FINAL REPORT
EVALUATION OF A
LOW NOX BURNER
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
-------
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.
-------
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.
-------
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
-------
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
/
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
)
-------
~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
-------
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
-------
'-
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
.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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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'
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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.
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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.
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
~
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
-------
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
-------
A.
Overall View of Facility
B.
View of Emission's Sampling and Analysis Equipment
TEST FACILITY FOR GAS EMISSIONS ANALYSIS
FilUN
IV-It
-------
[
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
-------
. ~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."
\(:)N\\ER
AIR BLOWERS
BURN E.R \'t..S\ oS, "Nt:> 2.
Schematic Diagram of Fuel & Air Systems
Figure
IV- 6
-------
A.
Assembled and Insulated Fuel Heater - Vaporizer
B.
Disassembled Fuel Heater Vaporizer After Testing
FUEL HEATER - VAPORIZER
BURNER FUEL SYSTEM
Figure
IV -7
-------
LIQUID FUEL IN
t
~
rLOW PASSAGE
INNER STEEL
SHELL
ELECTRICAL rUEL VA?ORIZER
FIG.
IV 8
-------
"':I
.... ....
~~
<0;1
c;.\.." ~ "'...... , 0 '"
(.0 ~DE!\&E"
C. 0 \\..
p
w..."'~..
FLOW ML~U\
,
F\ L -tE.."
.y,~ \.,\KIE
\.0 "" ''''~!I6U''E
"c.c.uMV\.,A.'T0'"
M2,
"2.
p
DGL:~~O:N:::
0\\\ VE.
&URME.R "E.~" 5i~"~t) 2-
5C.H~t'1....\\C. D\""~"M'\ Of: VAPO,," c.i..NE.~~O" !::.V5"Te..M
-------
"'\~ \~
FUE.L. \~ .])
~',
~ 6
. ~'
.
.. ~,
. .
" ~
.
. ' )
~ ~ .
, ~
~,'. ~
#> ".
.
'6
.
"'.
.p
~.
..
I> .
~.
~ .1>
~ .
...
.1> I>
1>. . .
'1> ~
c.'
.oS ~.
.~
.,.
~.
.~
";U'\.'-/ ,..\~ . ~
1>',
""\"'iU~~ \~ '/>.
6". H />.
2..62.50.D.
2.000 1.0.
.3.000 \.D,
\.500 O,D,
I. qo,o 0, D.
?v~",a,"'" 'i.'I."""''.J!::,\ OI.J'\
P"'~'i~' t!>U"'~~"
\~N.\~~'"
I
I
I
BURNER VAPOR GENERATOR ASSEMBLY
FIGURE IV-10
-------
I I
I
FUE.L - A\R
- -- oc. T""'~
- P"OP"~£.
COMBU5TION O,..",p....
"000
20
I
I
I
,
,
I
\
'NO
I
I
I
TO,. A.\..*'
C.OM~U&"It>LL~
I
1'000 115
i w
Do
1 tj
i
It.
. !
t a=
~ ~
~. ~
o
.. u
~ 2000 en
~10
t:! !
~ <
i
w
I,
1000
I
I
/
I
I ~2.
I
/
/ ..,. 1!IfIo,.\ \"L'( "'..""'~ ",,0""'"
/ "L""'\)!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
-------
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
....
<
.
....
'»
-------
'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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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,
-------
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
-------
. 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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
~--~--
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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" :~,::
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
\
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
. !
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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 ..
-------
!,:\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
-------
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
-------
...
~
....
~
!
.:
....
...
~
.
'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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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)
-------
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
-------
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.
-------
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&
-------
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
-------
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
-------
*
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
-------
.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
-------
~
~
~
::
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
[ :
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
~!
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
\ :,
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
[ .
-------
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 :
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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'
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
~
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"
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
-!:!.~~~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~
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
'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
-------
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,'
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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.
-------
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
-------
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., ~
-------
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
-------
: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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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 -
-------
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 -
-------
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 -
-------
~
~
~
. 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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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&
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
.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
:!
-------
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~
-------
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
.,.::.. .,:;.',
-------
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
-------
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,,)
-------
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
------
-------
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
~ -, ~~, '.
-------
~.
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 ,
-------
:;:
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
-------
-
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
-------
1000
100
..,.
~
c..
......
>~
~
10
1.0
'~
0.1
0.02
';][£1: r
~
1-
0.03
o . 05 @ . 0\3 . @ .0.'
NOMINAL FUEL AIR i
-------
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.
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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..
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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.??
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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.
-------
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
-------
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"]
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
~= €(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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
. .
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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 . . .
.--+--.-..-
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
. /
-------
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
-------
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
. ,
,
-------
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)$1)/CONT
TBI+TB .
CA+(O.22618)+(1.4147E-5xTB+TI)+-7.8229E-10x(TB*2)+(TExTI)+TI*2
CP+(O.02)+(O.0004194xTB+TI)+(-7.9218E-8x(TB*2)+(TBxTI)+TI*2)+6.43E-12x«TB*4)-(TI*4»+TB-TI
CB+(O.28072)+(1.5293E-5xTE+TI)+(-8.4458E-10x(TB*2)+(TBxTI)+(TI*2»
CB+CB+(-1.8508x«TB*O.5)-(TI*O.5»fTB-TI)-88.356fTB-TI
+TEMP
CONT:TBI+TB
IRT+Kx(1-E)xTllx(1-ExPH}x(MFfMA)x(*-EAfRxTP)f(1+Tll)xEx((PHxTHx1-E)+«1-ExPH)xMFtMA)+PHxEx(1+TH)xMFfMB)*2
INT+INTx(TB*O.5)x(29x2116f1545xTB)*2 .. .
[ 1]
[2]
[3]
[4 ]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
V
[19]
...
So
...
.
<
M
M
.
...
-------
I
I
[1 ]
[2]
[3]
['I J
[ 5 ]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[1f)]
[11 ]
[12]
[13]
[14]
~
v HOT[ r] 17
'V l:tr~~;J;!:
J'llA+O.1x\10
~IJ+460+ 0 400 800 1200 1600 2G00
E+ C.g 0.99 O.U99 O.~999
/i.rr+( (p;2IA). (pPilA ). (pI:'). 5) pO
/.~+1
PUT': 'i'I +'1' IA un
J+1
JUT': T'/l+FHAr J]
~~ .
A J;"n[N ; J ; ; ] +~ ( 5 . ( p E) ) n ( ( r t:) p~' J - 4 G C. ) . ( ( f1 r) p i)f!) .77. ( ~ j, -I~ C, ;j ) .I t"~'
J+J+1 .
+(J$pPIIA) /JUP
If+I.{+l
+( !.{Sp~'I I!) /!:U:~'
Table VII-2
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
[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
-------
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
-------
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.
-------
[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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
<
...
.....,
~~
....
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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.
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
:::~
''''
~..
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
....
-------
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
-------
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)
-------
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
-------
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"
. ....
.....
....
-------
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
-------
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>
-------
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 '"
....
$
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
/.'"
~.
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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.
-------
APPENDICES
-------
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.
-------
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".".
...
-------
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
-------
,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."
-------
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
-------
,;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. .'
-------
. 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
-------
::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
-------
...' ..
,',
. . . .
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
-------
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
-------
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
-------
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
------- |