![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Grumman-581 wrote: On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 16:40:11 GMT, Larry Dighera wrote: How does the energy density of LNG compare to ethanol? It's less than gasoline, but I'm not sure how it compares to ethanol... Do you mean LNG or LPG though? Propane has an octane rating of 110 to 120... Sounds great, right? Unfortunately, the weight of the tanks is what would probably get us... Our tanks would have to be built quite a bit sturdier to handle the increased pressure... Although typical operating pressures are around 130 psi, tanks are typically rated to over 300 psi... With LNG, you need either higher pressure or a cooling system... LNG, as used in the Beech system (Beech Aircraft really did the pioneering work on LNG, of course it went nowhere....) was stored at very low temperature at approximately atmospheric pressure in a dewar type insulated tank. It's important to understand that methane-natural gas- is an incondensible gas for all intents and purposes, like oxygen and nitrogen but unlike propane, nitrous oxide, carbon dioxide, ammonia which can be stored at human-habitable ambient temperatures at pressures feasible for storage tanks. Methane and propane can be burned in an IC engine in similar fashion once they are a gas, but at very different fuel-air mixtures. Methane is approximately 108 octane and propane is in the 103-106 range depending on exactly what's in it (LP motor fuel is nothing like reagent grade and contains methane, butane, methanol, and lots of other junk). LNG would be practical but the cost of distribution would be high and the fuel system is fairly complex, at least in the Beech system. CNG has no range to speak of. LPG is very practical for all sort of ground vehicles and has been done successfully in helicopters, but large volume storage in fixed wing aircraft is problematic. A fixed wing aircraft designed around a fuselage LP tank as a stressed member might make some sense. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Bret Ludwig" wrote in message ups.com... LNG, as used in the Beech system (Beech Aircraft really did the pioneering work on LNG, of course it went nowhere....) was stored at very low temperature at approximately atmospheric pressure in a dewar type insulated tank. It's important to understand that methane-natural gas- is an incondensible gas for all intents and purposes, like oxygen and nitrogen but unlike propane, nitrous oxide, carbon dioxide, ammonia which can be stored at human-habitable ambient temperatures at pressures feasible for storage tanks. Methane and propane can be burned in an IC engine in similar fashion once they are a gas, but at very different fuel-air mixtures. Methane is approximately 108 octane and propane is in the 103-106 range depending on exactly what's in it (LP motor fuel is nothing like reagent grade and contains methane, butane, methanol, and lots of other junk). LNG would be practical but the cost of distribution would be high and the fuel system is fairly complex, at least in the Beech system. CNG has no range to speak of. LPG is very practical for all sort of ground vehicles and has been done successfully in helicopters, but large volume storage in fixed wing aircraft is problematic. A fixed wing aircraft designed around a fuselage LP tank as a stressed member might make some sense. For those of you who have not yet decided that this guy Ludwig is a dufus and / or a troll.... natural gas is not methane. Although methane makes up approximately 96% of the local natural gas here, there are many other constituents. Several of the products that he says are stored at human habitable temperatures... well lets just say that he is wrong at least on the ones that I am most familiar with. For instance, ammonia is stored at temperatures around -28 degrees f. As a matter of fact, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and ammonia are all cryogenically stored. BTW, we condense methane at -282 degrees f. at my work place 24 hours a day as a step in recovery hydrogen for reuse. Joe Schneider N8437R ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() For those of you who have not yet decided that this guy Ludwig is a dufus and / or a troll.... natural gas is not methane. Although methane makes up approximately 96% of the local natural gas here, there are many other constituents. 96% is "most", most of the time. Where I'm from. Several of the products that he says are stored at human habitable temperatures... well lets just say that he is wrong at least on the ones that I am most familiar with. For instance, ammonia is stored at temperatures around -28 degrees f. As a matter of fact, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and ammonia are all cryogenically stored. Nitrogen must be cryogenic to be in liquid form. CO2 and NH3 are stored in regular steel tanks and when both gas and liquid are in the tank, and the tank is allowed to sit with no flow, the tank assumes ambient temperature (or higher in the sun) and the pressure inside is a direct function of the product's temperature. Same with Freon (most kinds), propane, etc. Nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, helium, are a liquid at earth temperatures only under freakish pressures. There is said to be solid methane at the bottom of the ocean in certain places but what is the absolute pressure at those depths? About ten thousand psi is the practical limit for pressure vessels. That's why these gases are transported cryogenically or as _gases_ in the 2-3000 psi welding type cylinders. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Bret Ludwig" wrote in message ups.com... For those of you who have not yet decided that this guy Ludwig is a dufus and / or a troll.... natural gas is not methane. Although methane makes up approximately 96% of the local natural gas here, there are many other constituents. 96% is "most", most of the time. Where I'm from. Several of the products that he says are stored at human habitable temperatures... well lets just say that he is wrong at least on the ones that I am most familiar with. For instance, ammonia is stored at temperatures around -28 degrees f. As a matter of fact, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and ammonia are all cryogenically stored. Nitrogen must be cryogenic to be in liquid form. CO2 and NH3 are stored in regular steel tanks and when both gas and liquid are in the tank, and the tank is allowed to sit with no flow, the tank assumes ambient temperature (or higher in the sun) and the pressure inside is a direct function of the product's temperature. Same with Freon (most kinds), propane, etc. Nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, helium, are a liquid at earth temperatures only under freakish pressures. There is said to be solid methane at the bottom of the ocean in certain places but what is the absolute pressure at those depths? About ten thousand psi is the practical limit for pressure vessels. That's why these gases are transported cryogenically or as _gases_ in the 2-3000 psi welding type cylinders. You are in way over your head Ludwig. I've worked with all these gases for 28 years, in well, let's just say very large quantities. I do this stuff for a living. You don't have a clue. The more you try to defend your incorrect drivel the deeper you get. Be a man and back off and admit you don't know what you are talking about. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "JJS" jschneider@remove socks cebridge.net wrote You are in way over your head Ludwig. I've worked with all these gases for 28 years, in well, let's just say very large quantities. I do this stuff for a living. You don't have a clue. The more you try to defend your incorrect drivel the deeper you get. God forbid that I would in any way defend anything that this nutjob says, but I think there is incomplete statements on both your parts going on here. You store these gasses at low temps, because it is impractical to store them at the crazy pressures that they would have to be, if kept at room temperature. The way things are done, in a real world? Very cold, with some pressure to help out, so you get a you are right, on this one. Yes, as he said, they can be kept at room temperatures. Almost anything can be. Practical? No. Wrongly stated? No. -- Jim in NC |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Morgans" wrote in message ... "JJS" jschneider@remove socks cebridge.net wrote You are in way over your head Ludwig. I've worked with all these gases for 28 years, in well, let's just say very large quantities. I do this stuff for a living. You don't have a clue. The more you try to defend your incorrect drivel the deeper you get. God forbid that I would in any way defend anything that this nutjob says, but I think there is incomplete statements on both your parts going on here. You store these gasses at low temps, because it is impractical to store them at the crazy pressures that they would have to be, if kept at room temperature. The way things are done, in a real world? Very cold, with some pressure to help out, so you get a you are right, on this one. Yes, as he said, they can be kept at room temperatures. Almost anything can be. Practical? No. Wrongly stated? No. -- Jim in NC Sorry for the late reply, Jim. We had to restart the plant and I was working some long hours. What you say above is correct. But some things he has stated, not included above, are totally incorrect. I'm just sick of Ludwig making blanket statements that are only partially correct so that he can forward his troll agenda. Some of his statements are correct enough that some people "partially in the know" might accept them as gospel. That was my sole reason for responding to the group. I try hard not to fall for troll bait If you'll go back and read his drivel, he says things like, "you can't condense methane". Yeah right! He makes statements about the way products are stored when there are multiple ways to store them. I tried to reply that in my experience he was wrong. There are other ways. He attacks Van and Rutan, two of the icons of the experimental aircraft movement. He calls Van's keen observations blather. Another "for instance": His assertion that natural gas is methane: Natural gas varies in composition depending on a host of factors including what processing it has gone through, if any, and also from gas well to gas well. It is not "only" methane: Here is an example. From one of our supply pipe lines, on August 9th it was 96.00 mole % methane, .43% carbon dioxide, .08 helium, .0012 i-butane, .0012 n-butane, 2.4621% ethane, .9300 nitrogen, ..0957 propane. Another pipeline was 95.76% methane, .00220 C6+, .64 carbon dioxide, .04 helium, 2.7004 ethane, .74 nitrogen, .1101 propane, .0023 i-butane, .0020 n-butane. So what? He replied that 96% is mostly methane. Each of these constituents affects the BTU value of the gas. The first pipeline was running 1017 BTU's and the second 1027 BTU's. This is a huge factor not only in using the gas as a fuel but also in process it into other commodities such as ammonia, methanol, carbon dioxide, etc. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 09:52:03 -0500, "JJS" jschneider@remove socks
cebridge.net wrote: "Morgans" wrote in message ... "JJS" jschneider@remove socks cebridge.net wrote You are in way over your head Ludwig. I've worked with all these gases for 28 years, in well, let's just say very large quantities. I do this stuff for a living. You don't have a clue. The more you try to defend your incorrect drivel the deeper you get. God forbid that I would in any way defend anything that this nutjob says, but I think there is incomplete statements on both your parts going on here. You store these gasses at low temps, because it is impractical to store them at the crazy pressures that they would have to be, if kept at room I worked for a company that used a *LOT* of H2. Probably as much or even more than NASA. We had a very large tank farm which "as I recall" had 12 tanks. (This was well over 20 years ago so I may be mis-remembering some of it) We had a lot of tankers loaded with H2 coming into that place. Of course the tanks were insulated, but we used the pressure of the vaporizing H2 to move the stuff. N2 for us was a contaminant. Cold? I noted some liquid running off one of the fittings and figured it was way too cold for water, but it sure looked like it. The tank farm operator remarked; "Water? No, it's way too cold for that. That stuff running off is liquid Oxygen". temperature. The way things are done, in a real world? Very cold, with some pressure to help out, so you get a you are right, on this one. For us the only alternative for pressure besides the evaporating liquid H2 was Helium (analysis grade which I believe is five nines) and even with all those tanks the stuff didn't evaporate fast enough go keep the pressure up. Purity was our problem as we were working at less than one part per billion. That is difficult to maintain. Yes, as he said, they can be kept at room temperatures. Almost anything can be. Practical? No. Wrongly stated? No. Times change though.The output of that plant is many times what it used to be and they have gone through two very large expansions since they became the world's largest supplier of that product. Currently (according to the local paper) they are looking "world wide" for a new site to build another plant and it's my understanding there are a lot of places that want them. With improved recovery techniques and some "other processes" that tank farm has disappeared. Last I saw there was only one small tank. Probably 5 to 10,000 gallons give or take a bunch as I don't know how much they kept in there. Stuff that was byproduct is reused in one form or another. Recovery techniques have dropped the H2 use to a tiny fraction of what it was at one time. However I would add that there is a way to keep a lot of H2 in a relatively small space at room temperature that is "physically practical". Unfortunately it takes a lot of some very expensive material that is also toxic. They can use metal Hydrides as "metal sponges" and the things do hold a tremendous amount of H2. Also a ruptured tank is not a fire safety issue as you normally have to use a small heater to get the H2 out. I believe these are the same type of Hydrides they use in batteries which are a disposal problem. They aren't supposed to go in the garbage, but being sold to the general public I'd bet way more than half of those batteries do end up in the trash. Think of what NiMH batteries cost and then think of a chunk of that stuff the size of the gas tank in a car. A bit of history. I started working for that company about the time they moved from using an old two story farm house for an office and a large cement block garage for production to a new office building plus a new production facility about the size of a basketball court. With the first expansion we were using so much H2 we installed the World's largest electrolytic cell for generating H2 as there wasn't enough liquid H2 capacity in the US to supply us and NASA. For some strange reason they gave NASA a higher priority than us. You should have heard that cell. When running at capacity it was deafening. The O2 was just vented to the atmosphere and that was a *lot* of O2. It was sorta like standing in front of an F-16 getting ready to taxi. That cell was dismantled not long after sufficient quantities of liquid H2 became available. I worked there 26 years, quit and went back to college to earn my degree. Never went back except in an official capacity to consult on a computer system as they were a subsidiary for the corporation I ended up working for after graduating. -- Jim in NC Sorry for the late reply, Jim. We had to restart the plant and I was working some long hours. What you say above is correct. But some things he has stated, not included above, are totally incorrect. I'm just sick of Ludwig making blanket statements that are only partially correct so that he can forward his troll agenda. Some of his statements are correct enough that some people "partially in the know" might accept them as gospel. That was my sole reason for responding to the group. I try hard not to fall for troll bait If you'll go back and read his drivel, he says things like, "you can't condense methane". Yeah right! He makes statements about the way products are stored when there are multiple ways to store them. I tried to reply that in my experience he was wrong. There are other ways. He attacks Van and Rutan, two of the icons of the experimental aircraft movement. He calls Van's keen observations blather. Another "for instance": His assertion that natural gas is methane: Natural gas varies in composition depending on a host of factors including what processing it has gone through, if any, and also from gas well to gas well. It is not "only" methane: Here is an example. From one of our supply pipe lines, on August 9th it was 96.00 mole % methane, .43% carbon dioxide, .08 helium, .0012 i-butane, .0012 n-butane, 2.4621% ethane, .9300 nitrogen, .0957 propane. Another pipeline was 95.76% methane, .00220 C6+, .64 carbon dioxide, .04 helium, 2.7004 ethane, .74 nitrogen, .1101 propane, .0023 i-butane, .0020 n-butane. So what? He replied that 96% is mostly methane. Each of these constituents affects the BTU value of the gas. The first pipeline was running 1017 BTU's and the second 1027 BTU's. This is a huge factor not only in using the gas as a fuel but also in process it into other commodities such as ammonia, methanol, carbon dioxide, etc. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair) www.rogerhalstead.com |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() JJS wrote: snip You are in way over your head Ludwig. I've worked with all these gases for 28 years, in well, let's just say very large quantities. I do this stuff for a living. You don't have a clue. The more you try to defend your incorrect drivel the deeper you get. Be a man and back off and admit you don't know what you are talking about. Okay smartypants, why is propane sold as a liquid in low pressure tanks and nitrogen as a GAS in high pressure tanks or a LIQUID, at cryo temperatures in dewars??? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder | John Doe | Piloting | 145 | March 31st 06 06:58 PM |
I want to build the most EVIL plane EVER !!! | Eliot Coweye | Home Built | 237 | February 13th 06 03:55 AM |
NTSB: USAF included? | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 10 | September 11th 05 10:33 AM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | April 5th 04 03:04 PM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently-Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | July 4th 03 04:50 PM |