2 250 440 165.3 0.4863 2176 0.9011 98.8889 51.3433 - 1.0000 0.0128 -1.0000 94 2 250 485 165.3 0.6478 2900 0.9890 11.0026 .4.0006 - 1.0000 0 . 1154 1.0000 95 2 250 510 165.3 0.8299 3416 0.9937 6.2930 9.3111 - 1.0000 0.5037 - 1.0000 96 2 250 520 132.9 0.9865 3636 0.9817 18.2715 207.8635 - 1.0000' 0.4010 - 1.0000 97 2 95 77 55.9 0.4881 2192 0.9648 35.1657 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.3787 - 1.0000 98 2 95 77 55.9 0.6175 2705 0.9936 6.3709 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.4642 -1.0000 99 2 95 77 55.9 0.8087 3283 0.9974 2.6068 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.4747 1.0000 100 2 100 77 55.6 0.9984 3565 0.9841 15.8934 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.3623 - 1.0000 101 - 1 102 77 55.5 1.1925 3485 '0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 0.3553 - 1.0000 102 2 102 77 89.0 0.7520 3132 0.9954 4.5716 - 1.0000 1. 0000 0.4443 - 1. 0000 103 2 400 770 50.0 0.8359 3525 0.9984 1. 6190 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 104 '2 400 800 50.0 0.5406 2666 0.9946 5.4009 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000. 1.0000 105 2 84 88 49.9 0.9250 3503 0.9964 3.6101 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 106 1 85 95 49.9 0.4888 2194 0.9687 31. 2602 3.9308 - 1.0000 0.0049 - 1.0000 107 0 85 89 49.9 0.3925 1729 0.9060 94.0000 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 108 2 85 92 49.9 0.4448 1900 0.8980 102.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 109 2 85 98 49.9 0.5563 2477 0.9890 11.0324 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 110 2 400 730 50.0 0.4039 2115 0.9606 39.3993 16.3425 - 1.0000 0.0030 1.0000 111 2 400 730 50.0 0.3915 '2044 0.9450 55.0286 47.2658 - 1.0000 0.0832 - 1.0000 112 2 400 720 33.2 0.4688 2407 0.9919 8.0925 0.1555 - 1.0000 0.7380 - 1.0000 113 2 400 725 33.2 0..3891 2072 0.9677 32.3190 17.5557 - 1.0000 0.1116 - 1.0000 114 2 400 730 33.2 0.3805 2027 0.9598 40.1876 11.5914 - 1.0000 0.2476 - 1.0000 115 1 400 720 33.1 0.3883 2068 0.9672 32.8187 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.0186 - 1.0000 116 2 400 710 82.7 0.5375 2647 0.9906 9.3964 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 117 2 400 710 82.8 0.4312 2209 0.9573 42.7243 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 118 0 400 730 82.8 0.3861 1916 0.8790 121. 0000 68.5008 - 1.0000 0.0125 - 1.0000 119 2 400 720 126.8 0.4672 2346 0.9623 37.7045 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.0308 - 1.0000 120 2 400 475 127.0 0.4279 2041 0.8700 130.0000 -1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 BURlJ=2- --STABLE PRED El,!M = 1000)(1-EPF1) NOD - BURNER DATA FQR NOX BURli=l- - -LIMIT PRED EPFY PROU THEORY NOT - NOX FROM VAPOR GENERATOR SXH. T"IRN=O---GOING OUT ;S~ Hili HtJ' ..... !\JCI !\J image: ------- COIIPARISOB OF PREDICTED BURliER INEFFICIENCY AND EXPERIUENTAL EMISSIONS DATA PAGE 5 RUN BUR' AIR FUEL .AIR EQUIY COMB PRED PRED COG HCG NOBG NOTG '0. TENP TENP FLOJI RATIO TENP EFFY EUN EIIII EMM Ellf.1 EIIN OF OF LBSIBR of GIKG GIKG G/KG G/KG G/KG 121 2 ..00 ..50 126.8 0."469 2239' 0.9"32 56.7651 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1. 0000 -1.0000 122 0 ..00 450 126.8 0."010 1963 0.8770 123.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 -1. 0000 123 2 7.. 70 50.5 0.7951 3236 0.9975, 2 . ".59 5 0.3215 -1.0000 0...28.. -1.0000 12" 1 80 78 "9.5 0.47"3 2112 0.9556 .......2..3 13.8280 -1.0000 0.0757 -1.0000 125 - 1 85 78 "7.6 0.4930 2218 0.9128 27.2300 11.26"7 1.0000 0.0582 -1.0000 126 0 95 78 127.3 0 . 5049 2092 0.8880 112.0000 12.3792 - 1.0000 0.2"59 -1.0000 127 1 95 18 119.6 0.5687 2498 0.9157 2".3086 16.0 litO -1.0000 0.2088 -1. 0000 128 2 90 100 67.8 0 . 5"11 2..11 0.9815 18...8..2 1. 0000 -1.0000 - 1. 0000 -1.0000 129 2 80 80 86.2 0.5061 2217 0.9515 ..8...529 - 1.0000 -1. 0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 130 2 80 80 82.8 0.5822 2556 0.98 56 14.3664 - 1.0000 -1.0000 -1. 0000 -1.0000 131 2 80 80 66.7 0.6869 2923 0.9952 4.7632 - 1.0000 -1. 0000 1.0000 -1.0000 132 -1 80 80 "".5 1. 0553 3562 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 -1. 0000 133 2 80 80 83.4 0.5628 2"80 0.9819 18.0994 - 1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 134 '2 80 80 66.7 0.7036 2975 0.9957 ...3....2 - 1.0000 -1.0000 1. 0000 1.0000 135 0 80 80 72.3 0.4347 1864 0.9000 100.0000 - 1.0000 38.1951 - 1.0000 -1.0000 136 2 88 90 72.3 0.5318 2367 0.9770 23.0175 - 1.0000 95.3023 -1.0000 -1.0000 137 2 90 90 66.7 0.7036 2982 0.9957 ".2635 - 1.0000 0.9204 -1.0000' -1.0000 138 2 95 95 96.6 0.640" 2773 0.9907 9.3221 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 0.3612 -1.0000 139 2 95 100 95.0 0.7260 3050 0.99"6 5.""36 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 140 - 1 95 100 91.1 1'.0266 .3569 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 1. 0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 141 - 1 95 100 77.3 1.2099 " 3..60 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 - -1.0000 1.0000 142 2 95 100 77.8 0.5389 2399 0 . 91 &0 22.0132 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 -1. 0000 143 - 1 95 100 77.8 1.2013 3..72 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 -1.0000 1. 0000 141t - 1 95 100 91.1 1.0266 ,3569 0.0000 0.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0009 - -1.0000 1.0000 llt5 2 95 100 94.4 0.7302 3062 0.9947 5.3162 - 1.0000 - 1.0000' - -1.0000 1.0000 146 2 95 '100 96.6 0.5lt33 2..0.. 0.9732 26.8288 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 1.0000 llt7 1 95 100 98.3 0.4702 1979 0.8900 110.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 - - 1. 0000 1.0000 1 1t8, 95 100 0.761" 3153 0.9954 1t.6212 - 1.0000 - - -1.0000 2 90.5 1.0000 1. 0000 149 - 1 95 100 53.6 1.2873 ,3356 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 0.0000 -1.0000 150 2 95 100 56.9 0.4388 1887 0.8980 102.0000' - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 BURN=2---STABLE PREDEMH = 1000x(1-EFFY) NOB - BURNER DATA FOR NOX BURN=l- --L'IMIT PRED EFFY FROM THEORY NOT - NOX FROM VAPOR GENERATOR EXH. BURN=O---GOING OUT Table VIII-23 image: ------- COMPARISON OF PREDICTED BURNER INEFFICIENCY AND EXPERIMENTAL EHISSIONS DATA PAGE 6 RUN BURN AIR FUEL AIR EQUIV CONB PRED PRED COG HCG NOBG NOTG NO. TEI-IP TEMP r LOfI RATIO TENP EFFY EMM EMU EMM EMM EMM of of LBSIHR of GIKG GIKG GIKG GIKG GIXG 151 2 400 160 84.0 0.7066 3197 0.9969 3.1313 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 152 2 400 330 79.5 0.7451 3308 0.9974 2.6398 - 1.0000 0.1098 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 153 1 360 300 111.2 0.4703 2329 0.9642 35.8068 - 1. 0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 154 2 355 200 55.6 0.7013 3155 0.9977 2.2649 "':1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 155 2 270 2'5 98.9 0.5043 2401 0.9743 25.7017 - 1.0000 :>.1179 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 156 0 260 255 103.3 0.4292 1963 0.8860 114.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 157 1 260 290 100.0 2706 0.9896 10.3856 - 1.0000 0.0099 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.5856 158 2 260 317 100.6 0.6375 2884 0.9931 6.8859 - 1.0000 0.0700 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 159 2 265 350 97.3 0.7598 3257 0.9962 3.8282 - 1. 0000 0.0621 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 160 - 1 270 410 90.7 1.2226 0.0000 0.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 3546. 161 - 1 275 392 89.6 1.2418 :>.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 0.0789 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 3525 162 - 1 275 480 87.9 1.5592 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 6.4648 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 3096 163 1 360 110 22.0 0.5464 2663 0.9976 2.4453 - 1. 0000 63.1902 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 164 2 370 120 22.0 0.7565 3321 0.9993 0.7427 - 1. 0000 28.6829 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 165 2 375 120 30.8 0.7925 3415 0.9990 0.9942 - 1.0000 0.0721 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 166 2 365 140 44.5 0.6641 3051 0.9979 2.1090 - 1.0000 0.0337 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 167 2 370 150 44.0 0.8406 3518 0.9985 1.4867 - 1.0000 0.0336 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 168 2 370 170 41. 2 0.9728 3701 0.9950 4.9734 - 1.0000 0.0649 - 1.0000 -1.0000 169 2 345 180 55.0 0.7296 3230 0.9979 2.0617 - 1.0000 0.0260 - 1.0000 1.0000 170 2 325 190 69.8 0.5771 ;2733 0.9935' 6.5443 - 1.0000 0.0051 - 1.0000 - 1.0000' 171 2 305 195 78.1 0 . 5162 2491 0.98.51 14.8941 - 1.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 172 0 275 195 97.8 0.4118 1917 0.8870 113.0000 - 1. 0000 1.0630 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 . 173 - 1 -1 - 1 -1.0 - 1.0000 - 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 . .. 174 2 400 250 96.6 0 . 6507 3027 0.9954 4.6110 - 1.0000 0.0261 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 175 2 405 275 93.3 0.7925 3428 0.9971 2.9001 - 1.0000 0.0291 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 176 2 405 280 93.1 0.8733 3597 0.9967 3.3376 - 1. 0000 0.0308 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 177 2 405 200 98.6 0.4239 2145 0.9338 66.1992 - 1.0000 0.0000 0.2043 .- 1.0000 178 2 405 195 95.9 0.5413 2661 0.9896 10.4432 - 1.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 179 2 350 300 133.7 0.8388 3497 0.9954 4.5738 - 1.0000 0.0088 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 180 2 345 310 134.6 0.7140 3178 0.9947 5.3268 - 1.0000 0.0151 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 BURN=2-- -STABLE PR ED EMM = 1000x(1-EFFY) NOB - BURNER DATA F~R NOX BURN=l-- -LIl4IT PRED EFFY PROU THEORY NOT - NOX FROM VAPOR GENERATOR EXH. BURN=O---GOING OUT Table VIlI-24 image: ------- COIIPARISOll OF PR8DIC'r6D BURlI8R IlIEFFICIElICr AND EXPERIIIElI'rAL EUISSIONSDA'rA PAGE 7 RUlI BURlI AIR PUEL AIR EQUIV COIIB PRED PR8D COG RCG NOBG NOTG .0. '1'EIIP '1'EIIP PLOtl BA'1'IO '1'EIIP EFFY EMil E14M EMM EMM EMM op op LBSIBR op G/KG G/KG G/KG G/KG G/KG 181 2 340 305 136.1 0.6205 2880 0 .9911 8.9491 - 0.0137 -1.0000 - 1.0000 1. 0000 182 2 340 303 138.8 0.5"58 2613 0.9821 17.8870 -1. 0000 0.0108 1.0000 - 1.0000 183 2 335 295 139.0 0."894 2372 0.9616 38.3977 0.0062 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 1. 0000 18~ 1 334 280 141.1 0.4435 2053 0.,8170 123.0000 -1.0000 0.0069 0.1083 - 1.0000 185 2 335 320 139.0 0.5014 2427 0.9681 31.8877 - 1.0000 0.0240 -1.0000 -1.0000 186 2 335 340 139.0 0.5631 2674 0.9849 15.1181 - 1.0000 0.0000 0.4135 1.0000 187 -1 - 1 -1' -1.0 -1.0000 -1 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 188 2 430 340 71.9 0.6830 3t-.9 0.9970 3.0325 - 0.0077 - 1. 0000' - 1.0000 1.0000 189 2 ..30 320 79.0 0.5532 2727 0.9929 7.1253 - 0.0000 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 1.0000 190 1 430 300 79.0 0.4885 2..88 0.9856 14.3782 -1.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 191 2 400 295 66.9 0.5766 2788 0.9947 5.2707 1.0000 0.0148 -1.0000 -1. 0000 192 2 405 295 56.0 0.6896 3153 0.9978 2.2005 - 1.0000 0.0039 1. 0000 -1.0000 193 - 1 410 360 51.6 1.2578 3587 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 23.7001 - 1.0000 -1.0000 194 - 1 ..10 .. 20 113.0 0.5"U 2679 0.9883 11.6743 - 1.0000 0.0314 - 1. 0000 -1.0000 195 -1 410 410 113.6 0.4858 2446 0.9762 23.7640 - 1.0000 0.0353 - 1.0000 -1.0000 196 - 1 410 390 115.2 0.4920 2470 0.9778 22.1823 - 1.0000 8.9366 - 1.0000 1. 0000 197 - 1 430 340 101." 0.5304 2640 0.9884 11.5726 - 1.0000 0.9200 -1. 0000 - 1.0000 198 - 1 360 260 "1.2 0.6579 3028 0.9980 2.0329 -1.0000 0.0084 1. 0000 -1.0000 199 -1 340 320 38.5 0.9818 3690 0.9938 6.1932 1.0000 0.0380 -1.0000 -1.0000 200 -1 410 270 38.5 0.6616 3074 0.9983 1.6980 - 1.0000 0.5087 1.0000 -1.0000 201 2 86 82 83.2 0.8221 3307 0.9961 3.9168 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 -1. 0000 1.0000 202 2 82 82 102.9 0.7187 3017 0.9938 6.2446 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 -1.0000 203 2 110 100 1"8.0 0.6216 2704 0.9832 16.7514 1. 8195 0.0278 0.3728 - 1. 0000 204 -1 1 1 -1.0 -1.0000 -1 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 205 2 313 77 76.8 0.6978 3114 '0.9966 3.3925 - 1. 0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 206 2 253 77 167.8 0.6498 2909 0.9890 10.9588 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 207 2 245 77 181.5 0.5601 2572 0.9728 27.2419 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.2588. 0.1527 -1 70 -1 51.5 0.8177 3292 0.9980 1.9506 - 1.0000 - - 1.0000 - 1.0000 208 1. 0000 209 -1 70 - 1 49.9 0.9883 3549 0.9904 9.5711 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 210 -1 70 -1 49.9 0.6666 2856 0.9968 3.2151 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 BURN=2---STABLE PRED EMM = 1000IC(1-EFFY) NOB - BURNER DATA FOR NOX BURN=1- --LIMIT PRED EFFY FROM THEORY NOT - NOX FROM VAPOR GENERATOR EXH. BURN=O---GOING OUT Table VIII-25 image: ------- COJ.!PARISON OF PREDICTED BURNER INEFFICIEnCY AND EXPERIMENTAL EMISSIONS DATA PAGE 8 RUN BURN AIR FUEL AIR EQUIV CONB PRED PRED COG RCG NOBG NOTG NO. TEMP TEMP .FLOW RATIO TEMP EPFY ENU ENN EMM EMM EMN of of LBSIHR of GIKG GIKG GIKG GIKG GIKG 211 - 1 70 - 1 ~9.9 1.0852 35~~ 0.0000 0.0000 - 1. 0000 -1.0000 - - 1. 0000 1.0000 212 - 1 70 - 1 102.9 0.6368 27~6 0.9915 8.~514 - 1.0000 1.0000 - - 1. 0000 1.0000 213 - 1 70 - 1 99.7 0.7865 3208 0.9961 3.9081 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - - 1.0000 1.0000 21~ - 1 70 -1 96.6 1.0999 3537 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 -1.0000 215 -1 70 - 1 ~9.9 0.~8~5 2175 0.9729 27.0681 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 216 - 1 70 - 1 48.2 0.6615 2839 0.9968 3.2156 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.QOOO - 1. 0000 217 2 80 - 1 83.8 0.6044 2638 0.9885 11. 47~6 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 218 2 100 70 91. 5 0.6187 2708 0.9919 8.1171 0.1629 -1.0000 0.0726 - 1.0000 219 2 110 70 95.3 0.7845 3228 0.9965 3.5301 5.5606 - 1.0000 0.9701 -1.0000 I 220 2 100 100 86.2 0.5854 2583 0.9863 13.6626 - 1.0000 0.3391 0.2876 0.2~31 221 2 100 100 116.8 0.5761 253~ 0 .9788 21.1727 - 1. 0000 0.3523 - - 1.0000 1.0000 222 2 100 100 131.8 0.5105 2156 0.9078 92.1901 - 1.0000 2.095~ - - 1.0000 1.0000 223 2 100 100 108.4 0.6205 2704 0.9877 12.3~88 - 1. 0000 0.5651 - 1.0000 - 1. 0.000 22~ 2 100 100 168.5 0.5562 2413 0.9555 ~~.532~ - 1. 0000 0.3447 - 1.0000. -1.0000 225 2 100 100 151.8 0.6173 2679 0.9817 18.2645 - 1.0000 0 . 9205 - 1.0000 -1.0000 226 1 100 100 177.9 0.5266 2149 0.8800 120.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 227 2 76 82 55.8 0.5796 2554 0.9903 9.7308 0.1744 0.9677 0.7041 -1.0000 228 2 82 90 58.4 0.5761 2545 0.9896 10.4349 0.1755 0.4170 0.0989 - 1.0000 229 2 85 95 57.6 0.5773 2552 0.9899 10.0640 0.1751 0.6529 0.3103 - 1.0000 230 2 433 98 57.6 0.5779 2818 0.9959 4.1~52 - 1. 0000 0.4560 0.2053 -1.0000 231 2 420 100. 60.8 0.5473 2702 0.9941 5.8817 - 1. 0000 0.3310 0.1174 -1.0000 232 2 410 100 90.9 0.5203 2589 0.9878 12.1522 - 1.0000 0.2877 0.1879 -1.0000 233 2 407 100 90.2 0.6172 2925 0.9948 5.2052 - 1.0000 0.4614 0.5288 1.0000 234 2 90 82 7f..9 0~6725 2881 0.9941 5.9028 - 1.0000 1.5728 1.2813 -1.0000 235 2 92 89 77.3 0.5930 2608 0.9886 11.4415 - 1. 0000 2.6~91 0.8953 -1.0000 236 2 89 89 77.7 0.6003 2632 0.9892 10.7661 - 1.0000 2.97 69 0.5918 -1.0000 237 2 82 82 38.4 0.6353 2760 0.9961 3.8535 - 1.0000 2.9425 1.5835 1.9999 238 2 79 70 49.1 0.4880 2202 0.9763 23.7091 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 0.0637 1.0000 239 2 80 71 48.9 0.5391 2414 0.9894 10.5573 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 - 0.1855 1.0000 240 2 82 71 48.9 0.6563 2830 0.9967 3.2991 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.4526 - 1.0000 BURN= 2- - -STABLE PRED EMU = 1000x(1-EFPY) NOB - BURNgR DATA F.OR NOX BURN=1- - -LIi>1IT PRED EFPY FRON THEORY NOT - NOX FROU VAPOR GENERATOR EXR. BURN=O---GOING OUT Table VIII-26 image: ------- COHPARISOIt OF PREDICrED BURNER IlIEFFICIEIICr AND EXPERIMENTAL E/.!ISSIONS DArA PAGE 9 RUN BURN AIR FUEL AIR EQUIV CONB PRED PRED COG HCG NOBG NOTG NO. rENP rEHP FLOJ/ RATIO TEMP EFFr EUlI EMN EMM EMM ENM OF OF LBS/HR of G/KG G/KG G/KG G/KG G/KG 241 2 82 72 48.8 0.7266 3051, 0.9978 2.2394 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.9359 1. 0000 242 2 78 68 49.2 0.7617 3150 0.9980 2.0079 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 1.8018 -1.0000 243 2 80 72 48.8 0.8945 3457 0.9978 2.-2083 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 2.6989 1. 0000 2 79 68 98.1 0.5043 2221 0.9570 43.0363 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 244 0.1184 1. 0000 80 70 97.6 0.5994 2622 0 .'9890 10.9873 '- 1.0000 - -1.0000 245 2 1.0000 0.2608 246 -1 80 70 60.5 0.6393 2770 0.9953 4.6675 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 - -1.0000 1.0000 - 75 70 -1.0 0.4609 2131 0.0000 0.0000 - 1. 0000 - - -1.0000 247 1 1.0000 1. 0000 248 - 85 70 47.2 0.5625 2507 0.9925 7.4574 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 - -1.0000 1 1.0000 249 - 1 75 70 49.2 0.8476 3363 0.9981 1.8957 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 -1.0000 0.1125 250 - 85 70 48.8 0.8555 3386 0.9981 1.8842 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 1 1.2634 1.0000 251 - 85 ' 70 100.8 0.4983 2190 0.9502 49.7573 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 1 0.0767 252 - 90 70 100.4 0.5006 2210 0.954,3 45.7280 - 1.0000 - -1.0000 1 1. 0000 0.0501 - 97.0 0.577 2 2549 0.9866 13.4016 - 1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 253 1 92 70 0.1275 - 93 70 100.1 0.6412 2779 0.9925 7.5138 - 1.0000 1.0000 -1.0000 254 1 0.2430 255 2 93 70 90.0 0.6063 2653 0.9882 11.7618 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1. 0000 , 1. 0000 256 2 85 70 97.6 0.7188 3024 0.9954 4.6069 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 0.4797 - 1.0000 257 2 85 70 97.6 0.7852 3214 0.9963 3.7465 - 1. 0000 -1.0000 1.3082 -1.0000 258 2 85 70 97.5 0.9004 3466 0.9955 4.4843 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 2.0235 1.0000 259 2 85 ,70 97.4 1.0000 3556 0.9804 19.6038 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 2.6256 - 1.0000 260 2 85 70 97.3 0.9609 3538 0.9915 8.5162 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.9896 -1.0000 261 - 1 89 70 97.2 1.1875 3482 0.0000 0.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 1.1944 1.0000 262 2 90 70' 144.4 0.5167 2244 0.9436 56.4055 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 0.2285 1.0000 263 2 97 70 143.5 0.5957 2609 0.9835 16.4723 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 - 0.3739 1.0000 264 2 85 73 48.8 0.4951 2240 0.9799 20.0719 0.1469 - 1.0000 0.1062 - 1.0000 265 2 85 73 48.8 0.5820 2577 0.9938 6.2279 0.1737 - 1.0000 0.4157 - 1.0000 266 2 96 70 143.0 0.5677 2498 0.9772 22.8177 0.2547 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 267 2 96 70 97.8 0.5045 2243 0.9611 38.9211 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 '-1.0000 0.0970 96 70 97.2 0.5817 2569 0.9874 12.6322 - 1. 0000 - 26'8 2 1.0000 0.2692 1. 0000 96 72 97.2 0.6582 2838 0.9936 6.3814 - 1. 0000 - - 269 2 1.0000 0.6805 1.0000 270 2 96 72 97.1 0.6860 2929 0.9947 5.3297 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 -1.0000 1.9372 BURN=2---STABLE PRED EMM = 1000x(1-EFFY) NOB - BURNER DATA FOR NOX BURN=1- --LIMIT PRED EFFY FROM THEORY NOT - NOX FROM VAPOR GENERATOR EXH. BURN=O---GOING OUT Table VIII-27 image: ------- COMPARISON OF PREDICTED BURNER INRFFICIENCY AND EXPERIMENTAL EMISSIONS DATA PAGE 10 RUN BURN AIR FUEL AIR EQU1V CONB PRED PRED COG NCG NOBG NOTG NO. TEMP TEMP FLOW RATIO TEMP EFFY Ell/.! EMM EMM EMU EMM OF of LBS/HR of G/KG G/KG G/KG G/KG GIKG 271 2 100 75 144.1 0.5576 2459 0.9740 26.0316 - 1.0000 - 1. 000'0 0.1791 -1.0000 272 2 100 71 141.7 0.6618 2846 0.9909 9.1203 - 1.0000 -1.0000 0.5020 - 1.0000 273 2 100 70 143.1 0.6745 2888 0.9915 8.4565 - 1.0000 1. 0000 1.4659 -1.0000 274 2 100 70 143.5 0.7565 3140 0.9942 5.7548 0.4611 0.0000 0.3865 -1.0000 275 2 95 70 143.7 0.8254 3317 0;9947 5.2594 0.7331 - 1.0000 1.0296 -1.0000 276 - 1 - 1 - 1 130.0 - 1.0000 - 1 0.0000 0.0000 - 1. 0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 1. 0000 277 - 1 -1 - 1 140 .0 - 1.0000 - 1 0.0000 0 .0000 - - 1.0060 - 1.0000 -1.0000 1.0000 278 - 1 - 1 -1 - 1.0 - 1.0000 - 1 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 -1.0000 1.0000 279 2 109 70 91.0 0.5791 2~64 0.9848 15.1737 0.1247 0.1994 0.3360 0.1639 280 2 110 70 90.9 0.6808 2920 0.9936 6.3889 0.2104 0.9399 0.7810 0.7188 281 2 110 70 111.3 0.5932 2610 0.9838 16.2'248 0.1216 0.0485 0.3316 0.1638 282 2 94 70 46.4 0.6072 2670 0.9942 5.7850 0.1187 0.0000 0.3665 0.3002 283 2 100 70 47.3 0.6024 2658 0.9939 6.0739 0.1196 0.0000 0.1101 0.0786 284 2 105 70 46.5 0.4239 1846 0.9000 100.0000 0.1727 0.0000 0.0624 0.0454 285 2 116 70 136.5 0.4873 2051 0.8890 111.0000 0.2450 0.0000 - 1.0000 0.0589 286 2 82 75 58.8 0.5010 2253 0.9771 22.8988 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.1097 - 1.0000 28,7 2 92 70 144.0 0.5260 2302 0.9548 45.1854 2.6202 0.0000 0.1586 - 1.0000 288 2 90 69 144.3 0.5654 2483 0.9757 24.2540 - 1.0000 0.0000 0.1849 - 1.0000 289 2 95 69 143.6 0.6016 2629 0.9843 15.7393' - 1.0000 0.0000 0.2559 - 1.0000 290 2 99 60 142.9 0.7193 3029 0.9934 6.6129 0.9138 0.3568 0.1304 - 1.0000 291 - 1 73 68 66.0 1.3984 3192 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 0.6409 - 1.0000 292 - 1 75 70 49.1 1.5625 2965 0.,0000 0.0000 0.1314 161.4518 0.4629 - 1.0000 293 - 1 82 70 47.1 1.3594 3251 0.0000 0.0000 1109.9767 1.0542 - 1.0000 - 1. 0000 294 - 1 90 70 51.1 1.2578 3393 0.0000 0.0000 764.7702 2.7660 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 295 - 1 72 70 49.2 1.3203 3297 0.0000 0.0000 961.B26'~ 0.911~9 1.1960 - 1.0000 296 - 1 86 73 48.6 1.3438 3274 0.0000 0.0000 944.0615 0.6170 1.6858 - 1.0000 297 - 1 92 71 48.3 1.4141 3183 0.0000 0.0000 1152.1380 0.5784 1.0119 - 1.0000 298 - 1 95 71 48.2 1.2813 3364 0.0000 0.0000 879.4185 0.8733 2~1113' - 1.0000 299 - 1 96 71 87.2 1.3750 3238 0.0000 0.0000 984.6333 0.9159 - 1.0000 - 1.0000 300 - 1 85 69 49.3 1.1719 3494 0.0000 0.0000 ,1013.6513 1.0314 0.8173 - 1.000n BURN=2---STABLE PRED EMU = 1000x(1-EFFY) NOB - BURNER DATA FOR NOX BURN=l- --L1141T PRED EFFY FROU THEORY NOT - NOX FROM VAP-OR GENERATOR EXH. BURN=O---GOING OUT Table VIII-28 image: ------- CtJIIPUZ80. 0' p.."zcrBD .U.... Z.."ZCZ..C7 A.D .ZP.Bz...rA£ .IIZ8SZ0.S DArA PAG. 11 .u. BUB. AZR 'U.£ AZR .QUzr C0II8 PR.D PB.D COG BCG .OBG .orG .0. rDP rpp ,UJJ/ RArzo rBHP ."7 .. BIIII .11. .101 .1111 0' 0' £8./.B 0' G/XG G/KG G/XG G/XG G/XG 301 -1 18 19 '1.5 1.2181 3'"'' 0.0000 0.0000. 129.tt393 0.5725 2.3267 -1.0000 302 -1 12 70 11.1 1.'219 3172 0.0000 0.0000 1104."730 -1.0000 0.3230 -1~0000 303 -1 ,.. 18 11.5 1.2113 3352 0.0000 0.0000 , "2".""0 2. nOI 0.5779 -1.0000 3M -1 11 70 1'1.5 1.3'38 3275 0.0000 0".0000 950.9025 1.0133 0."252 -1.0000 305 -1 100 11 12'.2 1.3150 32U 0.0000 0.0000 1030.770" 0.8'''1 o. ..431 -1.0000 3- -1 100 'I 131.1 1.1711 3503 0.0000 0.0000' 510.8185 '.017' 0.6130 -1.0000 30' -1 10.. 'I '''.3 1.1153 3"" 0.0000 0.0000 551.1211 -1.0000 0.3189 -1.0000 308 2 '0 320 "'.1 0 . 5"" 2...., 0.1886 11.3115 1.9812 -1.0000 0 . 2088 0.0'79 309 2 18 350 "7.5 0.5052 2285 0.97'" 20.St38 2.1579 0.0000 0.0.,8 0.011" 310 -1 ,.. 310 "8." 0.3"31 1562 0.'100 90.0000 0.5925 0.1868 0.0529 0.0529 311 2 385 350 ..,... 0 ~ 5886 2820 o. I"" 3.,6311t 1.8390 0.0000 0.33'" 0.3061 312 2 388 nl "1.3 0.5011 25..6 0.9925 1."545 0.1It25 0.0000 0 .016" 0.0726 313 2 3'5 3110 117.2 0.3'115 2063 0.9522 117.1285 0.1861 0.0000 0.0092 0.03.35 31.. 2 3"0 1150 88.2 0.53112 2603 0.9883 11 .67'2 -1.0000 -1.0000 0.0883 0.1590 315" 2 3611 ..50 93.1 0."726 2357 0 .9727 27.2698 -1.0000 -1.0000 -1.0000 0.0507 316 2 1100 1160 10.5 0.50"3 2520 0.9n9 15.0668 0.1"41 0.0000 -1.0000 0.0332 317 2 ..35 460 90.0 0.405' 2085 0.9216 78.3522 0 ;1806 0.0000 ,0.005,9 0.0237 318 2 350 638 137.1 0."935 2408 0.9665 33.4715 0.1..7.. 0.0000 0.0378 0.08"8 319 2 350 620 137.2 0."150 1976 0.8800 120.0000 0.32"9 0.0000 0.0000 0.0319 320 2 351 600 13".5 0.6..8.. 2981 0.9928 7.1961 0.1838 0.0000 0.0673 0.1328 . 321 2 1..0 no 89.8 0.5978 2659 0.9"87 11.2516 0.3619 0.0000 0.0951 0.1367 322 2 115 "90 90.0 0."857 2115 0.9234 76.5982 0.5007 0.0000 0.0074 0.0394 323 1 105 530 90.0 0.11"" 1922 0.8960 10".0000' 5.1723 0.2758 -1.0000 0.0295 324 2 95 585 135.5 0.58"7 2555 0.9769 23.09"8 0.1235 0.0198 0.0588 0.11"4 325 2 105 550 137.3 ,0.5181 2229 0.9286 71."471 0.9387 0.0117 0.0184 0.0437 326 1 110 610 138.7 0...,96 2023 0.8900 110.0000 4.5562 0.2561 0.0050 0.0399 327 2 "12 77 48.2 0 .6017 2884 0~9170 3.0281 0."025 0.0286 0.1456 0.2342 328 2 395 90 47.3 0."641 2378 0.9871 12.8502 0.4998 0.0000 0.0320 0.0671 329 2 390 95 47.1 0 .3821 1968 0.924" 75'.6240 3.1701 0.0000 0.0000 0.0253 330 2 407 97 90.3 0.5955 2853 0.9939 6.0797 0.1211 0.0000 0.2646 0.3661 BlIRN: 2- - -STAiJLE PRED ENU = 1000x(1-EFFY) NOB - BURNER DATA FOR NOX BURN=I- --LIMIT PRED EFFY FRON THEORY NOT - NOX FROM VAPOR GENERATOR EXH. BURN=O---GOING OUT Table VIII-29 image: ------- COMPARISON OF PREDICTED BURNER INEFFICIENCY AND EXPERIMENTAL EMISSIONS DATA PAGE 12 RUN BilRN AIR FUEL AIR EQUIV COMB PRED PRED COG BCG NOBG NOTG NO. TEMP TEMP FLOW RATIO TEMP EFFY E [.JI.1 EMM E/tIM EMM EMM of of' LBS/BR of G/KG G/KG G/KG G/KG G/KG 331 2 400 100 92.7 0.4834 2436 0.9798 20.1670 0.1506 0.0000 0.0891 0.0891 332 1 435 92 89.7 0 .4059 2086 0.9223 77.6826 358.7488 0.0000 0.0000 0.4155 333 2 392 95 135.2 0.4401 2160 0.9166 83.4309 4.7839 0.0000 0.0000 0.0573 334 1 395 100 140.3 0.3843 1908 0.8800 120.0000 - 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0408 335 2 92 590 91.3 0.5556 2457 6.9787 21.2564 0.1263 0.0000 0.0770 0.1287 336 1 90 630 92.6 0.4667 1964 0.8900 110.0000 9.0811 0.0631 0.0000 0.0597 337 2 90 610 48.5 0.5434 2432 0.9876 12.4134 0.1292 0.0000 0.1511 0.1019 338 2 90 660 49.6 0.5899 2605 0.9926 7.4003 0.1186 0.0000 0.0080 0.0565 339 2 100 660 136.7 0.5685 2492 0.9718 28.1970 - 1.0000 0.1976 0.1838 0.1580 340 2 395 90 138.3 0.4997 2478 0.9739 26..0525 0.1455 0.0121 0.0239 0.1076 341 2 150 100 92.4 0.5245 2378 0.9725 27.4705 0.1383 0.0000 0.0250 0.0955 342 2 90 85 93.3 0.5472 2419 0.9753 24.7073 0.1283 - 1.0000 0.0000 0.8349 343 2 102 100 91.3 0.5273 2344 0.9686 31.4349 0.1375 0.0000 0.0452 0.0949 344, 2 100 100 91.9 0.4688 1979 0.8900 110.0000 0.1555 0.6505 0.0077 0.0690 345 2 102 95 135.3 0.5445 2386 0.9606 39.3849 0.1330 0.0000 0.0240 0.1704 346 2 105 95 138.2 0.4898 2051 0.8890 111.0000 - 1.0000 0.1853 0.0000 0.0952 347 2 105 97 134.5 0.6523 2813 0.9882 11.7854 - 1.0000 0.0000 0.2097 0.4230 348 2 107 95 90.1 0.6022 2649 0.9882 11.8085 0.9708 0.0000 0.0275 0.5474 349 2 100 100 91.9 0.5137 2274 0.9592 40.7793 128.2549 2.5352 0.0070 0.1373 350 2 101 105 136.4 0.5697 2498 0.97,24 27.5751 13.6585 0.0998 0.0417 0.3315 351 2 105 810 92.4 0.6311 2749 0.9906 9.3830 0.1105 0.0000 0.0973 0.1707 352 1 110 815 93.1 0.5036 2230 0.9510 48.9656 0.1399 0.0000 0.0190 0.0138 353 2 120 790 137.7 0.6311 2749 0.9861 13.8546 0.1105 1.3118 0.1497 0.2070 354 2 430 630 81.4 0.5379 2672 0.9915 8.4997 0.1306 0.0000 0.1018 0.1588 355 2 438 610 82.0 0.4309 2251 0.9646 35.3630 0.1643 0.0000 0.0112 0.0432 356 2 450 625 43.8 0.5570 2762 0.9964 3.5851 0.1260 0.0000 0.1024 0.1531 357 2 140 690 180.5 0.5053 2111 0.8800 120.0000 0 . 1394 0.0000 0.0284 0.0779 358 2 110 690 46.8 0.4673 2116 0.9590 41.0407 0.1512 0.0000 0.1025 0.0795 359 2 120 730 138.2 0 . 5022 2097 0.8860 114.0000 0.1403 0.0000 0.0666 0.1014 360 2 380 570 92.6 0.5322 2608 0.9881 11.8535 0.1321 0.0000 0.1119 0.1649. BURN= 2- - -STABLE PRED EJ.fM = 1000)«1-EPFY) NOB - BURNER DATA FOR NOX BURN=1- --LIf!IT PRED EFFY FROU THEORY NOT - NOX FROU VAPOR GENERATOR EXH. BURN=O---GOING OUT Table VIII-30 image: ------- COIIPARXSO. 0' PR1lDXcr.D .U"" X..'PXCX..CY A.D .ZPBRx...rA£ E.ISSIO.S DA2'A PAGE 13 BU. BUR. AIR 'U.£ AIR .QUIr COII1I PR.D PR.D COG BeG ROBG N02'G .0. rap rap '£Of! RArIO rap B'FY BN. BIIJI ENII ENN EMil OP 0' £BSIBR 0' (;J~C C/~C G/KG G/XG G/XG 361 2 1100 620 10.9 0.11673 2370 0.97 50 211.9818 0.1512 0.0000 0.0154 0.0795 362 2 1105 670 89.8 0.6305 2967 -0.9952 11.7757. 0.11 06 0.0000 0.1986 0.3236 363 2 1105 6115 90.8 0.119811 2501 0.98110 1.6.01111 0.11114 0.0586 0.1774 0.2323 3611 2 1105 670 11'.7 o. 5691 2769 ,0.9960 11.0079 0.1232 0.4965 0.1836 0.1943 365 2 1105 670 11'.0 0.621111 2953 0.99711 2.12111 0.1118 0.0616 0.2725 0.1910 366 2 1110 660 117.9 0.11309 2255 0.97911 20.1335 0.16113 0.0000 0.0558 0.0648 367 2 1105 670 137.0 0.5100 2530 0.9782 21.7602 -1.0000 0.0000 0.0515 0.1270 368 2 1fI0 690 137.1 0.11309 2087 0.885 5 1111."709 0.1643 -1.0000 0.0279 0.0432 369 2 1100 690 136.3 0 .5691 . 27..8 0.9882 11.7979 0.2"64 0.0000 0.1502 0.2267 - 370 2 1103 710 90.9 0.5"75 2683 0.9907 9..3231 0.3745 0.1464 0.1043 1.0000 - 371 2 ..26 720 137.1 0.5738 2785 0.9893 10.1911 > 0.9111 0.0000 0.1572 1. 0000 372 1 ..25 700 138.7 0.5..3. 2676 0.9856 1".350" 1.1935 0.5236 0.0525 :1. 0.000 ; 373 2 "25 720 90.9 0.5325 26116 0.9898 10.2252 0.1320 0.0757 0.0984 1.0000 - 374' 1 ..30 700 90.3 0.11'13 2..95 0.9839 16.0altS. 5.8846 6.5336 0.0584 1. 0000 . - 375 1 1100 710 91.11 0."618 23116 0.9725 27.11727 25.2456 108.5867 0.0042 1.0000 - 376 1 400 710 90.3 0."711 2387 0.9766 23.3936 85.4441 180.1626 0.0041 1.0000 -1. 0000 - 1. 0000 377 2 1t05 705 "8.3 0.11838 21f62 0.9903 9.7117 0.7287 0.1335 - 378 1 1t28 730 1t5.5 0."875 2..96 0.9919 8.0865 3.3900 5.0370 0.0687 1.0000 - 379 1 375 720 "7.0 0."650 236- 0.9865 13.52"7 8.5'00 3.4403 0.0670 1. 0000 - 380 1 1t12 715 1t5.7 0.lt395 229.. 0.9.832 16.8192 27.7000 75.2300 0.0055 1. 0000 32.1684 - 1. 0000 381 1 411 728 138.5 0."507 2262 0.9438 56.1542. 66.5627 0.0037 - 382 1 411 721 138.7 0.lt501 2258 0.9"29 57.1028 "9.3421 156.2723 0.0053 1.0000 - 383 1 ..03 700 "7.1 0."725 2..18 0.9890 11. 0430 20.7706 57.4081 0.0710 1.0000 - 38.. 1 76 710 91." 0.5775 2531 0.9830 16.9827 0.4440 0.0488 0.0822 1.0000 - - 1. 0000 385 2 90 430 91.6 0.5625 2..83 0.98011 19.6011 1.0000 0.0402 0.1436 - 386' 1 91 "70 89.8 0.52'" 2339 0.9686 31.3526 32.2044 8.5927 0.0271 1.0000 - 387 1 80 740 47.8 0.5255 2353 0.9839 16.1210 4.0152 1.0001 0.0998 1.0000 - '388 1 81 740 "5.5 0.5337 2389 0.9865 13.5103 53.5975 28.3174 0 . 00'6 7 1.0000 - 389 -1 85 390 "8.2 1.233" 3..23 0.0000 0.0000 1194.6713 18.0370 0.5425 1.0000 - 390 1 90 515 80.9 0 . 5..00 2397 0.9769 23.1205 0.1301 0.2117 0.2557 - 1.0000 391 2 93 550 80.5 0.4900 214.. 0.9388 61.1581 77.7172 19.0275 .0.0098 1.0000 BURR= 2- --S TABLE PRED EMN = 1000x(l-AFFY) ROB - BURNER -DATA FOR NOX BURN=1- --LIMIT PIlED EFFY FROII THEORY ROT - ROX FROM VAPOR GENERATOR EXH. RURN=O---GOING OUT Table U-31. image: ------- APPENDICES image: ------- REFERENCES 1. Frank-Kamenetskii, D.A., 8Diffu8ion and neat Exchange in Chemical Kinetics", Quoted by Frank-Kamanet.kii, Princeton University Press, 1955. 2. Van't Hoff, .Etude. de Dynamique Chimique", Amsterdam, 1884. LeChatelier, Quoted by Frank-Kamenet8kii after Jouget, 8Mechanique des Explosifs", Paris 1937. 3. 4. Sernenov, N.N., quoted by Frank-Kamenet8kii, Z. Thysik, Chem. 48, 571, 1928. . 5. vulis, L.A., "Thermal Regime. of Combu8tion", McGraw Hill, 1961. DeZubay, E.A., .Characteri8tic. of Di.c-Controlled Flame", Aero Digest, July 1950. 6. 7. ~~~~~~~~'G:;Cstr::;~~ ~~~l~;::~~~U:~nP~~~::~~~ ~~~e and Explosion Phenomena page 21, Willi... and Wilkin., 1949. ~~~~~~~ti~:.zo:::8~e;:.;8~.~~d.8:;~c:;:~i;~~I~~~ ~~~;f8:nodY Symposium on Combu.tion. . . 8. 9.. ZwiCk, E.B., , Bjerklie, J.W., .The Mechani.m of Combu.tion stabilization in Monoprepellant Reaction Chamber.-, Sund.trand- Turbo, Paco!ma, 1958. 10. Clarke, A.E., Harri.on, ".J., Od9er., J., .cOIIIbu.tion Stability in a Spherical Combu8tor., pp 664, 7th Symp08ium on Combu8tion, Buttorworth.~ 1'59. 11. Jeff8, R.A., 8it 1'1... Stabilit~ Hea~~~ RaUi of Scme can-Ty~Cambu8 on :....r8-,.. ympo. ua on 08bu.t on pp ID'I1";"""Will1am8" lJtG'i';" 1960. Williama,et al, 8The Cambu8tion of Methane in a Jet-Mixed Reactor", 12th Symp08ium on Ccnbu.tion, pp 91J, 1'69. . 12. 13. Clarke, A.E., 8Further Studies of CClllbu.tion Phenomena in a ~~;::1,C~~::~~-i9:~ Symp08ium on Combu.tion, pp 9B2, Herbert, M.V., 8A Theoretical Ana~.i8 of Reaction Rai; controlled S,stema Part ~I-, 8th ympo81um on Combu.t on, pp 970-981, il1iama IItErn., 1960. 14. 15. Hougen, 0., Watson, K., Ragatz, 8Ch8mical Proce88 Principles., J. wiley' Sons, 1947. image: ------- Colorimetrio r.'icrodatcrmil8lit. of rJitrcgon ~;oxide in ihG ntmosfibera BERNARD E. SALTZMAN . D,.,.,o" 01 $pec/" HHI" s.n.b, U. So 0....., '" HuItI.. u..otIo", .Well.,.. ("tel..", 01110 The determlnatlo.. or nltros"n dioxide In the atrn- "here h..M heretofore I,.,en I..unpered by dim_hi"" ID ..."'ple nh,orptlon an,llack oC ."""Iraell,.. A new ope- . rilie rengeDt h.a Iw.en de\'elo.-I &I"d demonatrated to' .I-.rb effielenll,. in a mlelset Critt",1 bubbler &It \eye" . below 1 p.p.m. The reallent la a mixture or auVanlUe u.,jd. JV-(l-n&lphlll)'I)-elhylenedlamlno dlhydrochlo- rid", ...,,1 1Ir.f!IICJ "d.l. A ..laMt! .lIre.'1 eolor I. pr...luClOd with 11 lIen..ltlylty ..r n Cew INltla I"'r billion ror . 10- ",illllto "...nple ..l 0.1. liler Iter ...Inllte. (~....o I" liye- r..I.1 "x«... nn.1 olhcr /:""". ill .t..nf..loI ex,,"'"" p..."'''co on I,. IIlIsht later(erinr:; elTe""'1 'h"lM! n.a,. be ftd.,eed (urther by me..... which .ate .I,'....rll....l. .rOXIC oxitlrll of lIitrn~(,". lil".",t,,<1 dllring the IlIIe of ex- pl08iyP.8, in weMinl; ol>", believed to pI:»' " vitnl role in tho creAtion 01 irritating ';1"11 (4, 10). TO'licoloJ:i.: ~t.udiel (8, 0, 16, II, I~) can attention ,) the r",1It \ ""I. nitro~"1\ dioxido iA \ho I1\OIIt toxio of the y",rioua .MOI!en uxi.I"M by n Inr~o fllCt«, And that confll8ion in tho 1~llul\tion ,,' thc hcnlt.h llaznrde huA I'CIIIIlted from AnAlytical :lI!thoda wi. "fnil to diITrrr.nt.inte \.hie oxide from '\.ho o\.hcra in I mixt.ure. 111 terme of lIit.roJ:eo dioxide, 11 ligure 01 6 p.p.m. ia '!Ie mAximum 88Ie nllow:ll>ie eoncc11lrl1tion propoeed (8, i). IU th\'le coneiderationll r"'lIlire it. det.crmlnAtion In air at much ...c"r levr.18 than previo\J.h- UWllltht nOCC8Al)'. The m",jor problem of ..3IIt analyiiealmethoda hu b8en the ';j!jMllty in ahtlorbin« the gill lrum a ItIftieiently IArp 8mJt1e. :...ulta have loccn uncertain for leveIa below 6 p.p,m. Sampb :\l1li\ be eoI1ec~ In lAI'K" bottl. for the woll known pb8d- iioulronie acid meY"xI (8, (1), 110,1 tin,.. An! required for -p\etlt ....,.Uoa; 1<.. ft!8U1!A have I>(!p.n repnnr.d (16) nnd cunllrmed . u... ,.,.,...,nt ltudy. 8i",illlr diffieulliCII ocmJr with &he m-' iJk'lIolme\.hode (II, ~Ii). 11o&h determine all niLroccn odde8ln '100 fotm of niLmle, rl\ther !.IIIUl nit.ropn dioxide lpCCifie:IIl,.. AlternI'll! have bcl'n OIad" to UIIC rcnpmta lor nitrite il'll, whleh '<'IIIItIIM' NI..:cillc tor nilrog,'" .lin1ridc, but an abaorption efTlCieftey .i oll'y I\hollt a% W811 rcp..rk,U (16) when a midp!t impin(lUr .... .....1. How,'vcr, thcac rrngcnta wen found to be wry -- "',,",ot rnr i,;jtheJ' IcvdJl IlJline a ,1- ayrinp for c:oIleet.inI tile '11"1'''' 11, 1:1, lit); 10'" I,'velll haft '-wi cletenninro Ulilll a ....., '. . . C""t.inU/llIM ",Implaa haye '-' colh1eted II,. tMilll . Ii.. " ... lit,uid (lir lclll,.'t:ltlln!8 (1) ,. alkali IJUbbIen (II), '. . . :.1'''' ""inl': f7l unkllf)Wn ,oflicieney. ,._t report dr",IM wi&h &he ~ment alld demoD- . "II 01 a rmpnt whid, ie .pecifae lOT nltropn dioxide and ..1 for cont.inllOlIIl IllUnl.Jinl': wi&h a hich efIeicmey. The ..,,4oom '" .lclA'1'lIIilli",' ~ ~ ... ~ . II,,, r.'litle 01 a t- tenthe fII a . ;0" million with a vllri"~lJn 01 ..... Ulan 17": "181'18f!1e1K ..' """ IinAlly devr.\nI>f..1 em.,enlen&ly prodllCr.fl" A."IIIe diree$ -Io.r .. I.i.'" I'IUI .... ............. """lIdl,. or ..-tmt"""'>n,;..trie8Jly. . . 10.." ." ..~, ;';1' 1....1 II> It ,"""'.1, rtlttf!o' hI,.>I,..., ....1 IIIr .. .,,,,.1.., ..t .. ",... 01 0." lill!l' .",r IlIiUlot.., a -'u.,Uy "I a ,... .. ,,. I"'" Ioilli.... .. n,....h..... wiUt " \(I-minll'" I8IIIpIa. 'J'he ""ee$ i ....n.- i..',,",..rillll S- ... fCII....1 &0 .... "icbL ArrARA",!! Spectrophotometer, Heckmnn Morlnl DU. A I!e\ of ma~hed .teA tubol, 22 X 176 111111., j::ivilll( nn opLical JiKbt pnt.h of 2.02 em. WIll ulled in a llpeeil11 holder liLt.cd to tho 8p""trnllhu'.'motcr. Mld,et Flitted Bubbler., a11-~I:ulII, enpnelty IJI) mi., with "I'- ward-foelil!!:, 8-mm. dinmet.er tritted .hake. When UllCd wilh 10 ml. of tho ab80Tbing reagent, drnwinl': Air throllllh lit tbc mte of 0.4 liler per minute .hou1<1 prodllco 20 to 30 mi. of fine froth ubl.vo thn 111,11111,,". Grab-Sample Bottle. IlRving ~lnlld"rd-t"por p:I'I.urld.joint eoo- ncetlon II) .wJloocke lllr OV"cu"U"n, with calihrAlcd volume. vnrying from :10 to 250 ml. Orclinnry J:11I_.toppcred bora- lilieule glnee bottlce Are .uitllhln. FifLy-millilit<)r gll18l ayrillilll are convenient for moderulely hl!!:h coneolltrntione. REAG Jo:N"rtI All rOllicn... nrc moo.: (rom nnulytienl j;rl\lJo chmnieal. in nl- trir...-fr"c willer 1""'fAred hy reulolll..r nn.1 .Im.. "&le throuJdl " at the rate of 0.4 liler f"'" anillll"" IInti! M"ffaciont (!ow, baa .1~ (ahout 10 minu,,"...). N.,'.. tho '.olnl Air volume 8IImillcd. run, pm ruhbOT Jlu..,p.'ull '" .i"l1 "'I\Y hr. ulod lor con- ~&i<1III without ao-. If IcnJ;~hJl/tr,' L,.,., 1I,;"II11tII. . e.m,a., fer w.,el8 a1Ieve 1 P.P.M. /'1'11111,10 in nn oyacu- a&C!i1 J",tLIe of aPf'MllriAte iii.. jllNt 'N.fflro ,:ampllni 1.. eliminate any ullfJl!l1Alnty .wout IoaII of VII"IIUln. ,\ &lll'fIUollfny Y Itc'p- cook eooneetion to tile YllCUum 1'11"'1' i~ c.......nlent:. In &h. Ii.. potoition &be but.tIo .. "_trcl Lt, t '10 y/t'''",,>TClllltirc H( tho nb- lOTI'inc ft!II&Imt'" tlao adeanl V;"""II" i. I'CtIOI. In th" ICCPnd pcNlltiotl tho -I "in« ,"oUl.. I. "1.,,,,..1 /lIMI 1."0 V"Mlllln pump dmW'. air t.broa,di &he -Plilll( lin.. t.. ..h..roul!hh Ihuh It. 111 the thin! pllRUoo the 811mI'll", Ii"" i.. e..,nll'CIted to. ~: .,' t!\',.c:uatm bo$&Io anti the -pie I. colloe&cll. J'"r ,'1( 1~1I1u&inn "I &he ",.ruple .,oIumo &he v-re ia rwordcd at I.'''' dilTerCllC/! bt!twecn the . IiIIed aaad "_&oct condllioM, al/ll till! voillme ia lI,at IIf tI'e boWe pip tIta& of .,., COI1IICC&i!!: ""''''''-1 fm J in ~ ,..1.",1..... "...., ..I...... II"..... ,.,.., .. ,,'........, 1"..1..."..,,,,,.,... .1,....." .". Ddcllnill""" Aftar euJ"".\>",, 'II' "I.....".t,.." ,,, II". "",,,,... . d,,,,,,,'8. "...J.....~ riw ""'.~t,,!'f~ C~"',r '"''''-'''.'''''-''' i... t'U'''' pII&r. ....",i.. ." ,..,"" "I, ,,,.,,,.,..,. ','".",'d'"",. ,'"".1".". ... image: ------- 1Il1O ",Itb .tand"rd. vi.utlU.v or ~",I.iD - '(lOCtro!,bo&ometer at 6110 111", uling unexl",",,,t r""l':oIlL u a 18("...n08. Oalo.. ID:Af hn 1'1"'Hv~.111f "'I' I "~"I'ltI'!'I!d. ...iL4 lII'Iy ':1 to .."" WI' In ,,11Ii4lrl,. n.."" 11<1'. uay; 110""\,,,,', II H~I'Un" oxi~11I1 or .!'edUCiDI p.....,u'e pt'C:lCut III the .111111'1", 111. COllcelltrllUonH oonlldcrably excuedilll tll" L of the !lltl'Og('II .'1!O~ldo, the 'colo,. should be dctormlned a. 10.)11 U~ 1'0~"lbl(\ to JlUlllmlZO any loss. . Standardi.zatioJl. Add grRillg rengent. Mix I\llow 111 millutes for eomple!-e, eol?r dOVl'lupJilellt, urid read ihe colol'll. 'Che I-ml. stan""" II ~ nucroh !.cr~, 1'1., dchlll'li 118 V tmtel Ule pal'ta pcr ollihon or I1ltrogcn dumdo. II. hal becu dctermined empirically that 0.72 mole of sodium nitritc' produces the anme color III 1 nlole of nitrogen dioxide; hcnce 2.03.., of sodium nitrite i. oquiva- lent to 11'1. of nitro~ell uimdde. . Plot tho. ablor"al".'''~ .of the N/Julllard colore, corrccted for the blank, agnmst the u"lhht.crs of staudlLl'd .olution. Heer'l law is followed. Draw the straight line giving the beet fit, and deter- mine the value or millilitere of sodium nitrite intercepted at ah- 8Orhanec. of .exactly 1. Thia .value multiplicd by 4 ~ivce the .tuu,lardIZl\tlon factor, ,11, dehned as the IIlImber of microliters of nitrogcn dioxide required by ]() rnl. of abeorbing reagent to p:h'e nn absorbnnce of 1. For 2-0111. oell~ the value was 3.05. Thon: I'.p.m. of nitrogen dioxide ~ corrected abiorbnnce X M /V If the volume of the air anmple, V, is a limple multiple of M calculationl are simplified. Thus, for the M value of 3.65 pr~ viouely cited, if cxactly 3.65 liter. of air are anmpled through & bubbler. tbe corrccted absorbance il allo partl per million di- rectly. If other volumel of absorbing reagent are Uled, V is tak,'n as the volume of air 8IImplc p..r 10 ml. of reagent. EX/'t:ltI M y'~-/'A /. I. PreparatioD of Known Low ConcentratioDl of Nitrocen DIox- Ide. Tbe first step in the .tudy WILS the dovelopment of a lult.- aLle reagent which would give a high absorption efficiency with continuou. lampling, 80 thnt the low level. (hclow 1 p.p.m.) could be detcrmined. Thcse nitr.ogl'n dioxido conccl1trationl were prepared in the appnratus .hown in Figurc 1. The source of the nitrogen uioxide wus a stundardiICl1 lIir mixture contail1ed in a 46-liter cnrboy and avui"'''le through .an all-glllSs Iystcm or I-10m. hore tubing and ground joinl.8 lightly , crell8ed with lilieonc p;rcnltO. The mixturo WI\8 mado by hluo- dueing a rew lOiIliliten of l1itric oxidc, gcn"ruted in a nitromcter, , into the partially evacuated carboy, and nu.hing it in with uir until Dormal pJ'CSllure wal attaincd. A few dBY' Wero nllow~od for air oxidation of the nitric oxide to nitrogen dioxide and cquilibru.- tion with thc upparntu.. Tho resulting concf!ntmtion of nitrogen , dioxide was 20 p.p.m., which was well within tho rango of aecurnte , Analy"is I.>y existing method., ,.nd could I.>e df!tf!rlllined by coll"eting a Hample in a ~DII. oVl\cunicd bottlo through stopcocks' Blind C. The compo.ition of tho lIir in tho carboy W1\8 found &0 rernain remarkably conltant. During II JX>rioo of 4 months it dropIJed to 15 p.p.m. Most or this IOS!! could be uI:counted ror I.>y the, nl0re thlln 100 "ortions whida were withdrawn, each amounting to about I/JOOOth of tho CUl1tents or the carboy. The" vacuum tlult developcd in the eurboy W1\8 lIIeU8ul'ed and rolieved by admitting outside nir periodically, throu"h operlLtion of stop-. IIIIGk I), "high WIIW oftllllArily qp' In '1111 y\o8oll.-ition. . . Kno,Yn 10'" oonooll~'II'lonl oIlIlwopn 11I0Il111. WUfO pl'tpllOd b, I8OlIra'" IIUII\!on ot ~"II l"'ndA.llllod .I'boy II. mll'IIN In die loll""lrll m/lnllOfi It. 100m I , fll",llIn W/Il ",UhII'lwn Into " .. ly,lnp ''''11\111'' ltolllOllIl A, Ind '''on Ilowly IIIjoo"'lI IlIt.o I 1-lIw,.".,.,nIDII&o II. "'OAm by molno ot I motor-lI,lvon lllde, A dll"Uon of I to 141 wlIIlIIUllly I11III1 .110 vlllUI .oukillo VAriod .,.. IMYIII. ,,,. ,,,II' 011 ,he l"'flf11!4 fl\lIIIIY. of '1111 Iynahrolloul JlKltor, ('l'he IOGOIIII .y,ln.. 1I,lyon by 'h. NIftO .111141, Ihown In ANALYTICAL CHEM 181'!i',' FlIU"lI, ".. U8ed In later tea'- to Injeot an Interf.\ring Iulnto LI.,. IIlr ""-"" II" .mula. '1I4UI1""tllLh'"lIt ''''11"",,1, U,) 'fhe air .tream U8ed for dilution 0' the niuQI!"o diDlddo ... taken In through a unlveranl typo gaa-/DIINk cnnilter; tbis r~ d~ced ~e no~l nitrogen dioxide concentration in the laboratory alt. which at. tlmee reacl)ed 0.1 p.p.m., to considerably ICBS thaD 0.01 p.p.m. (A U-tuho containing AR"I~rite was found alm""t equnlly efficacious.) A mixing chamber WILB provided for the .tream below each point of gas injection. Flow was contrcUed by a critioal orifioe in the auCtiOD line to an 1L81Jirotor in the hood preceded by a trap with a mercury mnnometer conllcction. ' 8 C 2 '- '4' J" FipFO I, Apparatus tor PrepariD. Known Low CoDeentrat1oD8 ot Nitro.en Dioxide I: ~~::..c::::~:;:~~:=--. ..p.lD. ul DlhotI.. dloa"l. air ~il.'u" I s. Va.,yum conn..Lion to ..plratw In hoed tt re",Jin~ was olJtuinctl, P Will turllt!tI to di/'f't't till' nir thruul(h Lhe eampl,'r, WheD the Iyrillge W1\8 fully disohllrl;O image: ------- ,i'01.UXI 28, M~. 12, DICIXIII 1114 " . ,18!Jl .lIIPDt (oomcted (or the nlue obtaID8d 1a . bIaak nUl with no ' " ODDdltioDl, Alter which the pH i. IDcroaled wit.b a buft'er &ad tiI. " {Ji\rOPll dioxide addil.ion), A, II the ab8orbano8 01 iM cdor 000' ooul/line roapnt II added (or optill\t\\ color dovelopmm\. The'" rJined uaiDI the .ame roa-\ in hi 8ftCU&ted bottle and lDOt.hod~ wblah I. in aocordnnce wi~h I~ullie. of procedul"CI for .- nitrite I, 18, 19), wa. u~ed Cor Reapnte 1 to 3 ancl 7 to 10 , ~mplin. direotly (rom till! carbo1 (correoted for the blank nlue (Table), a. ,;el1.. in other tes~ not shown with 8uUanilic acid, 'J unoxpoecd rcaiOl\t), R. and R. are iM ~lUIDII of the ~t and .uUwic or hydrochlorio a.cid, followed by various buffere I!Cd in tho ecrubber aUld enouated bottle, and V. and V, and l-Mphtltylamine. Thi. method is Itlblect to loaae. due to .M the cOl'l'elpolldinl YOlum. of 0&""- air mixture which th- deeompn.iUon o( the una table diazo in~rmediato durinl the in- .. . ""I tet\lo MrIIoUon of umpling. ' roIOI'I rcpreeent. The colore obtained from the encuated bottle' , DIRI!:C1' Cow. MIITIIOO, In which the rengent contain. aU ' rere known or expected to ba tNe nllI8I with tile typel of In;redientl and aCter abl!Orption produces tho color with no f~' , ~nt tested. ' ", , . t.hcroperaUon., Thi. method is suhject to 10lacs bccauac of aide t Varl Aba rblA'" .A6- n..1.. ';' reacUon. between nitrite and the coupliDI rea~nt, and becali88 , I rl.ta 0 out 0 ~ -_t8. vuy J'llll8llta for of not havinl optimal pH for diazotizatioD and couplinl. Thi. .' , ailri~ were telted bocauee it WII!I apeated that t.bq would not' method, "hlaD "as ueed for the remninder of the reagen~ IiItOO I only ba specific for nitroaeD dioxide but aI80 ~ the required in Table I W!1l found to produce more color In the scrub- II'liaitivity. S~udiCi were made of variOUI oomblnatloftl ot' bar, eveD tbouih it Jlroduced leu with a standard bo\Ue ampll I I \ " I' I'. - 6"-->1- RlnI--'- I or nitri'" portkin. Tho dlreot color tY11e 01 rearent, oontatnlDl thcm en. Rnu t "'Ir fUlllI ..n. -..-.. c "- 00 c,z" .11 In;radlon", wa. thore(ol'tl ado!,"''' bl!caulo of l1'Oatelr CODA . ,lrthiliLiOl Aud ecnlitlvitice, of thl op~ mothod. 01 oolor venlcnco and. hllhor ablOrpLilln cJnrinncy. ' : dtvrlopment, of the optimum cOIlCOD\rat!olll and aelditiee for I' rhl'tO chcmicn]', nnd of tho ell'oct 01 wriDuaI moW. lidded III tIIl4ly.~. Tablo I Il1'CIOn~ tQe da8A wlUoh wore obtained. The lI':lRCut finally adopted, li.ted II No. 23, Ibowed tbohlpce' I rfficioncy (77%) and excollnnt ' IIIlor .t./lbility Rnd IODsitivity, lbc mnximnl ablorption or the ; red-viola' color hoinl at 660 .. an,.. : j jo'our comblnationo oC chand- I =Is WI'" triad: I Thl combination of 1U1Ia- nilic acid and I-narhthYlamiD8 ' (JIe..IIOD~ 1 to G wal finally, 1 rojecl.cll bccau. of poor colur It3bili~)' and eocaaional fDI. ur pioduo~n "'telr aeration. !lenl!On\ . il "Dular to bu" , IDIIIcwhat .\ronFr than ono I prcYlolIlI~ loulldb)' 1'.\\)' (1') , j 10 11ft 6711 efficlenoy ID . mid- I '" tmplnpr but III0000000ul1r ' - In . 60-1111. llalt miDp. , More nabl. and In.. IOlore WI,. obtained WI\II .w. Cullamldl! and N-(l-napbo I tb,I).e",y11I1edlanilne cUb~- aooblorl4e (J\eapllte 7'" 17), crith all 6itDci7 .. blah ..' I..~ (Re8pa' 12). 1'h08l 8bemI8aI8 Wlf8111td In' powder form with t&I1Ario acid b)' .18m.,. (I') ,,"d fUWI" I.cI "0 I 110"", OVIIYIIIItr,tly .nd 1ll1oiaI. rlcnorUy 11- III a IIG-ml. 11- IJrlnp alter di8alvlnl In watar. A hllher olllclun.,y WII' ob- 1al11llC1\:'lIUb8\itu~in. &nth.... aUla acl for thl euJf.nllamldt (Reapnt 18), lince tltl. "a. belwn to b.n II very rapid clIuo&l8a&ioD rato, bUI \IOCIr ..lor IDtenlit)' and nf)/ lIow IOIor d8Yclopmont we... found. '*' _ltI were obtained with the JlNYioull)' ulIl'f!portacl IORlblnaloion ur ~IIICanilil' 'acid 11'1.1 N -< l-naph\.hy I )-oWlY lon~ dia>mlno dlhydJ'ochlllrhJe (1tM- IC)ntlll0 to 32), which .'n. thl - Snail)' adop\.ud. Two method. 01 oolor do- \'elopltlcn\ wero i"..l.ip\.ud. fmlrwr.. M.,.IIOD, III whlnb """1'1.. IthllOrJltioll ill ~hc .lill'~ Ilwll~ ",n~~ I~ clI,.,.j."IIIII~ IIJIA cler ~hll. optflD&J I~rullilly acId, Optimum conoontrR~lone ~nd acicli~iCl (or "nch OIImbill~~ion or ' ohorniCAl. wore dotcrmlnad In onlcr to obtain t, ~ruc oVlIluntion of their worth. The ,.u]\8 in Tablo I showad that tho hipcet , Table I. 8ereen1q'T_ta tor Itea...n~ 10 Olttaln 111." A--..t.Ioa Emckncy A"-"a.... 1I1d..1r ltd. aI"'.. ..mpl.' perU'" ',' M.. , I'rooecIlin 10. Colo. \~:r.~:. Ab80rbIq Rap8'- D...lopm..' .DeI nem..Ir.- , %' D - WaIIUI. ..Id, C - I.N.,hlh71amla..'IO." 0.01 N M.oR Add 10% A.OH. 0.06~ D".n.r 10 20 mill. .dd 0.01" C ' i.OI~D Ahe. 10 mill. add 0.113" C 11 := B:J~.JWA~~~N~n fft=,I~or.:~' add 0.01" C .:~ .11 D~O.a, \i. ~ H PI....lOole. 0' '.' ....01 .1'" 'DI_.ooIor .. D, - 1ooIt..1I...... C - N-(I.,..phth7!)"Ih7.....",1aa ~ 14' .... gO:8.~B: f.!.HA~r.' , ~I:: f.m~~.~,.oO~2" <6 ro 0.1" .01 D.IO~ A.OI . I.'" AlIo.I. ...1. ..... o.OcJI" C. .0 If. . v- .. .... """'.I!-' 0.' ~ 11. BCI e.. 18l81li. ..... OJIQI" C .1 i:. \b,~CO'I1."..IJ.~ ....::t:' :: Ur: u o.~ 'b..'f,,''UCI. -*,. S.,..... &1-' O.OID ..,.. IJ,.eI ad..... .. ....... eo....IIW", 8ID ' '.K D, .o.CIIM" 0, I" 1101. DI....,...... _!.~ ..,... 10" 4eOU. ." ftIr'-i aad ~R ~ .. 1M- ..=-: II + 0."'" 01(11) Dr:.",":~ TIlt., _"110 eaNt .. II II + 0.01" 1'1(11) DI_....... TIlt., -lAIr"" .11.., 0.'" ~.t_W.C.I.." R.po" DI_,nIor. T.. ".."'1,110 + 11...." r.(Il) , ,.a.., D - .u''''''I11.''''', C - N.(I..ph...,.,...II,I...odla..llI. 0I11If4-"""". 100 ... O.OI"D.O."'C:.O.U'KCI 1)1..... ........ \',." .Iuw'....... 1:1 0,140 oIu...lu_' , D . looItaal1le"" C - N.(I,,,,,"~II...II.,,,1aa "I~~.IIO.... g:rNb="'..l.'I~eOK BI:::::::. "....u"'l... .~. UU O. :." D, 0.." '" ~ ........ I.......... , III UI8:3:1I'&'}I"I:8: RI::::I:: I'IMI",....., n .-.. u + '--,,'\.(11) »1_''''. T., 01 .....,118 71 ell"' lame .. U + D.l1'" ..(It) DI",,,,""'."'" .1 .....,110 7. .aNt ... .. U + 0,IlOl" I'.(m DI,,,,,, "'or. ,.... 01 ....I,U. 71 41«'" .-.. n + 0.01" h(rn 1>1_' ooIor. T...., .....,110 71-11 ."..,. UMtalol. ooIan ulo- .......... nt:n...:.:-"6'....~ "...1:~'~. "'IMd Turbid ~... .....10"'" "'.......... ; C ...."',,.,.. DI..... ....... ... of .."",U. .«.., DI"",''''''. ,.... 01 .."'1,110 .a.., , ,0.111 I . I 0,111 0.1. 0.141 , 0.'" 7 I II 14 0.1", II II " 41' IT II II &I II II I: 0,110 II II IT 0.'" .. ..... .. II + I.'" 1'.(11) 71 II II II ....... U + O.OI~hml) !!a- .. I., + 0.001 V ..,.. .. U + 0.001 CO( I) I!-- .. II + 0.." Ae(1JI) ',i 118 . ."....- "1\.,, --\loa I. lilia'".., wi'" I.., ""Id. ""d ..1...1., "'1"'" D - oIi...o\l.I.. -" o . .r:titf:=~~':;~'~';~".r ~~,'",.~..'i~"~:.~.~:~eft'~::~~~"" .Ii.,.i.lo. . CaI.uIa.. ,...t88cIaId -pl. oIl~i.", """"Cl'It .II,w,", (0' 110 1111..' ~u ",,,,'".1''''''''''' I. 10 mi. "-' II tit!. .!MIII'" 1loiii,. ' . QoIIIIIa.. ,... 1.14 ., ""'''''"111 ""II. (",.ultl ... ~ul.."lrM I.. I mi.rvli\o. .1 ."""011 .lIo.i... 110.'" ., ........ 8ItrI.. -. ....I......, '" I .,uI. '" 81"-,,_,,,8.1 IIIIU ",I. 01 "'MI." image: ------- 1\152 ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY possible concentration of di~ nzotisiDg reagent Willi dCllir- ahle; not only WnII the abBorp- t ion efficiency increnlled, hut e\','n the ('olor obtained in a bottle with a standard air sample (Heagente 11 and 12), Too high a concentration of , the conpling reagent, on the other IU\I\d, reduced tI)e color produced (Itcagents 22 and 2:1), prohably because of in- {'reased side reaction directly hetween this reagent and the nitrite. A high IIcidity (Rea- gent 20) greatly slowed the ('oupling step for the finally adopted combination of chemi- cals. Acetic acid was best he- ,'..nse it. provided lhe best com- promise pH and also had sur- face telUlion properties which provided a fine froth in the 5:,mpling device. Reagent 23, hased on these principles, was found to give the highest ab- ,orption elliciency. The eff cct of various met..l. added as catalysts WILS .light' (Reagents. 15 to 17, 24 to 32). The most elTective metel Willi 0.05% iron(lI) (Reagent 27), which improved absorption and color intensity, but was considered undesirable because of color instability which would result if oxidation to the iron(III) form occurred (Reagent 29). Nitrite Equivalent of Nitr0len Dioxide. l'ractic..lly, ltan.d- ..rdi"ILtion of t.he reng,,,,t is best achieved .with stand..nl nitrite lolution, fatber than with ditlieultly prepared stAndard g... 'Ampl., Tb. iDl~11I presumptioQ IV'" ~ha~ 0.6 mole o.f nitrite . would be equJ"lIIn~ .. 1 mole of III.... dIoIlde, by dl.-oluUon In Wa. of tJIe lat'" .. Ii",equal quaMltIeI II altrte HCI mtrOUl lIIeI. (fi'.qUltion I below), The IMt two IOIumDi of Table I, 11"lnl tilt a~ obtAIned with 1 ~. of altropn elf. (llIld. In an Ilr .m"le, Ind wl~h ~II. oqulnltnt amount of nl~rlt.o on tilt lboY. blllll, .1I"wld thAt thlt prcIIUmptloll Will II/j~ eorl'8Otl dl"ldln, tll. IIr.& n,uro by ~wllHl ~. IIOOCIIMS 1i"111 till! IOtull mollr eqlllv..wn' o"""IIIuli. '1'h. pmlou8l)' II..g. tlon.d .wd)' b)' !'aU)' (10) luuM I ,.ll\tIoMhlp 01 0.&7, II- ~IIOU,h I '1~l8IlOtoPy nplIWlI'IoD 01 the dlnllfonoe "OID 0.6 "'III Dot ",..n&lel. In In oITnr' .. IInd ,lit MIl.. of dl."... II",nt, I mor. oom,'I4M InvlI~UMAtion "II undortDktn of the ,,1I,,~lonNhtll betw..n tho oolor 011""1II1II I" In OYIOU"wa bottl. wl~h a '1..,1II16I'II188eI Ilr ,",mIllo, Illd th. IllIlor "b""'llod In 111111- Uon wltb .tarill"rd Dltrlto rll"pn', , 'J'II. olroot on ~ho 011111' IrI~II.I~)', whl"h oouW be procJuuod Ioy "Iryln, tilt annoontrl'lon. Ind oombiutloDl 01 ~h. IIIp 1J1~lIt. 01 th. IIn"\ ro"pnt, IA All."" In Tlbl. n. AU 101u- 1.11111. IAYI ..Ioout thn II/lfllll lIolor IIiLlIIINI")' with. ,LlIII41I1"c1 IIltrite portion, bu~ ~IIII oolor IIILiln.l,y wl'" I 'LlIII!!..rd "Ir ..."'plo v..rlad 1lIOI'I wldllly. . Vllu.. elnNII W a.IIM Iqul".. IUIIOI wore ob""ln.d whan thl Ilr amplo Will ..h"rbad In loet.lo IOld Iiono (RollOnt aa) or In a dllu~ .ulllnlllu-lCICItio Iuld rlllOn' (RoAPn' a4). A ¥llu. 01 a.61M .qlllvl\lanoe WII obtalnoel wl~ Ro",ont U (till ,lInlll)' Idoptod rOl\lOn,) III Ino~hor tAlt DOt .hown III whleh ,he Ilr ..mplo "'II Inol't!llIOCt tll 600 ,.1. (01 nl~,," dloxld.). ID tlll8 - tb. rln.. 01 'h. rUlpnt WII aooedod Ind onl)' I wuk orlnp.rocl oolor WII 01>- ""lnoel, bu' UPOD dlluUon 100 tlm.. with r.cId1tl.n..1 ,.IIID' th. oblrloterl.U. 001" WII obtalntd, liow"'lr, hllher "11U8I 1\'0,. obtlinod with .LrllnKnr .ulllnWo IOld (Rolpnt 86), Ind Table II. IdueDee of Rea.ent CompoeltJon on the Nitrite Equh.alent or NltropD Dioxide AblOrboo.. Mol.. 01 Nilri. '. Procedure 10' Color Std. air S'd. nit'riie E_Q.uivalr-nt fAjt Abeorblq Reaaen'. DevoloplDent aDd Remark.- .an)pla. portion- 1 Mule of NO,J . D - BuUaoill. a.ld, 0 - N-(I.Daphlhyl)..U.yl.oedlalllln. dihydroehloride, 560 III. aa 14~ AeOR Aboorb 20 ",10., add 0.02~ D, all.r 16 win.. add 0.002%'0 0.183 O.ISg 0 48 a4 0'02i D, ~4 . AoOIi . Ab.orb 20 mio.. add 0.002cz, C 0.106 O.ING O' \'I 35 0.8 D. 14 t A.OH Ab.orb20 min.. add 0.002% l1 0.250 O. IUI O' ;i~ 36 0.8 D.O.~%C AblOrb20mio. Dlre.leolar 0.243 0.110 0'72 23 0.8 . D. 0.002% C, 14~ AeOR AblOrb 20 win. Dir..1 .olor. . 37 0.5~D,O.002~C,50%A.OH A:'~~~:o~f:.' DIre.leolor UI~ g::~~ g:~~ C . ~ ref4!n to 4DAl oODGeDv.tloD I. mldu,.: w.{v. for I;OUd. a!1d v./v. for liquid.. D - dlaaoUlin. ",I.eat - eouphnl rOA,IIDt for oolordoyelopmtD\. AcOI - ~lAol"l acotlC~ ao(d. In ~;~v...~~~~:.l'1."o~I~~odard .alllpia 011,.J 01 nilrOll1l0 iOlid. (or 50",1. al20 p.p.m.) aboorbod 10100.1. 01 re.,... . Cal.ulaled lor 1.14 y 01 pola88lum ollrlle (would b. OO\uloalenllo 1 mlcroliler 01 01lro,a8 dlo&id. il 03 molt 01 pOlauium olt.rlle w.r. .qulval.M \0 1 mole 01 nilro,eo dlolld.) In 10 mi. 01 r..I.ol. . 4 Oblalnod by dloldlnl .boorbano. of .\&ndurd air A..pl. by Iwl.. Ih. ablOrbao.. 01 llaodln! ohril. parIJoo. No. Tab)e III. D.vlee Blaodard mldll81 ImplnMor Blandard mld,.1 Impinlor Modlfted Sbaw ..rubber uoed lor ..reelli... ~Ia; 110 mi. 01,1- heli... Mldpl tm"""er wilh Irilled tub. .nd Mid..1 bubbl.r willi 8-mm. 1r\118d di.t Mldg.1 bubbl.r wllh 8-111111. Irilled . diole Mldr..1 bubbler wilh 8-",",. 'rilled dl"k Ab80rptlon Efficiency with Various Sampling Devlea Vol. 01 S.mpling Rale, H.ad Lo... TOIl P.P.M. AblOrpli.. n.a..nl, MI. 1.lIor/Min. Mill. "r III 01 NO. F.1fi.ieooy, 1\ 10 .1 1 O. 14 32 10 0.5 1 o.a 31 20 0.7 0.14 17 10 0.5. 0.28 13-V2 10 0.4 54 0.3 IIQ 10 0.4 30 0.3 V4 10 0.4 34 0.4 V5 these were even hicher when the coupling reagent wu al80 pre!!eDt (Ret.gente 36, 23. and 37). Theile 1'e8\1118 may be explained by hypot.helizinl that the mt.ro&en dioxide may re&Ot either.. in Equat.ioD I, with water alone to produce equimolAl' quantitiC8 of nitrite and mlralt (50% equivalence), or 118 in Equation 2, directly with .ulf..nilic 101<1 lAd wntor 118 n peroxide to ylpld 100% equival,'nce, and till' the flfCIOI1" .f bllb oonoontratlollll of .ulf..nilic acid. &I woD II of I null lmou"t of oClUrlins ~lUllt, J",rmit.a ~If . laMer 1IIO&1oD .. ooour wl~ equill fruqllUlloy. 111 U.. formu'" "...w below, altropn dloxldo I. wrlUI!1I II UII' peroxidt lorm 01 the dlJllll', ntwCIIlJ1I l4't",\lIIII, w 1lillll'IUy .tnll!llIml rei... tlOlllhlpl' II O-N-o I + I - IINU, + tlNtI, no O~'N...o (I) no1.ii . . . 01.1'(-0 : + I: - U,o + I/~ o. + UNO. + : 11 O+N-o 'QMil"'" IQIN-N-(> lIQON_N .(2) ~ ,II -, 8( ,11 H 1>~ulflll\\IIu aeId IuUan1l1o aoId I" oftJ..r ,.10"0" tho nl~I'CIU' IC'td fllrll\l'll pt'OIIIIL't'. another mol8oulo of dlllUIIIlflnlllo IOId. In 1I:quatilln 8."'tllL'r OJI)'II'" Of bydropn poroxldt may be produuld. .It WII fOllnd L"'p«t- IIIIDtAlly thlt .mlll lmouD" of hydropn pfroIkIo did not ~ "ont oolor dov.lopmont or bloIOh the oolor. EquntioD 2 IDlY 1110 bt writ"" to .ho" two mol.oul. of .ulfnolUo Qcld uombillin. with tho nl~ropD totroxld., with thllll\lftO Clnd relult. Abaorptloa I8IoI.no, wlda Vartou. Slmpllnl Dom... AIit!' tIIo mOlf~ .ullllbl. rUIIlllllt Ilild III'C!II dovulnped In OOIiJund101l wltb thCl,nodl1ltcl Shlw ICrulJbtr, It Will found thlt muob bett« .motlno)' oollid 1'0 oh~lIlnod ulloa mldaot Irlttod bubblm. Tilt AOO~lo IOId ooDtont 01 ~h. ,.lIaOD' mlldo poIIlblo I IlDe aad .tabl. fOlm 0120. w 30-101, voilim. nbevo 10 ml. of ro&lOnt aDd image: ------- ,;OLUMI 26. NO. 12. DICEMBER 1884 'I ' " ' . :,:O¥idod amP IIIrlA08 ...tor;ood ~~ An u~" ; ',rlDI Irltted diak ,..118 better thAn vertical or dOWllward-lllCinl . :i!k8 beenu.. there 11'118 leA coalcacinl of bubbllll with OO~ , ;II~"L loa of 111"1\1.'0 nreA. In TAblr. III are lhoYm th. abeo~ , 'jo" efficicncilll obtained lor vAriouI' lIumplinl devlO8l. The UIn!e -,i~~ct Iritted buhblcra U!1rtcd IIhowod 9t to 00% efficieney a' , 1,:1 to 0..1 p.p.m. 01 nit" "I:r.n dioxide. 1)y ualnl two In mill : f 11M"'~"I\ry, pmct.JcI\lIy 100% cllicillncy mAy,be obtnilK!dj II tr.a\ Iilh ~1I,'h "ITIUIII',,,,,,"tllhnwed theacccnd bubblor_orcd 04% i 1111' lew bundr,'r!1 i,~ ,>1 1\ p:ut ller million whlr-h rm-I the ;,1 "III,blO1. Tho fritted buhhler with tht! hillhelt p-re drop .... ~hnwod the hillhClt efficlenoy. Standardllation .,alaat KDowa ConCIDtratlolll 01 lfltroc- ';lIlillo. In tho work dOlCribed AbcmI, tho llllliamp&ioa wu ""It. \,J",t the finnl,i'l!tl«cnt lIave true valulIII whc!a U88d hi tb8 .YU"II"Led boUle to IIuniple undiluted r.arboy alr mlnure, '1Dd "I"OI'J.llon offioloncl"" won' cnll.ulutOO on the I"""" fA the relAtko. "lor ototalnecl In thll' manner 118 compured to thl\t obtained .. I",n aompUn, dih1tPd onrl>oy uir ntixture. n romained to .. .jfomOnItmto tho ~lIr,u1Y c.r tIIla l.r08umlldon by .mpllnl hlllh.' ! roncclltmt.lODI of IllIIoPD dIoUdt ~ knowl\ ..Iuo. ,Tbree : 1)"t4!mI wore uaod to'pnpaI'IlUoh _t,....ln All abeoIuto IIIInlllr by ~ 'm.......' 01 purellltro8lft cIIoDIIll'OlD . . tanll, IIIIcI ..m.I&ucoouI lamP" .,.. ...... AD .......... I«tlollllllll both 1M ~ ...., I8d &he plllnaldllfaUonIe , ~ 'III'thoII (6). " ' " III UN! n"..,.."". ulMllenGUW plpI!t ....UMlIo mNiMa" ,''''PIIeI','''' .""..PP.IIINO 048ICII i 1I\tOpD dJo8Ide pi, , - &he eoa"l1 "IN IntNlllMod IlIto . Th" ""Nt 01 vM1nu8 lnl4lrr,'fIn, ..... wu found to he imlm- : "",t" or~. 11i...".08I run In ~ ...." 0.3 mi. ", porI/WIt ua- tho _t.mIOIma ....1II1I8h hiP. tha8 811M 01 , fIlA "II pi"" IlIto . ..CWltor boMII to 81ft . &MuJIINI .... ' h 1I1t,..n c1kndde. s..... 01 U.. pGIIIbOlty fA ....., ftr1I8I . II'IItratiOll" 100 1',P,m. aftor aUowtllllor &he """".-1dI8I -pie .... IDd ~tra8... all &he ,..111 .... ...... . IIII'voluJIII. AMlJIII8'by &he ",.. pJW- ~ GO.. and ,......a 18.... 01 mllrilltkorl (eomot8d""" 18 U"""'" ".~ 1,.".ln., hr phnoklJ.allolde MIcI..o, '7.D, ."10.0 p.p....' putt pII' mlUIID) pII' 10.... oI.llIIftI'IrIaI *lID" For eompIIrio , "1111 "hili pod uaI.J&181 -~ .... ......., hAl,,, '..., lor.,.L '01 allIcI88!t, d~ Are ordInU'll1 reqvtNII to.. 1M nl""" eIIftlde .PP8I'ICI to belolt . ... .... . ItGp 10" ' .... .... oIl8habllllltell8ltJ' the 110I'III81 ooIor .... loud .. and. \.he .,...... WIi ulIIIUIOIIIIu1111 ".,.,... ....... ........ ,. .. ... ..... 01 . to 4" fA ",1IIOfI,.- per .,. ' . 110111. II~ ~ ...,...., hall "- ...... .... &he .. 0-. ~8." 01 CII8bI 18 '1UlnpUnted by tb8 lllllt dIM "I'VI'II v"" 0110 !J.p... 18 &he ...., 011'1..,. I WIllI ......... ... III MIll" .""., ,.,11111" wtUl nl.,... tlkIIIdI prod.... nI- ' 'II, Ioh8 ... ""'" ,... tile ...... 01 ..... .... In'" ...... pmtoalde and 8IIJII88. 0WNIaU0na IIIIId8 OD till bI88 .... ,,.. ... III........ TIlt loll8wla8 ... ..... 1Iow. III pubIIIIIM klMIII ... (II) Indicated ~, ....... tb8 nI- , MP, ,.... If\8d ..,..., ...... ......... ... ...... .................... .... m""h..aI8r"""'" 01 t.be ,1IIt- . , ...... ... 811M tb8 _...~ fit the Iat.. """01'8 .... III the "COlic! 1)'Itorn, 0.. IfIW" 01 u.w ....... ...... ".. ..-..n.wJ, ....... l1li UIII t-.oUa8 Jl"lC""oded, tile ..II 111. lM!IIur»",ly "ul.hod In . .... - ........ ..... .... thin 01 &hi nl""" ~ - U mlau" eIIv'" by \III parte per btvUn In a eIoInIt, ",_' .... 8UbMII ...... ..... ..... ....... 01..... fir 1 p.,.... 01 -- &he 1IIIIl1II. would be ijrocl a ,.. on ocIp. Aa _&rt8 ,.. .... ... . ... ... ... ........, ,. 10 ",... I' -Id he G.4a IlllIIU&l. 'nIua.'or, Icny. The UI~18I --...... .... j .)III'" ..... ..".-.... ......." -- &be IptIm hI,lIGtIveIy 01......... p.p.nl, Thllullowtna ...1. WIN ....., . ,uct ......... 01 &III In...,.... hi cllll\euit. ' ~Dn""''''''''' '0 'II . II I. '. ,It rw,- pur,.. &be ."""",&u8 abown In Vliure 1."" inodI- .:. ..~~ .U ,8 .'..... .. ., .f "'lOtbM._oIOIunl.."lalr,ll'OlD"W~N4JI .. -=--.... . .. .. . 8... II.' ... ... ~..' ....... lamp, IOUId be mllIl'II with "" MIuD _tal.. The .......... dropped ..." bIa. 8M .... ........... ' III..... dIOIIIde J1II& In 'ran' 01 till! .mpU", d"lo8~ Tb8... , 1118"',....,. WIN ..b8tutlalJ,""""" TIlle rua .... 01 .... ....,. IOUId be varied by nddl. U.tub88 to &be train. . ... II Ul8 abIeIuM ItucIard 01 .... .tIN Ia~ u"",-, TIll . 0-.... dlllrmllIId by AIMoorption In alkAU.. iodide 18d.,.. ...a,.. Ibond pod ftII'IIIDID" aI......., ..... " a... ftpbo'-*" ..~..- 01 iodine 11....&811 on MIdIAcMion , II.. "'" tak8. ,', ' wtUl 8UIl~horIe add. TbI IU1I.mlr add cl8lWyld , In .... tbIId, I)'lto'" knon -....... ", ....... dJo8Idt' All)' In...,.,..lIItrI&I wbleh ml",t be .......t.' . - , ... Pf'I*IId b,. matI8 01 lour lowautIII. ".... ""'''11 Two asItroU.... 01 -- IIaU80Il . III"'''' 0"",1' tin" to aD ' i WII 8OII8&NoW to tn8IIUI"8 "'" IIIIaI1 .... ....... ~ otbmrlll 1lOI'IIIIII ooIor. EIo¥III mloron"... C!l1II1II!CI aft' IDOriII8 , lien h8Iow 10 ml: "",'mlnuM. The priDlipie 01 ~ ~ In tb" ~eqvJ"'" to ,/_"" 01 Ulat "n)C)1Jnt 01111""", WIllI \/In' Uln pi "... miMle to "- tIIr8qh . IDe hi""""" , 1111111111", tho InullDA1 oIrtlO' ~urrhllC In a hlltll'l. Thin,. maero. RIIIIP and'.,lIao ..,UtaP,. &11"0, nlld UI."..... drop.......... lit.... oompletelr deNoyad ""I '''ltlpUnl l\'I1W'nl, and al;.o &he, ..red bl . maIIOIIIItIr 00II.....1". nli4l"" ""i' I. .... dl"lIoIUl'anlll. 1ICid. Tb8 ,....n' AllUawd a Yl.'lIuw-bPOwn tin, I11III11,.."" by JIIIIIIIIn. tilt III III...", In. "'1111 bot... 0CIft0 wltll an abeorbaaOl eqUIv,\ll'lIt toll 11b011' ~ ,.1. ar nltoropn dloxlcl8. '''',allII' A8oarI&I IIIId -III the pili 18 nIP.. .......... Thl"" OOIIftIIlorit lDI"II1U loullil lur ",nI09111,-- .... to , ft'lll1Inp, .... /low \baa. TIlle low ""181"" III. . ........ JIIII tile .... ON a aPooIally prepared "IIP- dIoIddi ai, HMaI, and .'por&kIa 01............................ OI\lljnM_tll8p8nture. Tbe~dIoxtd._p~, 1/1 .u.p. rotcllllW In. . IIIODd ....... ........ TIll d""""" .... .... I8d DO Ylllb18 III.,.... lrom aQ,,.L Anal mI8tur8 /loW8l1lDto . _I.'" wbI8Ia ...... eouId be , oooumd. ':t'bi....., hcnmw, wu lound to .......' tM I' I 1- oo1l00t0d. It WII8 -i-r to ~rub all the alr wtUl di1ut8. eIIebrotllAlHuUurlo ICid to remove Impuritllll l1Ieb IlIiiorDoDfa whIch precipitated or OOD8l1med DiI.rolM dioxide. ' , " The nllUl" of the analr- 01 IlmultAneoua IIImp1lll were .. 1001oWl: ' ' PI.. iDe... nlu. Aul,..ie bS' p.-n' metllod Analnlo br pl!e...wIeuUo8l. ...fd....- P.P.M. 16,1 21.' 16.6 17,1 10,8 10,8 40.8 42.0 81.4, 8,11 8,2 6,S Good agreemont wu obtuilloo with the pl'IIII!nt method enn with .,nplo IIi.eII varyJDs Inlm 45 to 2.';0 ml. ' , The phtlnoldillllllonic llcld ,.nll't'fluru WUII ay8tematicully low, ..' hall boon "'llOried for Ilmilnr 1("1 concent,rationl (16). 1're-, vioul toalA with t\WI proooduro !tudah""'11 tJll1t IAhllOrption 01 lower contOntmt.lona in larp IJottlnll WII8 very a1ow; althotltCh 3 daye hAd boon allowed, a1I8bUy hllher reawta could \)(I ohtalned with l-II'eek ah8orptJOII. Th08ll Mmpl~ were collected In ~.6-liter acid botLlI!I with 16 mi. 01 ahlOrl>inl rcr&IIf'nti in the &au... provlounly quoted lor the Itr.lnl_t.eal ohamber. 600-ml. boW. wore 11nod ~\IICI 01 the hill"..r C'onMntntiona and 1 day of allIIOI'\.t.Ion In tho rtilrlll'"'tor w"a ndequa.... Tho ......It III thC1ltllltudl1ll WI\I thl' I\bIIoluto ntondardlaat.loa 01 &he method IIIId the "b~' 01 thl nIIdJ'y fA the ~ tIon eI1101oa- wbloh wore 011"""101 with the apparatua .howD lal'llllirn I. .' image: ------- . 1954 oxidationoillitropn dioxide by the OIODe. The OOrreot.iOD to ' the analyU for thl. eft'ectwu lOUlhl1 oomputed &I +10% for 1 p.p.m. of OIone, +21% for 2 p.p.m., and +60% for 6 p.p.m.; tho log of tbe corrcction factor W&I proportional to tho concon- trlltiou of ozono. Thle method WAIl vory convenient and IIIItil- I""tory (or I"".. th"n 2 'or 3 p.p.m. ololono; lit higher vuluoa the cOIT"dion becamc high and unccrtnin. UrdintU'y, rengent-grade manganeae dioxide was found un- IIItiafactory lor thia use becauee of it! appreciable IIhsorptlon of nitrogen dioxide. Alter attempting to purify various batchell, IUCCCsS wile attnined in the loll owing DIIInner: A plug of glau wool, cleaned with dichromate cleaning solution and washed, W&8 1I10istl'ned witb mnngaueee(II) nltrote eolution and dried in an oven at 200. C. for 1 hour. The final plug used was 1 cm. in cli:"neter and 1.5 cm. long and required nhout 0.5 ml. of 76% munpnese(II) nitrate hexahydrllte. ,Mangllneee dioxide 11'&8 produced &I the IIILlt decompoecd with Iou 01 nitrogen dioxide. The plug wae plnced In a'V.tubo and air wae drawn through lor an hour to eweep out the nitrogen dioxide and reduce the blank to about 0.01 p.p.m.j an evelilower value may be obtained by e1ectricaUy heating the tube at temperatures up to 200. C. clurin; thie aeration. Better than 09% of 0.3 p.p.m. of nitrogen clioxide pll8led through unabeorbed. After long uee the catalyst beeomee exhau.ted and requlree replaoement. SuUur Dioxide. Teet. with thia ;111 were made ueing the twin Iyringe of the apparatue ebown In Figure 1. Sulfur dioxide , alono producod no color with the reIIlt8nt. Extromely larp amounl.H lIowly bleaohed tho color formed with nltroaen dioxide. TIIIII, 20 ,,1. of luUur dioxide produced no elleet; 00,,1. reduced the recovery 4 % and required the color to be read. within 46 mlnutell, the lading after ] ~ houn beinll0%i 900,,1. reduced the recovery by 11%, Ind all color ,,&8 loet after 17, houn. Nu. morOUI materlall wero tried &8 oo1or ltabillzere. It w.. found that tho Addition of 1 % aonton. to tho Toapnt hoforo UN areatly retarded the lllllln, by formln, a tomporary addition produot with lullur dloxld.. With 00 ,.1. of ..Ilur dloxldo, ,ood reeultl ,GOIdd bo obtAlllod by rCllldlnl tho oolor within 4 to 6 houn, In~tolWl ol tho 4/1 mllluwM I'III1l1lrcul wlthnut tho uolltonn. ,TOIti wore alia maUo with wIIWr IKlluttOIl~ of IICIIIlum "I.ulllto "CJutvAlont to SU ,.1. of IUllllr III0IIllJu. Color _In II hourI WAI 0..% with- out aootono, and 16% with 1 % ACIOton.. Nu,lJOfOU' nporllllontll wore maUo ulllni a V-tubl OO!I&olnlDI obromlum trIoxIl.Io on KlIWII wool, AI prevlw.ly rooomlDOndIId (II', to cIoItroy th'lIIIlrur 11101111111. It WRI found thllt:tO p.p.m. of thlt 1/11 WD' OCIlnll!owly ro,nwlllllO thut JlOrlUotly ltAlilo 0010,. "1rO obtolllnd. Tho mol.ture ullntllll' wlIIlollnd to ho I'Gthlr orltJ. 0111. Whnn tho uhromlum trlollirio WAIl vlMlhly Wilt (ulter ..mplln, air of hlah hllmlt.llt)') olily 70" of 0.8 p.p.m. Dltl'OlOn dlOllIdt wa~ pMIICICI, whlln It Will IIrlnd allilin 00" WAI ptWlCld. Un.,. ever, a OIllOllluwly IIry tU1/1I 11111 not relnov. tbo IUlrur IIlollliu. Th. IOIIUII 01 nltrllllon dlC/llld. .p)lOlll'Oll to 110 reilitod more to the mol.ture oonulIIL Llilln to tho IImoun' of 1'OIIII000cJ ohromluln, IIn08 pocl p.rlUI'/IIIIIUICI Willi ollt.ahllllllrom A tubo whluh oonl4lllod 110" 01 tII. OhrollllulII In rWlluocIlorm. It. numhllr ol olperlmontl wore mlldo Ulhllt I1I1MluunlltAI to olllitrol thu hun,llIlty. It wu found J,bat thu hClllt 1lIlliIouIIIIl"t 11110 romovc'cl the nltrolllD cllollld.; f~r 0.11 p.p.m. lit 0.:1 IItllr ,..r rnlnllto tho II*WI.w.l'II: mnlnOIdum Jl1'rl,hlllrllto, 113%, 1)1'I,'rl 1 II, AU'f.,: ul~llIlul'D ohlorllill dlhydrato, a,t '?&I: IIrlllllllur IIlIhY1II'oUI ulllc,lclin uhlorldo, SU,., And phOlI,horu. Pllllt.olirlo, 10". . III MUlnmary, nllllltllrfOrtll,no lrunl Mulrur dluxh.!lI"uuarr,"1 from amounl"t up to 10 Lllllu, that ol .lltro;1I1I dlolldllj Intclrloren.. from 1II/'IOr AmouDtI muy 1Jo nduooU by ullnl llootono II the oolor O&n be I'IIId without "...t dOlay, or a ohromlum trlo.ld. V.tub.. TII. mol.tul'8 oontont or tho IlIttor mu.t .bo kopt botWlOn villbl,y wot IInd boll' clry. Thu UH ul cJlllloOllntll1i tho trilin II Dot p.... mb"dhlu. . Olher Mlmlon 0.1110.. '1'hu IlIte'rfurulluo lrellll othor Ditro- lun 011111111 I. IIIIMII.dlllo. ANALYTICAL CHEMISUr Tho ovaluation of the interference of nitric oxide, NO, I.e eo~ pllcated by the fact that thi. compound ia slowly converted br' air to nitrogen dioxide. However it bas been studied iD the ab- lence of air in the gas induatry (!?/J), using sulfanilic ncid and I. nllphthylamino, nlld fouud nul. to produce 1\11)' .,olor unle. convorted to nitrogen dioxide by B epocill( oxi!!izilllt "'''uhh~r. Since tho prOijOllt rcl\~Cllt produces 1\ color by n oimi!:.r rCAetioa, It may llifely be eald thllt this gna d'oes not interf~re. Equilibrium calculations show that nitrous aei!! anhydride, NIOI, and nitrogen tetroxide, N,O" do not exist at eonceutratioDl of 100 p.p.m. and below. Kinetic data show that their di8SOCi.. tion Is practically Instantaneous. Hence these nitrogen oxidee may be disregarded. '. Nitrogen pentoxldo is rarely found. because it is readily hy. drated to nitric acid vapor, and ie a180 an unstable compound which is very !ensitive to heat; the haU life is 6 houre at 25° c., 86 minutel at 35° C., and only 5 !econde at ]00. C. The de- composition product! are nitrogen dioxide and oxygen. Thit oompound 11'&8 prepared by mixing a stream of Ditrogen dioxide with OIODe In 0.5 p.p.m. exoess using the flowmeter apparatus. , previouely referred to. The atream oontained 25 p.p.in. of nitrogen pentoxido (equivalent to 50 p.p.m. ae nitrogen dioxide), and lavo a teet lor about 6 p.p.m. 01 nitrogen dioxid.,. It it likely that thia was duo to Imllurity or decomposi tion or the nitro- IOn pentoxlde. Nitrio acid does not interfere with the determ.ination. Whea .dded in eolution to tho ",I\Ront It produoed no rolor, nor did it afTeot the devcloPlllcnt 01 color with nitrite oolution or nitro~ dioxide gas. In the form of vapor. II 5000-p.p.m. aumple col. lected In an evacuated bottlo gaV!! a test lor only 2:1 p.p.m. or Dltragen dioxide. The eample wa~ prepared by IIlIowing a lman amount of concentrated nitrio add to atand in a cloeed bottle, with the .dditioll ol " cryetlll of Mulfamic acid to destroy nitrou. aold impuritiOi. Tho .mull Interr,'rcllco round muy actually be nltro;on diollldn "roduced hy ducunJllI'lMltion in Illite or thla ~ OllutlQII. ' Oth.r Int"'orlna 0..... It. nUlnh!.'r of other «- "IN ID- vUlt/Mllte,,1 hy IlIloIh.. thl'lI' In tho (IIrm ol w"wr IOlutioa to . ' lVlIJUllt IIIlutloll wllll'h eontulnocl II ,'uWr equivalullt to about t ,.1. ol Dltropn dIoxld.. The AlnuuDt .ddud WIll lqulvll8llt to lU ,.1. of Intorf.rln, material. }[ydropD aullide produced DO ,"oct. Chlorlllo PIIortially bll!aohod tho oolor Inltantl)', cnu..a 46% 10M and ublll(in, tho tint 10 orllnp~ thu nnlll color remained INlrlootly .tllill.. 1 [ycJropn poroxldu Inol'llllHll tho color IU,htly (+4% In II hwn), ..ftetr 3 1111)'1 1./.., oolor 1IIIIIInortl1111t1d 1090 IIlId Ilild A III;htly dlll'uront tint with IotIe vlolot than tho normal oolor. It'or'mllllluhydo produoed no IIp,,roolllblo (lfTcct III 2 houn: In 3 dl\YI a 14% /P'Of\wr than 'norDllI1 oolur 1011 oooul'l'lll1 with prncluotlon of 11ft orllhp)'"lIo", tlu!,. In t,l... pr(!II('nct' of ]~ I\UUklllO (ulIIIII for ..I(ur dlolll~I') Ih" luh'r(t'Mlllt'" IIf 1111 tI".... nili- tIIrlll" Will tho hmo, OllUOjlL r..r thllL of furnlm,h'h~',II'. ",hir" .tlllelill not Intelrlonl wlthlu :lllIIlIrM, hilt unullU\! IIlnuI/Ot c~''''I'I,''" 10/0" u( wl..r In :1 dll)''', ACKN'OWLKIIC;"",:/IIT 'rill! lIuthor IA Iratltlll! to J. T. 1\fuuntellll lur ml\ny hulllf'" '"lIIOItinnA, IInd to D. II. n.I'Url !llId H. l~. StoldnKur, undrr wbtllO C1l1'IInt11l1l thu wurk Will oarriml out, fur thuir vlllu:.hle rovluw unLi urltlol.m. Ll'r.m""IIIIK c:,'rID (1) Avurllll, r. R.. narl. W. .'.. \\'IIo image: ------- ::OLU MI 26, NO. 12, DECEMBER 1954 : j) Gray, K Lo.'II., IIhu'Nulllao. J. K.. and Goldhora, 8. D., ArM. : ' bid. 1/1/11. "lid (k'"lltIIiulUJl Mod., e, 20 (106~). ' ; ;0) IIMIOD-Smit, A. J..111d. 1o:"IJ. CII....., 44,1342 (1062). ' \:1) HoUor. A. C.. and Ihwh. R. V.. AJr.u.. CUEII., 21, 1386 (I!J1I1). :2) Jarf)ha. M, D.. "Th~ AnuJyiical Cbomu.&ry or Industrial Poi8ona, IInlluds. unrk, In- aeiencol'ubli.hcrs. 11/40. ':.) .Johnaton, II. S.. nnd Yoat, D. M., J. C/oem. PIII/'" 17,3811 (1949). ,;1) Ki"""lbaeh. n., IN". I~NO. CUE>!., AJrAL. ED., 18, 700 (1944). ;j) l.aTowUy. I.. W., d ai.. J. 1M. HI/a. Tozieol.. 23, 129-47 (11M1). \ iti) Potty, F. A.. 3f.rlPetty, G. M.. 1m"., 25, 3Gl (1111:1). ,0) HeindoUar, W: 1'.. 1,,1>. ENo. Cue..., ANAL. E..., 12,325 (1940), is) /lid..., B. }o'.. ,,'ith :\lellon. M. G.. Ibid., 18, D6 (194/1). I. " 1955 (111) 8hin..,l\l. 1I..1hid.. 13,33 (H)'H). . ' '. (20) tIIin;'!!",,", L.. "..d Yellow, J. S., Alii, ClIO ANOC:. Proc., U (11N2), , 277. (21) St,mrord IlAIecareh Institute. "Third Interim Report OD the Smog Problem in Loa Angel.. County." 1 950. (22), U. S. Publie Henlth 8ervke. Pu",i. lI"olll. Rull.. So. 272, ""'1. (23) Uaher,)o'. L.. and Hao. II. 8.. J. Cllrm. .Soc.. 111, 79IJ (1917). (24) Wado. II. A.. Elkina. II. B.. alld /luotolo. D. P. W., Arell. IrwJ. Hl/rI.andOecupottonal M.d.. 1,8\ (11160), (25) Y&IIO image: ------- ...' .. ,', . . . . OXIDES OF NITROGEN OIIESWALTZMAN MEmOD APCD 11~ ' " SCOPE Thl. -!hod It UI8d to'det8rmlne _II cone8ftIl'8tlCIIII of nlllag8ft dI.1. faund In !he 01,1.0..81'8. n. 1- limit of the _!hod 1.'*-'tO.1 D.D.m.lno ~_I.iamp/e, bottle. By olml", the .01- af !he ...,Je, nlfrogIn d1aIcl. In IJeClflo ~.. can obDbe -...d. How...., the JIhenfld1.,~ ICld II8thod Is ee::a-lIy_- played by thl~ IGboraNl7 r.~.lIIItlng. (N.8.) , " ' METHOD SUMMARY . , 'It'8 a.;::r.;:!::a ~ c"llei:t8d In e_uat811 bottta canlalnlnt the ~I", .Iutlan. The omorbln:: .11Iffan CCIIIII8b of ,0 mixture of .,1 fanl I/c acid, acotlo acre, c:n:! N- ,(I-,hthyl)..thyl...n_lne dlh)odraahlorl.~ After thaklnt, tMnlfrogen dloxl. dlm:atl18l tho ..I.ntc acid which"" caupt. with N-(I"ft11Phthyl)..thylcnocllo- IIIIM'farmln, a cf,.. hlnf8ntlty 0'''' _lor I. --...d wIth a colorf-tor ond the cone8l'\t\'CItlan of nltragMI dI.,.reed "-" 0 ullbratiOll Curle. SPECIAL A...'ARATUS COLLECTION. , Chaney rotary -.- (FI;ure 1), SOO-I.1Iott1es wlthnanww necks cOlltalnl~g Iatlulot8d .w..w., ,3-lnch pleca 0' ,heavy-wall GI'fII-nAIiw MIl"" ,ICI8W 0""", .1Id,1- p'., ""...!OttCIII ~R..... 2). ANALYTICA". , Sp8choP"''''':'''' (Col-- ~1'MI81 """14), mlcrac~ (Co""" N.. 14-J15, mlnllIIUIII .01- 2.', "".). . " R!AGENTS , , ~ ..... D "".' DI88Iw 0.'...., N~H2CH2HH2' XI" 100".""", Al8lrblIIII ttllll:8ftt. DI_I... 5 .-.,.,.1811110 &ld\HU~;;2.j IzO) In eqo ",I. of --. AcW 140 1111. of lleel., acellc _lei'" 2D 1111. of 0.1'" N-(I-n8phthyl)-ethyI8MdI8RIM d1h~hlorl.. .lull8ft. DUv" to 1 liter. ANALYTICAL. ," Stw1d1r4 S~ NltIt.. s.Iutt8n. Acc--Iy _lgh 0.2755 ~ 0' aocf1- N.8.. 1'1I1,14_41017"'thocI hCII been "'fI8,."d by'" DIstrict dnco Auguat 1956 for 01; /IIo)n!t:rlnll purpoI8I by an autamatlc'recordlng InstNnIent, Nitrogen Oxl- It..." Model 3011, IIIOftUfactuNd by 8.mnan EneIMer/n,. Inc., Norl:, Hollywood, Call~la, to DI.trlct IJ*lAcatlcn and later modified by !he Las Ante'" County, , Air Pollution Control DJatltct. '. ' , APeD 11-a6 II.lof6 image: ------- nitrite (NaN02' 98% weight allOY) and dissolve In water. Make up to volume In a I-liter volumetric flask. Transfer 1 mi. of the solution, by means of a cali- brated pipet, to a SO-ml. volumetric flask and moke up to volume with water. 0... mllll Ii ter of the latter solutIon contolns the equivalent of 5 /l-g. of nitrogen dioxide gas (based on the 0.72 foe lor from Saltzman) and will be reFerred to, hereafter, as the standard solution. Tr(lnsfer the following amounts of the standard solution to a series of 25-mI. vol- umetric flasks using a measuring pipet or 5-ml. buret: 0.1 mi. 10 the flnt, 0.2 mi. 10 the second, 0.3 mi. to the third, 0.4 mi. to the fourth, 0.5 mi. 10 the. fifth, 0.6 ml. to the sixth, 0.7 ml. 10 the seventh, 0.8 ml. 10 the eighth, 0.9 mi.. 10 the ninth, 1.0 mi. to the tenth, 1.1 mi. 10 the eleventh, 1.2 ml.lothe twelfth,. 1.3 mi. 10 the thirteenth, and 1.4 mi. 10 the fourteenth. Dilute each solution 10 YOllime with absorbing reagent. The flosl,ol091coi stoppers nnd the 3-inch lengths of rubber tubing .n IN sodium hycfroxlcle overnight. Rime with distilled water, then with O.ODIN hydrochloric acid, and again with distlll.d wator. Allow to dry. . Plac. a ierologlcal stopper on the neck of the collection bottle. . Attcch a piece of rubber tubing 10 the sidearm of the bottle and evacuate 10 a pressure of about 25 mm. of mercury: Tighten the terew clamp en the rubbc' ~,U..: ~c:' /::~onnect from the sou,...e of vacuum. Insert the solid-glass plug Inlo the end of the rubber tubing. Add 10 mi. of absorbing solution to the bottl. by poking ,he needle of a syringe (conloin - Ing the absorbing solution) through tt:e serological stopper . The vacuum of the bottle wi II draw the obsorblng solution in. Remove the syringe. Number the bottle in any convenient manner. ~d the bottle on the circulorplatfonn of the Chaney rolory aampler. the lop of the bottle fits inlo a sleeve on 0 guide plate which has the time APCD 11-56 .P.4of6 image: ------- 01 the IClmple mark.d OIl it, Clnd whl.:h lion the 1111118 shaft ell the platform. The clr- culcar plCltform rotal8l by means of CI timing mechanism 10 that a now bottl. Is placod Inta position far ICImpllng each hour. Th. sampl.r holdt 8 bottl.,.. Th. ICImpl~ II tak.n by meanl of a hypodermlo n.edl. connec18d ta a piece of tubing I.adlng 10 the atmosph.re. When a bottl.. -- underneath the ne.dl., the ""ide piaN actlvaNla mlcl'Olwltch mounl8don the tOlenold ClU8mbly. The tOI8IIOid II 8ftOr- glzed and the plunger of the IOlenold -- the hypodermic needle down through the ltapper on the bottl.. After Clbout 30 MCondt, another micl'Olwltch on the to/enold Clssembly 1'01_1 the.lolenold. Thll procedur. II repea18d far each tOmple bottlo. ,\n .Iectric intorvol timer ",",I the power 10 tho lamplor on and orr at any pI'OlOt timet. .Upon arriving at the IOmpler location, turn tho power'lwitch ond drive IWltch off. lIemove the previoul ICImpl." and record the numben of tho bottl.., tlmol, ond da18. Place the next set of bootlol in poIltlOll on the platform and no18 tho numbor~ of the bottlel, timol, and da18. Chock 'to ..e that the noedl. will hit the ltapper', and not the guide plal8l, by turning the platform by hand 11_ly until the f1nt mlcrolwltch clicks. Monuallyc»pr.. the lever arm holding the needle Ilowly to within about 1/. ino;h of the It.,... (do not puncture tl1e Itoppur). "illu noedlc mill! be ClflPl'ox/rnatoly In the "enter of the ltopper. If it hits any of the motal peartl, It must be ad(Ulred or ", b.nt, 10 that it Is In the correct poIltlon. this procedure II r.pea18d far ooc:h bottl.. . G_lIy~ Ifthell88dle II allgn.d far.th. f1ratbottl., It will be correct far the oth... Monually turn the platform to the correct tl"_, chock the timer far correc....., and turn the IWI tch.1 on . If it il de.lred to take a ...,. manually, the IOmpl. bottl. lIIOy be pIInctwed with a nliedl.j or the gl- pl"llre_ved and tho lerew clamp op8nod far u...t 10 &8Cond.. A 2-IiNr IOmpl. flCllk, Ilmllar to the OI'e' used In the Ph.noldl",lronic Acid M.thod far nitrogen oxld.., may allD be Ul8d. In thll c_, place 10 mI. of ablorbl""'IOIIItlon in the flosk and .yvcuoht ta the vapor preIIUr8 of the tOlution. C!oIe the screw clamp, and IMOrt the IDlld~l- plug In the rubber tubing. Take the ...,.. by apenlng the FI- far about 10 MC~. Replac. the screw clamp, tOlld"'1ll- pi"" and return 10 the laborcitary for analYIII. ' SAMPLE PREPARATION Shako the bolli. (ar lIosk) containing thuampl. for. 1.5 mlnutel on a mech.nicallhokor re all- for compl.18 color development. ' ANAL YTICAL PROCEDURE . r,...rw the eompl. from the bottla (or lIosk) dJroctly 10 the ..-tro,.hotollla18r cell and reed the obeclril8nc. ot .5.50 m .. against -ter. Obtain a blarik .,.Iue by rvadlna the abeclril8nc. af the arl,lnol ablClrt»lna IIIlut/on. Subtnlc t the bl8nk wlue from the .""Ie velue 18 ."'n the corroc18d --bone.. Read the w.'ght of nl".... dloxl. cCll'r8lf1D11dJn, to tho correcl8d abtorbonc. from the calibration CUfW. APeD 11-56 P. 5.16 image: ------- ADDITIO.NAL NOTES Wh8n "'''''' theColelnanlfl8Ctropholulnefer, check the .»1", for zero absorba,,,e ...... 811Ch ...ta", llnee the Ins"'-"t drifts graduolly. To .Impllfy this procea, OM of the two mlcrocwettea In the holder II ol_YI kept nlled with _fer and the a- checked .I",t thl. cell beroreeac:h reading. Since It II Important that the por- tIon 0' the c_tte In the IlQllt path be completely full, f!1. analyst should realize that the e:_tt8 I. tllt8d.lIghtlyand ehould nil It so that the .Ide GrIM - about half full. . If only a f8w....," - 10 be analyzed, theepectrophalometer may b. zeroed agalnlt the blanlc. ~, If 0 large number of IOmples are 10 be analyzed, It II better 10 zero the IftItrument wIth wa.r and IUbtroct the blank. Thll will avoid the paalbility 0' low"" w"," due Iothe~1 ot.rptlon of nitrogen dioxide from the Iobor- olary o~,. by the blank. . REPOITING AND CALCULATIONS C.laulot8 the part. per mlll10n 0' nitrogen d1axlde 01 lol'-: ~ Vc (I) ..... W = mIc,...,.. 0' nItrogen dIoxide per 10 mi. 0' ab8arblng solution \Ie: :: volume 0' air 1OIIIp1ecl, U..n, at 7l1J '"'". of mercury and 2SoC. a.n.rally ,....... and NtnperOture corrections - neglected, and the _d V'OIU1118 of the be"le or fIosIc II used To c~ ,. grot", per .~ cubic (.,at (6QOF. and 1 otma8phare), multiply. the porta per million by 8.48 X 10 . REFERENCES GrI_, P., lor., 11, 427(1879). SoltzlllOn, Iemord, Anal. Chem., ?~, 1949-55(1954). , APeD 11-56 P.60f6 image: -------