A REVIEW OF THE
FOUDAMENTAL COMBUSTION RESEARCH PROGRAM
April 25, 1980
Science Advisory Board
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
EPA NOTICE
This report has been written as a part of the activities of
the .Agency's Science Advisory Board, a public advisory group
providing extramural scientific information to the administrator
and other officials of the Environmental Protection Agency* 2tae
Board is structured to provide a balanced expert assessment of
scientific matters related to problems facing the Agency. This
report has not been reviewed for approval by the Agency, and
hence its contents do not necessarily represent the views and
policies of the Environmental Protection Agency.
-------
PREFACE
There is a stated desire within EPA's Office of Research
and Development (ORD) to have "peer reviews" of specific
elements of its Program, The objective of such reviews is to
ensure that these elements have the benefit of evaluative
comments from a broader segment of the appropriate expert
community than is normally involved in any specific research
project. A peer review can take any of several forms. In the
most continuing type, a program is reviewed at its conceptual
phase, at several benchmarks and at its conclusion. In the
single-exposure type, the program is evaluated by a group of
experts, specially put together for the review.
A peer review of the Fundamental Combustion Research (FCH.)
program of the Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
(IERL) - Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, to provide an
independent assessment of the program was - requested by the
management of QRD's Office of Environmental Engineering and
Technology (OEET). The Technology Assessment and Pollution
Control Committee (TAFCC) of the Administrator's Science
Advisory Board was asked to conduct this review. TAPCC
elected to perform this review and formed a special review
group. The review group chose to
a) examine the objectives of the program within the
context of the Agency's missionj
b) evaluate, to the extent possible, the technical
quality and management of the research underway; and
c) assess future program direction with regard to Agency
needs.
The members of the TAPCC review group were W» Leigh Short
{chairman) and James H. Porter, and consultants Ralph H,
Kummler, John M. Ross, and Paul W. Spaite. In addition,
-------
Stanley M. Greenfield and M. Massoudi of Teknekron Research, Inc.
(Berkeley, CA) provided technical support. William K.
McCarthy, Jr., Acting Executive Secretary of TAPCC, provided
staff and administrative support.
As conceived, this review was to utilize the periodic
projects-review meeting that had been scheduled by the EPA
project officer, Steve Lanier. Background information for the
assessment of the FCR program was acquired as follows;
a) Review of the briefing book provided by Mr. Lanier.
This book describes the program, 'its objectives, the manage-
ment system and the individual projects.
b) Attendance at three (3) days of program review
discussions, during which the status of the research
activities was presented and other investigators were able
to continent on the Program, the results, the validity of
experimental technique, etc. The agenda is found in
Appendix A and the attendance is _given in Appendix E. This
meeting was held January 23-25, 1980 in Newport Beach,
California.
c) Participation in an open meeting of the TAPCC review
group at which program managers and research personnel
associated with the FCR program responded to questions and
comments from the group. This meeting was held on
January 26 at the University of California, Irvine, campus.
-------
TABLE OP CONTENTS
Section Paqe
Preface i
Table of Contents iii
1.0 Conclusions and Recommendations 1
1,1 Program 1
1.2 Technical 2
2.0 Review of Program Objectives 4
2.1 Adequacy of Program Objectives 5
2.2 Ability of Achieve Program Objectives 6
2.3 Benefits to EPA 8
3.0 Review of Program Content 8
3,1 Relevance to Present objectives 8
3.2 Methodology 10
3.3 Progress Toward Achievement of Goals 13
4.0 Review of Program Management and Coordination 15
4.1 Adequacy of Staff IS
4.2 Adequacy of Program Budget 16
Appendix A - Agenda for the FCR Contractors* Review
Meeting Agenda Marriott Hotel,
Newport Beach, CA January 23-25, 1980 17
Appendix B - Attendees at the FCR Contractors' Review
Meeting * Marriott Hotel, Newport Beach,
CA January 23-25, 1980 19
Appendix C - Attendees at the TAPCC FCR Open Meeting
University of California/ Irvine, CA
January 26, 1980 21
- 111 -
-------
1.0 CONCLUSIONS AKD RECOMMENDATIONS
The conclusions and recommendations of the Technology
Assessment and Pollution Control Committee's (TAPCC),
Fundamental Combustion Research FCR review group are divided
between the conclusions and recommendations of (1) a general
program nature and (2) a specific technical nature and are as
followss
1.1 Program
Concerning the general program aspects of the
review, the TAPCC FCR review group concludes that:
1. The FCR program of the Office of Environmental
Engineering and Technology (QEET) is in general well-conceived
and well-executed. Participants are competent, well-qualified,
enthusiastic, and displayed a good understanding of the spectrum
and complexity of the problems needing solution.
2. Funds expended for the program have produced results
that are worth the cost.
3. The "Master Contract" approach has proven to be
successful. The prime contractor is doing a good job of
managing the subcontractors and is responsive to EPA'a needs.
4. The EPA management team is well acquainted with the
details of the on-going research, the problems which require
solution, and the necessary interfaces with industry and other
non-EPA sponsored research programs in the same area* The TAPCC
FCR review group recommends that
o Efforts should be made to insure that the
competence and knowledge which have been
developed by the FCR program be fully utilized
and as widely disseminated as practicable.
-------
5. Past and present work is aimed chiefly at
understanding and minimising the problems associated with
controlling those NOX emissions which are produced mostly by
large coal and residual oil-fired boilers. This is considered
to be a proper emphasis at this time for fundamental combustion
research aimed at improving NOV control,
A
6. There is growing national recognition that
potentially hazardous emissions other than N'0X (e.g.,
sulfates, unburned hydrocarbons, trace metals) are likely being
produced by small combustors. This implies that combustion
conditions similar to those of small combustor operations should be
studied, for these parameters are different from those currently
being examined by PCS. The TAPCC FCE. review group, therefore,
recommends that
o the PCR program be expanded to include studies
that would lead to a reduction in the level of
pollutants other than NOX- This is not meant
to suggest a program redirection, but rather a
program expansion with commensurate resources as
required.
o the effort be expanded to identify future
problems (5 to 10 years hence) which would lend
themselves to analysis using experimental
techniques which have been developed under the
FCR program. A problem in this category, which
might be appropriate for investigation, is the
combustion of synthetic fuels produced from coal
or shale oil.
o studies should be conducted to determine whether
these synthetic fuels are likely to produce
potentially hazardous materials under normal
combustion conditions.
- 2 -
-------
1.2 Technical
Concerning the specific technical aspects of the
program, the TAPCC review group concluded that
1, The technical work which has been accomplished to
date is of high quality and is directed toward the solution of
EPA regulatory problems.
2. Proper and thorough use of past literature has been
made and the point of diminishing returns on further
recalculations of old results has probably been reached.
3. Since there is insufficient funding for this program
to underwrite the cost of obtaining individual rate constants
and elucidating mechanisms with current technology, the emphasis
on using kinetic code and reaction mechanisms developed
elsewhere and testing their applicability for simplified
combustion experiments is well placed.
4. More work is required to improve the kinetic codes
to prove the uniqueness of a specific chemical reaction mechanism.
Che TAPCC review group recommends that
o the FCR program consider funding new
fundamental flame studies, e.g., on flat
flames or opposed jet flames, which are
properly instrumented to provide reliable
detailed spatial and temporal data on free
radical species. These studies should prefer-
ably be done in existing equipment with augmented
diagnostic capability.
5. Since no clear-cut methodology to treat the interplay
of aerodynamics and kinetics in a turbulent environment was
delineated, one apparently does not exist. As this is a most
- 3 -
-------
difficult area and no solution is in sight, the TAPCC PCfi. review
group recommends that
o further investigation on the interactions of the
combustion aerodynamics and the chemical
kinetics in turbulent diffusion flames be
carried out. Until this limitation is
minimized, satisfactory design of an overall
combustor model will not likely be possible.
6. Although, the PCR program has had a major impact upon the
combustion engineering community, and much of the work published
by the program is presently incorporated in engineering design,
it does not appear that appropriate mechanisms for
use of the fundamental data being generated in design of
scaled-up equipment have as yet been identified. The TAPCC FCS
review group recommends that
o the principles and methodology which could be
used to apply data beimg generated to the
design of large-scale units or for modification
of existing units be identified.
2.0 REVIEW OF PROGRAMOBJECTIVES
The broad objective of the Fundamental Combustion lesearch
{PCS} program is to develop a basic understanding of fossil fuel
combustion processes and to generate data needed to design
combustors for minimum pollution. The specif-ic objective of the
FCS program currently is to develop an ability to predict oxides
of nitrogen (NOX) emissions considering a wide variety of fuel
types .and boiler types. Most work has been aimed at control of
NO,, from large boilers burning coal or residual oil. The
A
general approach taken by the PCS researchers to achieve these
objectives is to concentrate on the generation of gas-phase
- 4 -
-------
reactants from the volatilization of solid and liquid fluids,
gas-phase kinetic modeling, heterogenous reactions of NOX
reduction by char, and transport phenomena which are of
relevance to combustion processes. To synthesize these
components into a capability to predict emissions, the program
employs mathematical modeling and ideal flame and furnace models
such as the well-stirred reactor, the plug flow^reactor, the
pre-roixed flat flame,'the laminar axial diffusion flamer and the
laminar opposed jet diffusion flame.
2.1 Adequacy of Jprpgram Objectives
Nitrogen oxides are a major pollutant species produced in
combustion. Large boilers burning coal and residual oil are one
category of the major sources of our Nation1s pollutant
emissions. Furthermore, minimizing NOK through control of the
combustion process is generally considered the most economically
feasible route to initial control of these.pollutants. Sius,
the overall objective of the program is adequate. Additionally,
the techniques that will be developed for predicting NO,.
A,
emissions will be useful in predicting other pollutant emissions
from combustion processes. The tasJc objectives of the present
FCR program have during the life of the program been
appropriate. However, recently developed information on the
relative importance of energy consumption in all types of
combustors coupled with a better understanding of potentially
hazardous pollutants (e.g., unburned hydrocarbons, trace metals,
and suJLfates) have given rise to a need to reassess the overall
problem of pollution from combustion and determine what
additional fundamental combustion research is needed.
Some of the reasons why fundamental research might now
be appropriately targeted, in part, on problems presented by
- 5 -
-------
small and intermediate oil-burning combustors are as follows:
a} Much of the Nation's supply of distillate oil is
consumed in small boilers and residential furnaces.
Operating and maintenance procedures for these units
are such that poor combustion efficiency, resulting
in discharge of unturned or partially burned
hydrocarbons, can be expected.
b) Much of the residual oil is also burned in small
boilers, Besidual oil-fired boilers have been shown
to emit much more direct sulfate per unit of sulfur
content than do coal-fired boilers. Also residual oil-
boilers have been shown to discharge trace metals, some
of which are known to be toxic. Further, these
boilers are known to discharge oil soot which is suspected
to contain, at times, carcinogenic material. ,.
c) Small boiler and residential furnaces are located
in urban areas and discharge emissions at low levels.
In addition, much of the material discharged from oil-
burning boilers is known to be in the respirable size
range.
if questions relative to small combustors are to be
answered effectively, R&D on small scale systems will be needed.
At present it appears that little or none is underway.
2.2 Ability
As discussed above, the program objectives are clearly
defined. The responsibility for achieving these objectives
rests with the EPA program management staff and, to some extent,
with the staff of the master contractor. Because of the large
number of research contractors involved and the large number of
- 6 -
-------
areas currently under investigation, there will always be the
potential for a substantial coordination problem. For the most
part, the coordination appears to be as good as one could
expect.
One of the primary communication mechanisms for the
program is the "annual11 meeting of the contractors, at which the
research results are presented. At the most recent meeting, the
one which the TAPCC FCR review group attended, less technical
discussion took place than seemed warranted. There are two
likely reasons for thiss
a) The size of the meeting about 50 people
were present.
b) The presence of the TAPCC review group
which may have been an inhibiting factor in
preventing the research results to be openly
discussed and critici2ed.
The TAPCC review group believes that with regular and
continuing attendance by essentially the same TAPCC reviewers
the negative perception referred to in item {b} above would
eventually disappear. Holding topic meetings which would be
smaller in attendance would increase the interchange that was
perhaps lessened with a meeting size of 50.
The briefing book prepared by the EPA program manager
for the TAPCC FCR review group was very useful. Whether or not
this type of peer review is continued, publication of a summary
document briefing book on an annual basis would be very helpful
to those not totally familiar with the program. The need for
the publication also arises because portions of the program tend
to be reported only in rather disparate journals and other low
circulation publications.
-------
2.3 Benefits to EPA
The benefits to be gained by EPA for appropriately
funding this program are:
a) An understanding of the NQX formation process
in boiler operation that will permit both
optimization of NOX control and a quantification
of the sensible emission limits for standard setting;
b) The knowledge gained will apply not only to the
combustion of conventional fuels such as oil and coal
but also to the utilization of synthetically derived
fuels in boilers and to the thermal destruction of wastes
(incineration);
c) The methodology to evaluate future problems
will be developed.
3.0 REVIEW OfT JPROGRAM CONTENT
The program content was reviewed and evaluated in terms of
relevancy, methodology and progress.
3,1 Relevance to Present
a) Chemical kinetics; The program includes a solid
component of gas phase and heterogeneous chemical
kinetics geared to interpretation of data taken
both within and outside the PCS program, gaining in-
sight into the complex reaction phenomena of fuel
pyrolysis and subsequent combustion, and determining
the kinetic constraints to the maximum limit of NOX
control attainable. More specific efforts to obtain
the critical rate constants are clearly needed, but
-------
the level of effort required to obtain rate constant
data is equally clearly beyond the current resources of
the program. The effect of coal properties such as mineral
composition, graphite content, and porosity on particle
burnout time and the reaction mechanisms leading to
NOX formation should be addressed and experimentally
investigated.. The current emphasis on synthesis in
the chemistry area is well placed. The additional
emphasis on obtaining global rate-determining
information pertinent to specific fuels is appropriate
and highly relevant to the objectives of the PCR program.
b) Aerodynamics! The fluid flow, which dominates
the combustion process in any industrial combustion
system, is highly turbulent. Most coal flames in
boilers are dominated by aerodynamic phenomena. Ike
importance of combustion aerodynamics has led to the
general belief that for diffusion flames the chemical
reaction rate is not the rate-determining process.
Spectroscopic investigations have shown that this is
only true for the hottest part of the reaction zone.
The preheating zones show interesting sequences of.
chemical reactions. fhe interplay of aerodynamics and"
chemical kinetics which is of practical importance in
turbulent diffusion flames is presently inadequately
treated in this program.
c) . Equipment: There is a wide spectrum of
equipment, beginning with laboratory scale
and continuing through bench and pilot scale sizes,
The specific selections have been wisely chosen to
address the issues which have arisen in each
individual project. However, the equipment and the
techniques need to be standardized. In summary,
the tasks selected appear to enable a reasonable
probability of success in achieving the objectives.
-------
d) interface with applications: The interface
of FCR activities with what happens in real furnaces
has not been demonstrated clearly. For example,
applying the results obtained in lab-scale stirred-
reactor experiments to actual situations requires
incorporating scale-up procedures which need to be
elucidated. Efforts should be made to tie the end
results into a furnace model incorporating the
practical factors such as mixing, burnout time, and
temperature variation in the furnace. At present,
furnace behavior is determined by correlation factors
derived from the reference fuels. While this has been
an important contribution to the engineering^design
community, a general model describing combustion
processes in a furnace on the basis of practical
variables is currently lacking. The fAPCC FCR review
group recognizes, however, that such a model may be
premature at this stage of the FCR program.
3.2 Methodology
j*4*' \
a) In developing an overall model capable of
scale-up and engineering design, many separate model
components must be tested and validated. 3fee FC1
program is following the "validation by parts"
methodology in which any portion of the model which
can be separately tested is subject to independent
scrutiny, The program frequently is divided into
independent tasks in which one subcontractor develops
a model and another validates it. Wlis is an approach
which is to be encouraged. Although this approach is
desirable and necessary, it is not sufficient.
Eventually, comprehensive tests of the overall model
must be developed.
- 10 -
-------
b) In evaluating model prediction using data
obtained in the laboratory, emphasis should given
to quantitative measures, such as correlation
coefficients and statistical treatment, rather than to
qualitative statements of agreement.
c) More emphasis should be placed upon criteria
for determining model uniqueness, especially with
regard to chemical kinetic mechanisms. Comparison of
model prediction with concentration profiles for
stable species, burning velocities, and final exhaust
concentrations are useful, but not sufficient.
Concentration profiles of reactive intermediates often
provide a more rigorous test of model accuracy. Special
emphasis should be placed upon programs to measure
free radicals in situ* Of some 100 reactions
considered ejcemplary of a general mechanism, perhaps
only 20 will be critical, and the rate constant
uncertainty in those 20 can cause difficulty.
Detailed profiles of the reactive species such as OH,
CHQ, CN, etc, will help eliminate the uncertainty
problem and will assist in defining mechanism
uniqueness,
d) In the modeling strategy, care must be
exercised in discarding literature data which do
not fit the current kinetic models. Emphasis should
be placed upon defining the range of model validity,
including all of the relevant parameters (e.g., Over
what range of temperature have kinetic parameters been
measured, and over what range have the model
components been validated?). Care must be taken to
limit model use in engineering design to applicable
situations and not to attempt to extrapolate into a
region where the model has not been tested.
- 11 -
-------
e) In using the jet-stirred combustor for
development of kinetic packages, the program must
address the adequacy of the well-stirred reactor
equipment. Namely, the comparison of kinetic times,
residence times and mixing times must be evaluated*
Until quantitative measures of mixing times have been
established for a given piece of equipment, it should
not be used for kinetic comparisons. The example, a
demonstration of log linear tracer behavior'for
residence times in cold flow which are an order of
magnitude above combustor residence times, does not
allow adequate assessment of micro mixing on the time
scale of interest.
This is not to say that a partially stirred reactor
will not be a useful tool. However, data from such
a combustor cannot be used to test kinetic codes«
f) Additional areas requiring some attention
include;
, (1) a good working definition of "nixing,"
(2) fuel decomposition rates and products,
(3) a definition of mixing histories as related
to product yield,
(4) N-H kinetics,
(5) establishment of a "sample* data base.
Filters, product, etc. should be
preserved by EPA for future study should
priorities change. A well defined set
of samples together with their combus-
tion histories would be useful. This
- 12 -
-------
might avoid redoing studies if future
interest results in new pollutant studies.
3.3 Progress TowardAchievement ofGoals
The FCR program has clearly had a major impact upon
the combustion engineering community. Numerous examples of each
contribution can be cited:
a} The importance of fuel-combined nitrogen in
total NOX production first was demonstrated by the
FCR researchers. T&eir work showed that NOX control
for low-nitrogen fuels should be accomplished by
minimizing peak temperatures through control of
mixing, heat transfer and diluent addition. For fuels
with high-fuel nitrogen, a strategy which involved
limiting oxygen availability in staged combustion was
indicated. These general principles are now accepted
and are being widely applied.
b) Th,e FCR researchers were the first to find that
fuel nitrogen contained two fractions, one "volatile"
and one "refractory," the latter being burned much
later in the flame during carbon burnout. Pilot scale
work confirmed the importance of the two types of fuel
nitrogen and led to the design of low-NO.. burners
A
which controlled the flame shape and carbon burnout.
The designs which were developed have been
demonstrated effectively on large scale equipment in
the lab,
c) Bench scale studies show that both nitrogen
distribution and type of reactor affect NQX levels
in combustion gases. Growing understanding of these
relationships has led to encouraging progress in work
- 13 -
-------
underway to correlate field results with bench reactor
an<3 pyrolosis testing of volatile nitrogen.
d) Kinetic studies involving ammonia, hydrocarbon,
and a low-Btu gas system indicate that design of
combustors using coal-derived low-Btu fuels having a
high content of nitrogen should-provide for a fuel-
rich first stage with controlled stoichiometry and a
rapidly mixed second stage to minimize NQX
formation. Hi is was confirmed subsequently by
experimental work which also indicated that the same
combustor configuration is appropriate for other
high-nitrogen fuels including oil from shale, residual
oil, and all coal-derived liquids.
e) Study of residential furnace oil burner
performance resulted in EPA's patenting a burner
design which yields a 65 percent NOX reduction
including, reduced carbon emissions and improved
system efficiency.
f) Studies involving a first principles model for
study of catalytic combustion led to design of a
patented graded cell catalyst. The novel design gives
order of magnitude increases in heat release rates
which are expected to permit design of smaller, more
efficient combustors with minimum pollution. This work
was extended to the development of and patent on the
design of a high-efficiency radiative water tube
boiler which can control to very low NQX emissions.
g) Kinetic studies were used to assess emissions
expected from magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) systems.
Results indicated that equilibrium levels of NOX
would be attained in the burner section. Also it
- 14 -
-------
was indicated that decomposition rates were too low
for available residence times. Contrary to previous
expectations, N0» levels would not likely be reduced
A
sufficiently to meet standards during subsequent
passage through the radiant furnace. This suggested
the need to redirect the work to focus on process
changes at the burner end.
4.0 REVIEW OF PROGRAM MANAGEMENT AND COORDINATION
4.1 Adequacy of Staff
The "Master Contract* approach appears to be working
well. Although there will always be the potential for conflict
of interest, the close contact with EPA in the deeisionmaking
process minimizes this potential. The TAPCC PCR review group
is impressed with the organization. The EPA program manager has
assembled a very high quality team of researchers. They are
very knowledgeable of the work in the field and open to
suggestions on other ways to attack the various problems of
eKtramural activity. ,The technical capabilities of the people
associated with this program appear, in general, to be
excellent.
The morale is high and their dedication good. The
indepth technical understanding of the program by the associated
EPA staff is evident and assures the required Agency technical
overview, control, and guidance.
There would appear to be a need for additional
capabilities in the area of mathematical modeling if research is
to be initiated in solving the Navier-Stakes equations for
swirling atomizers. Additional manpower resources may also be
necessary if work is begun in a study of scale-up
fundamentals.
- 15 -
-------
This is one of the few research programs within EPA
that has been managed via a master contract. The prime
contractor is also responsible for the very large fraction of
the work passed through to subcontractors both, firms and
consultants. It is the TAPCC FCR review group's judgment that
the prime contractor has done a good job of managing the overall
contract, in this particular instance of program implementation
via the master contract technique, EPA has been well served,
4.2 Adeguacy of Prggram Budget
The budget is well-managed and has been well-utilized.
The mix of money among various program elements has been well
thought out and is consistent with the program priorities and
objectives. If the above recommendations to expand the program
beyond its present objectives are adopted, an expansion of the
budget will be in order.
- 16 -
-------
APPENDIX A
AGENDAFOR THE FCR CONTRACTORS* REVIEW MEETING
Marriott Hotel, Newport. Beacl?_f__CA__ .January. 23~25, 1980
Wednesday 23 January
8s30 a.m. Registration
&iOO a.m. The CRB Fundamental Combustion Research program
W. S* Lariier - EPA
91 30 a.m. Session 1 - GAS PHASE CHEMISTRY AND HETEROGENEOUS
NO REDUCTION
Chairman - C. T. Bownan, Stanford University
1. Kinetic Modeling Needs A. Sarofim, MIT
2. Development of a Kinetic Mechanism to Describe
the Fate of Fuel Nitrogen in Gaseous
Systems - T.L. Corley, EEE
3. NO,, formation in the Flat Laminar Opposed Jet
Diffusion Flame w. A. Hahn, Oniversity of
Arizona
4, The Formation and Destruction of Nitrogeneous
Species During Hydrocarbon-Air Combustion
D. w. Blair, Exxon
5. Application of the FCR Mechanism
J.O.L. Wendt, University of Arizona
6. NO Reduction by Char A. F, Sarofira, MIT
7. Mechanisms of NO Reduction on Solid Particles
G. G. De Soete, IFF
Thursday 24 January
8:30 a.m. SESSION II - THERMAL DECOMPOSITION - CHEMICAL
AND PHYSICAL EFFECTS
Chairman - A. F. Sarofim, MIT
1. Inert Pyrolysis of Oil and Coal
R. Gay, Rockwell
2. Drop Tube Experiments on Oils and Coals
j. M. Beer, MIT
- 17 -
-------
APPENDIX A (Continued)
3. IR Analysis of Coals and Coal Volatiles
P. Solomon, UTRC
4. Physical and chemical Effects Occurring During
the Thermal Decomposition of Coal Particles
R. W. Seeker, EER
Ii30 p.m. SESSION III - BENCH SCALE REACTOR STUDIES
Chairman - J. P. Longwell, MIT
1. Back-Mixed Liquid Fuel Fired Reactors
M. Murphy, Battelle Columbs Laboratories
2. Back-Mixed Solid Fuel Pired Reactors
P. Goldberg, Acurex
3. The Impact of Fuel Characteristics on NOX
Bormation M, P. Heap, EER
4. Pollutant Formation During Fixed-Bed and
and Suspension Coal Burning
D. W. Pershing, University of Utah
F_riday_ 25 January
8:30 a.m. SESSION IV - TWO PHASE TURBULENT DIFFUSION FLAMES
Chairman - W. S. Lanier, EPA
1. Droplet Combustion in Shear Layers
A. Vranos, UTRC
2. Spray Characterization -- G. S. Samuelsen,
U of CA, Irvine, and C. Hess, SDL
3. Fluid Mechanics of Swirl Induced Recirculation
Zones J. Switfaenbank, University of Sheffield
4. Pollutant Formation in Long Turbulent Pulverized
Coal Diffusion Flames R. Payne, IFRP
1:30 p.m. SESSION V - MODEL DEVELOPMENT
Chairman - T, J. Tyson, EER
1. Development of a Coherent Flame Model for
Turbulent Chemically Reacting Flows
F. E, Marble, California institute of
Technology
2, General Kinetic Analysis Codes E. J. Kau, EER
- 18 -
-------
APPENDIX B
ATTENDEES AT THE FCR CONTRACTORS REVIEW MEETING
Marriott Hotel, Newport Beach, CA -- January 23-25, 1980
Professor J. M. Beer
MIT*
Mr. George Bennett
U.S. EPA, RTP, NC
Dr. David Blair
Exxon Research & Engineering Co.
Linden, NH
Dr. D. Blazowski
Exxon Research & Engineering Co.
Linden, NH
Professor Tom Bowman
Stanford University
Dr. J. E. Broadwell
THW Systems
Redondo Beach, CA
Mr. Dick Games
U.S. EPA
Cineinati, OH
Mr. T. Corley
Energy & Environmental Research
Corp., Irvine, CA
Dr. Gerard De Soete
Institut Franeais du Pe-trole
France
Dr. J. Drewry
GRI
Chicago, IL
Dr. R, Gay
Rockwell International
Canoga Park, CA
Dr. P. Goldberg
Aetarex Corporation
Mountain View* CA
Dr. w. Hahn
University of Arizona
Mr. Robert Ball
U.S. EPA, RTF, MC
Mr. Simon Hansen
MIT
Dr. M. P. Heap
Energy and Environmental
Research Corp. Irvine, CA
Dr. C. J. Kau
Energy and Environmental
Be.search Corp. Irvine, CA
Dr. R. Kendall
Acurex Corporation
Mountain View, CA
Dr, R. Kummler
Science Advisory Board
U.S. EPA, RTP, NC
Mr. W. s. Lanier
U.S. EPA, RTP, NC
Professor T. Lester
Kansas State University
Mr. Arthur Levy
Battelle Columbus
Laboratories
Columbus, OH
Dr, Joel Levy
MIT
Professor J, P, Longwell
MIT
Dr. S. Greenfield
Teknekron, Berkeley, CA
Dr. Andre Macek
National Bureau Standards
- 19 -
-------
APPENDIX B (Continued)
Mr. G, B. Martin
U.S. EPA, RTP, NC
Dr. M. Massoudi
Teknekron
Berkeley, CA
Mr. William N. McCarthy, Jr.
Science Advisory Board
U,s, EPA, Washington, DC
Dr. M. Murphy
Battelle Columbus
Columbus, OH
Dr. T. O'Brien
Department of Energy
Morgantown, WV
Dr. Epy Payne
IFRF
Holland
Professor D, pershing
University of Utah
Dr. J. Pobl
Sandia Laboratories
Livermore, CA
Dr. J. Porter
Science Advisory Board
U.S. EPA
Dr. J. loss
Science Advisory Board
U.S. EPA
Professor S, Sanuelsen
University of California
Irvine, CA
Professor A. P* Sarofira
MIT
Dr. W. R. Seeker
Energy & Environmental Research
Irvine, CA
Dr. L. Short
Science Advisory Board
U.S. EPA
Professor P. E. Marble
California Institute of
Technology
Professor D. Smoot
Brigham Young University
Dr. P. Solomon
UTRC
East Hartford, CT
Dr. Paul Spaite
Science Advisory Board
U.S. EPA
Dr. Robert statnick
U.S. EPA, Wash., DC
Professor J. Swithenbank
University of Sheffield
England
Dr. J* D. Trolinfer
Spectron Development Labs
Costa Mesa, CA
Dr. G. Tucker
U.S. EPA, RTP, NC
Dr. T. J. Tyson
Energy s Environmental
Research Corp,, Irvine, CA
Dr. A. Vranos
UTRC
East Hartford, CT
Professor J, o* L. Wendt
University of Arizona
Dr. L. Weitzman
U.S. SPA, CIN, OH
- 20 -
-------
APPENDIX C
ATTENDEES AT THE TAPCC FCS OPEN MEETING
University of Ca1Ifornia, Irvine--> January 26, 1980
Professor j. M. Beer
MIT
Professor Tom Bowman
Stanford University
Dr. R, Gay
Rockwell International
Canoga Park, CA
Dr. S. Greenfield
Teknekron
Berkeley, CA
Dr. John Hart
KVB, Inc.
Tustin, CA
Dr. M. P. Heap
Energy & Environmental lesearch
Corp., Irvine, CA
Dr. Kim Hunter
IVB, Inc.
Tustin, CA
Dr, R» Kummler
Science Advisory Board
U.S. EPA
Mr. w. S. Lanier
U.S. EPA, RTP, NC
Mr. G. B. Martin
U.S. EPA, RTF, NC
Dr. M, Massoudi
Teknekron
Berkeley, CA
Mr. William N. McCarthy, Jr.
Science Advisory Board
U.S. SPA, Washington, DC
Dr. J. Pohl
Sandia Laboratories
Livermore, CA
Dr. J. Porter
Science Advisory Board
U.S. EPA
Dr. J. Ross
Science Advisory Board
U.S. EPA
Professor S. Samuelsen
University of California
Irvine, CA
Professor A. p. Sarofim
MIT
Dr. W. Leigh Short
Science Advisory Board
U.S. EPA
Dr. p. Solomon
DTRC
East Hartford, CT
Dr. Paul Spaite
Science Advisory Board
U.S. EPA
Professor J. Switnenbank
University of Sheffield
England
Dr. G. Tucker
U.S. EPA, RTF, NC
£>r. T. J. Tyson
Energy s Environmental
Besearch Corp., Irvine, CA
Professor j. O. L. wendt
University of Arizona
- 21 -
------- |