J Joei 2018 12 001

JOEI542_proof ■ 27 December 2018 ■ 1/14
Journal of the Energy Institute xxx (xxxx) xxx
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of the Energy Institute

journal homepage: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-the-energy-
institute
1 The assessment of the fuel additive impact on moving grate boiler

2
3 efficiency
4
5 Q1 Robert Junga a, *, Janusz Pospolita a, Patrycja Niemiec a, Maciej Dudek b
6 a
Q9 Department of Thermal Engineering and Industrial Facilities, Opole University of Technology, 5 Mikołajczyka St, 45-271 Opole, Poland
7
Q2
b
RENERGI Sp. z.o.o, 17B/3 Kozioroz_ ca St, 80-299 Gdan
sk, Poland
8
9
10
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
11
12 Article history: The purpose of the work is to determine the impact of a commercial coal additive on the efficiency and
13 Received 30 September 2018 the pollutants emissions of an industrial boiler. The tests were carried out in a 41.1 MW thermal output
14 Received in revised form moving grate boiler in common operating conditions for a period of two months. At that time, coal was
15 30 November 2018
alternately dosed with and without the additive. The amount of the additive to coal ratio was fixed at 1L/
Accepted 4 December 2018
16 Mg during the tests. The additive applied was a 20% aqueous solution of four compounds, i.e. iso-
Available online xxx
17 propanol, manganese (II) acetate tetrahydrate, acetic acid glacial … % and N,N-Dimethylethanolamine.
18 The samples of coal, bottom and fly ash were collected from the installation twice a day during the tests
Keywords:
19 Combustion in order to check their properties. The boiler's main energy parameters and the emission levels of CO,
20 Coal NOx, SO2 and dust were measured and registered. The additive influence on the boiler operation was
Fuel additives evaluated based on the efficiency and three indicators which highlighted this impact.
21
Moving grate boiler The additive influence was mainly demonstrated in boiler efficiency increase, in the range of 0.5e1 p.p.,
22 Efficiency as well as the oxygen concentration in the flue gas which indicates that there was a decreased amount of
23 Q4 Economic effects the combustion air. On the other hand, the studies do not show any evident influence on the NOx, SO2
24 and CO emissions with the applied catalyst to fuel ratio. The research showed that even a little
25 improvement of efficiency gives a measurable economic effect.
26 © 2018 Energy Institute. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
27
28
29
30
31 1. Introduction
32
33 Coal is the main source of energy in Poland with the consumption estimated at the level of 74.2 million tonnes in 2016 [1]. It is utilized by
34 both power plants in pulverized coal-fired and less frequently used fluidized-bed boilers as well as grate boilers - the most common in
35 district heating [2]. Exploited steam and water grate boilers are primarily medium-power units (5e50 MW), both older (even from the 1970s
36 and 1980s) and newly built installations which are currently customized to the requirements appropriate for the combustion plants,
37 especially regarding the limitations of pollutants emissions [3]. These requirements (at present strongly prohibitive) are often hard to be
38 achieved, therefore boilers can be adapted to be combined with selective catalytic and non-catalytic reduction (SCR, SNCR), desulphuri-
39 zation as well as other types of installations reducing the amounts of pollutants in the flue gases [4]. However, the most important purpose
40 for the contemporary boiler technology is the maximization of the energy derived from the fuel unit.
41 Commonly used moving grate boilers have many advantages, e.g. they do not require fuel preparation (milling) and they enable the
42 combustion of low calorific fuels and their blends. However, they provide relatively low efficiency at the level of 85e89% [5] and high
43 emissions of pollutants in comparison to pulverized coal-fired and fluidized-bed boilers, therefore various actions are taken in order to
44 optimize the combustion process. Apart from low-emission combustion techniques such as optimization of combustion air quantity or
45 advanced secondary air supply, fuel additives may be used. The main purpose of the additives application is to reduce the slagging and
46 fouling problems as well as to decrease the formation of soot [6e9]. This contributes to easier boiler surfaces cleaning and, as a consequence,
47 better heat exchange which should indirectly have an impact on its efficiency. They can be also used to decrease NOx [10e13], SO2 [14] and
48 dioxins [15] emissions.
49
50
51 * Corresponding author. Q3
E-mail address: r.junga@po.opole.pl (R. Junga).
52
53
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joei.2018.12.001
54 1743-9671/© 2018 Energy Institute. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Please cite this article as: R. Junga et al., The assessment of the fuel additive impact on moving grate boiler efficiency, Journal of the Energy
Institute, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joei.2018.12.001
2 R. Junga et al. / Journal of the Energy Institute xxx (xxxx) xxx
1 Generally, the studies regarding different fuel additives concern mainly the pollutants emission and mitigation of fouling and slagging
2 issue. These tests are conducted in laboratory conditions [10,11,16e19] or in low-power boilers [20e22]. There is only a small number of tests
3 carried out in pilot and industrial scale installations [7,12,13]. In addition, a relatively small number of studies touches on their impact on
4 boilers operation and efficiency, in particular in medium combustion plants which thermal output is of the order of a few MW.
5 Daood et al. [12] studied fuel additive influence on emissions and boiler efficiency when burning three various coals (lower heating value
6 of 23.2e29.0 MJ/kg) in a pilot-scale installation as well as in a 260 t/h steam generating pulverized fuel-fired boiler. The mixture of oxides,
7 consisting mainly of iron (over 40%), aluminum and calcium as well as silicon (over 30%), was used as the additive. The additive was injected
8 into the combustion chamber in two ways, i.e. in the form of aqueous solution added to the fuel and as a powder mixed with air. Additive
9 mass fraction fed to the furnace varied from 1.3 to 13%. The researchers found that the additive decreases the unburnt fuel heat loss. For
10 example, when the additive mass fraction was fixed at 1.3 and 13%, the heat loss was reduced by 19 and 63%, respectively. Test carried out in
11 the industrial boiler burning 27.5 Mg/h of coal indicated that the addition of 2.5 Mg/h of additive decreased the unburnt combustible left in
12 ash from 12 to 7%. The authors also observed that the efficiency improvement (by 2%) was obtained as well as NOx emission reduction.
13 In Ref. [21] it was emphasized that the catalytic additive in the form of copper compounds and sodium chloride affect the combustion
14 process decreasing the excess air levels. The application of Na, Cu and Mg cations, even in relatively small amounts (300 ppm in the solution
15 of 2 dm3/Mg of coal fuel), increased the efficiency of low-power boiler burning Ekogroszek coal by 0.5e2.9 p.p. According to Persson et al.
16 [20] the addition of MgO and Mg(OH)2 reduces the amount of carbon in the ash by over 50% which decreases the unburnt coal heat loss. On
17 the other hand, an increased amount of deposits was observed which can have a negative impact on boiler efficiency. However, the re-
18 searchers indicate that the measurement time was too short to assess boiler efficiency during the application of additives.
19 In the technical report on coal additives [23] burned in boilers of different thermal outputs, the influence of magnesium-based additives
20 on boiler efficiency increase is particularly emphasized. It is thought that the combustion enhancers can potentially increase plant efficiency
21 by up to 2.5%.
22 Due to the fact that the studies mainly concern laboratory conditions, the main problem is to transfer the results obtained to the in-
23 dustrial plants. Regarding large industrial units, the size of different impacts and the different scale of the physical phenomenon makes it
24 difficult and sometimes even impossible to formulate general conclusions. At most, there is only a chance to determine certain directions of
25 additive interaction but the formulation of specific conclusions may be problematic. Therefore, it was decided to carry out research into the
26 fuel additive impact on the combustion process in an industrial grate moving boiler which thermal output is 41.1 MW. The additive applied
27 was an aqueous solution of four compounds, based on manganese ions.
28 The purpose of the research was to assess the possibility of improving OR50-N boiler operating properties by adding fuel additive. The
29 boiler efficiency through particular heat losses estimation was established. Furthermore, the studies were supposed to show whether the
30 additive also affects the level of emission of selected pollutants.
31 The adopted research concept consisted of the analysis of selected boiler operating parameters and emission tests during the combustion
32 process of coal treated as a reference fuel. The analysis time and the range of parameters variability corresponded to boiler exploitation at
33 different operational conditions dependent on weather conditions and energy demand. Historical data was also analyzed in order to
34 establish the reference level of boiler operation during the combustion of coal without the presence of the additive.
35 The studied phenomena should be considered in the terms of measurement uncertainty of different physical magnitudes characterizing
36 the boiler operation and, as a result, the uncertainty of the established heat losses level. In summary, the idea is that the effect should be
37 permanent and, if possible, exceed the range of physical magnitudes resulting from the measurement uncertainty. The additive interaction
38 may be manifested in changing the values of parameters illustrating the combustion process, such as the temperature of the ignition vault,
39 flame temperature over the grate, oxygen concentration within the boiler or ash characteristics.
40
41
42 2. Materials and methods
43
44 The combustion tests were performed in April and May 2017 in Opole (Poland) in the heating and power plant ECO SA (Energetyka
45 Cieplna Opolszczyzny SA). The research involved the combustion of fine coal in a moving grate boiler OR50-N which was working in a
46 combination with heat exchangers and turbogenerator. The studies consisted of coal combustion with and without a additive in similar
47 operating conditions and comparison the results obtained.
48 It was decided that the research should be carried out over a longer period of time and under typical operational conditions resulting
49 from the time of the day and weather conditions and, as a consequence, affecting the changes of boiler load. It was also adopted that the
50 reference level would be all the magnitudes characterizing the boiler operation established during the coal combustion without the additive
51 in a sufficiently long period of time.
52 Coal with and without the additive was burned alternately, therefore several series of studies can be distinguished:
53 April:
54
55 I series - coal without the additive for 10 days,
56 II-k series - coal with the additive for 4 days,
57 III series - coal without the additive for 9 days.
58
59 May:
60
61 IV series - coal without the additive for 7 days,
62 V-k series - coal with the additive for 3 days,
63 VI series - coal without the additive for 6 days.
64 VII-k series - coal with the additive for 8 days,
65 VIII series - coal without the additive for 7 days.
R. Junga et al. / Journal of the Energy Institute xxx (xxxx) xxx 3
1 In the further part of the research, the individual series of studies are marked with subsequent numbers.
2
3
2.1. Boiler OR50-N
4
5
OR50-N is a three-pass moving grate boiler. Fig. 1 presents the side view of the boiler, whereas Fig. 2 shows the scheme of the unit
6
equipped with ancillary installations. These figures facilitate the location of particular boiler elements and key measurements points for the
7
subject analysis. Emissions levels and flue gas temperatures were measured in the chimney and they were taken into account when
8
determining the energy balance. OR50-N boiler was designed to burn fine coal with the lower heating value of 22e24 MJ/kg, ash content of
9
18e22% and moisture content of 10e12% [24]. The fundamental boiler operating parameters are listed in Table 1.
10
11
12 2.2. The additive properties and dosing installation
13
14 The additive, created especially for research purposes by a company specializing in the production of catalytic additives for fuels, was a
15 20% aqueous solution which compounds are specified in Table 2.
16 The purpose of the isopropanol utilization was to prevent the formation of ice caps in the dosing lines and to increase the oxidizing ability
17 of fuel.
18 Manganese (II) acetate was used as an oxidizing catalyst. At high temperatures prevailing in the combustion chamber, it decomposes to
19 manganese (II) oxide MnO [26]. MnO, in turn, reacts with oxygen forming manganese (II,III) oxide Mn3O4 [27]. Mn3O4 is considered to be
20 acting as a catalyst for carbon combustion [23]. Thus, given chemical reactions may be written as follows:
21
22 MnðCH3 COOÞ2 /MnO þ ðCH3 Þ2 CO þ CO2
23
24 6MnO þ O2 /2Mn3 O4
25
26 2Mn3 O4
27 C þ O2 !C
28 N,N-Dimethylethanolamine (DMEA) may be applied to control corrosion in boiler water condensate return lines. As reported by Loto
29 et al. [28] it is a corrosion inhibitor in acidic chloride environment. The study revealed that the DMAE adsorbs on the steel surface blocking
30 the active sites and inhibits hydrogen evolution reactions. Therefore, it protects against pitting corrosion and significantly reduces the
31 degradation rate of the material.
32 The last listed compound is intended to effectively remove fouling and deposits from boiler surfaces. It was added for testing purposes
33 and its addition was proposed by the manufacturer.
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65 Fig. 1. The side view of the OR50-N boiler with the ancillary equipment [5]. Q 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Fig. 2. The scheme of the OR50-N boiler with the cooperating technological lines.
32
33
34 Table 1
35 The fundamental operating parameters of OR50-N boiler.
36 Parameter Unit Value
37
Nominal steam output t/h 50.0
38 Maximal continuous steam output t/h 52.0
39 Minimal steam output t/h 15.0
40 Nominal thermal output MW 41.1
41 Steam pressure outlet MPa 6.3

Steam temperature outlet (for > 50 ÷ 100% of the boiler load) C 485.0 ± 5.0
42
Steam temperature outlet (for > 30 ÷ 50% of the boiler load) C > 450.0
43 Feed water temperature C 105.0
44 Average net efficiency calculated by heat loss method (indirect method) for loads 50, 70, 100% % >88.0
45 Net efficiency calculated by heat loss method (indirect method) for low load 30% % 84.0
46 Thermal power input for efficiency 88% and steam output 53.0 t/h MW 49.0
Air volume flow Nm3/s 16.6
47 Flue gas volume flow Nm3/s 17.5
48 Flue gas temperature C 120.0 ÷ 140.0
49 Chimney draft kPa 1.0
50 O2 in the flue gas % 6.0 ÷ 7.0
PM behind the dust collector (according to ECO)a mg/Nm3 100.0
51
SO2 in the flue gas at 0.6% S in the fuela mg/Nm3 < 1300.0
52 NOx in the flue gasa mg/Nm3 < 400.0
53 CO in the flue gasa mg/Nm3 < 250.0
54 a
At 6.0% O2.
55
56
57
58
Table 2
59 The composition of the additive [25].
60
61 Substance CAS Content, %
62 Isopropanol 67-63-0 10 ÷ 20
63 Manganese (II) acetate tetrahydrate 6156-78-1 5 ÷ 10
Acetic acid glacial% 64-19-7 1÷5
64
N,N-Dimethylethanolamine 108-01-0 4
65
1 Dosing installation was added on the coal transport system and it was injecting the additive into the fuel layer on the conveyor belt which
2 was transporting the coal to the coal feed hopper. The dosing installation allowed the regulation of the additive amount in relation to the
3 coal. The amount of additive to coal ratio was fixed at 1L/Mg, according to the manufacturer's guidance. The installation worked auto-
4 matically, turning on when the coal was transported on the conveyor belt. The scheme of the additive dosing installation along with the
5 explanation of the devices used is presented in Fig. 3. The coal feed system was transporting the fuel several times a day. Each transport took
6 about 15 min and it was dependent on the energy demand.
7
8 2.3. Coal and ash sampling
9
10 The samples of coal, bottom and fly ash were collected from the installation at a fixed frequency in order to check their properties.
11 Regarding coal, the samples were collected twice a day (at 10 a.m. and 10 p.m.) from the coal transport system to the boiler feed hopper. The
12 coal sample was manually collected every minute from the conveyor belt and then precisely mixed and quartered. About 2 kg of a sample
13 was then transported to the accredited laboratory operated at the CHP plant.
14 Combustion residues represents both slag and fly-ash return as they were transported from the moving grate by the mutual conveyor
15 belt. Collecting the combustion residues samples was carried twice a day, after the coal sampling. Every minute (for about 30 min) the
16 sample was manually collected from the conveyor belt and then precisely mixed and quartered. About 2 kg of a sample was then transported
17 to the accredited laboratory as was in the case of coal. Apart from fundamental analyses, the studies of particle size distribution, as well as
18 the research into the unburned fraction in the particular size ranges, was also carried out. Table 3 shows the scope, measuring methods and
19 the uncertainty of the parameters studied for both coal and combustion residues.
20
21
2.4. Flue gas parameters measurements
22
23
Among the series of measurements performed within the boiler, Table 4 summarizes the parameters which were the basis used in
24
determining boiler efficiency and enabled the evaluation of emission level. The data and the parameters of the measuring apparatus are also
25
specified. The flue gas emission was determined by means of two analyzers. SIEMENS ULTRAMAT 23 was the part of ECO equipment and it
26
was installed in the chimney, whereas MADUR PHOTON was verifying the results of the first analyzer and it was installed in the duct
27
connecting the boiler with the chimney.
28
Regarding the dust concentration in the flue gas, it was measured by the optical method (light transmission) with the use of DURAG D-R
29
290 dust meter. The analyzer was installed in the chimney and its parameters were:
30
31
measuring range of dust concentration < 200 mg/Nm3,
32
measuring range extinction 0 ÷ 0.1 … 0 ÷ 1.6,
33
measuring range opacity 0 ÷ 20% … 0 ÷ 100%,
34
lowest detection limit 0.75% for measuring range 0 ÷ 0.1 extinction,
35
accuracy < 1% measuring range.
36
37
Temperature measurements were performed by means of resistance temperature detectors (RTDs) and thermocouples with uncertainty
38
± 1 C. The measurements of the heat flow in the generated steam were performed with the use of a heat meter combined with
39
compensated flow and thermal energy calculator Metronic FP-3011. The uncertainty of the heat flow at the level of 2% was assumed based on
40
manufacturers data.
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65 Fig. 3. The scheme of the additive dosing installation and additive dosage during the tests.
1 Table 3
2 The uncertainty of the parameters characterizing the fuel and combustion residues properties.
3 Parametera Test procedure/Standard Unit Uncertainty U (k ¼ 2)

4 M in the fuel PN80/G04511 % ± 0.6
5 A in the fuel PB01 from 8.04.2009 % ± 0.2
6 C in the fuel PNG-04571:1998 % ± 0.5
7 S in the fuel PNG-04584:2001 % ± 0.03
H in the fuel PNG-04571:1998 % ± 0.3
8
N in the fuel PNG-04571:1998 % ± 0.1
9 LHV PNG-04513:1981 kJ/kg ± 226
10 C in the ash PB02 outside the scope of accreditation % assumed: ± 0.1
11 a
As received.
12
13
14 Table 4
15 The parameters and the data of measuring apparatus.
16 Parameter Method Range Unit Accuracy Resolution

17 Flue gas analyzer SIEMENS ULTRAMAT 23
18 CO NDIR 0 ÷ 1250 mg/Nm3 3 ppm < 0.02% FS
19 NO NDIR 0 ÷ 600 mg/Nm3 3 ppm < 0.02% FS
20 SO2 NDIR 0 ÷ 2500 mg/Nm3 3 ppm < 0.02% FS
O2 Paramagnetic 0 ÷ 25 % 0.2% < 0.02% FS
21
Flue gas analyzer MADUR PHOTON
22 CO NDIR 0 ÷ 20000 ppm ± 4 ppm ab (4% rel) 1 ppm
23 NO NDIR 0 ÷ 5000 ppm ± 5 ppm ab (5% rel) 1 ppm
24 NOx NDIR 0 ÷ 1000 ppm ± 5 ppm ab (5% rel) 1 ppm
25 SO2 NDIR 0 ÷ 5000 ppm ± 5 ppm ab (5% rel) 1 ppm
O2 Electrochemical 0 ÷ 21 % ± 0.01% abs. (5%) 0.01%
26
27
28
29 2.5. Additive's effectiveness indicators
30
31 Due to the boiler size and its work characteristics, the only way to establish the efficiency was the indirect method. Therefore, it was
32 needed to determine particular heat losses occurring during combustion as well as the uncertainty of these magnitudes. For this purpose,
33 the equations presented in Ref. [22] were used.
34 The additive influence should be manifested in increasing boiler efficiency which means that the heat losses should decrease, respec-
35 tively. Expecting that this effect may be relatively small, additional indicators were calculated and analyzed, i.e.:
36
37 Sf
I1 ¼ ; (1)
38 hk
39
40 Snc
I2 ¼ ; (2)
41 hk
42
43 where: Sf is the flue gas heat loss, Snc is the unburnt coal heat loss and hk is the boiler efficiency.
44 These indicators express, in the numerical form, the ratio of given heat loss to the thermal energy produced in the boiler Qu. Comparative
45 analysis of these indicators makes it possible to determine whether the reduction of one of the heat losses is not at the expense of increasing
46 the other one. Moreover, both indicators are sensitive to the potential boiler efficiency changes.
47 It was also decided to calculate the third indicator I3 expressed as
48
Qu
49 I3 ¼ ; (3)
Bp
50
51 where: Qu is the average amount of useful energy, MW, Bp is the average fuel feed, kg/s.
52 This is due to the fact the heat flow is measured continuously. Then, the first of the indicators (Eq. (1)) can be used for monitoring the
53 relative value of the flue gas heat losses, whereas the second one (Eq. (2)) monitors the influence of the unburnt heat loss in the slag and ash.
54 Analyzing the I3 indicator (Eq. (3)) enables the determination - averagely - how much heat is produced from fuel unit. Moreover, extending
55 the test time allows the evaluation of additive influence in a more objective manner.
56
57
58 3. Results and discussion
59
60 3.1. Coal and combustion residues properties
61
62 The research was carried out under typical operating conditions. Burned coal, whose average parameters are listed in Table 5, had the
63 lower heating value of 23,436 kJ/kg (as received) with standard deviation of 802 kJ/kg. This value resulted from the relatively long tests
64 period, therefore it was impossible to use one specific fuel supply. The total moisture content varied from 7 to 13.2%. Lower values of total (as
65 well as transient) moisture content occurred in May. The ash content at the as received state was on average 17.2% with standard deviation of
1 Table 5
2 Physico-chemical parameters of coal burned during the tests.
3 Parameter Symbol and unit Average value Standard deviation

4 Moisture content on wet basis M, % 9.8 1.5
5 Ash content A, % 17.2 2.4
6 Carbon content C, % 60.89 2.00
7 Sulphur content S, % 0.43 0.05
Hydrogen content H, % 3.34 0.13
8
Nitrogen content N, % 1.11 0.04
9 Lower heating value LHV, kJ/kg 23,436 802
10 Higher heating value HHV, kJ/kg 26,639 870
11
12
13
2.4%. This value was maintained at the level of 16e18%, although there were also deviations of 12.0 and 21.2%. The carbon content at as
14
received state was stable and it was on average 60.82%. The same situation applied to the hydrogen, nitrogen and sulpfur content which
15
changed insignificantly during the tests. Moreover, it can be assumed that, on average, a slightly higher lower heating value of coal in May
16
(by about 550 kJ/kg) resulted from the reduced moisture and ash content by about 0.77 and 6 p.p., respectively.
17
In May, during the V-k series of tests, fuel with a significant content of ash and fine size distribution was fed. This fine fraction increased
18
the flow through the grate and therefore influenced a distinct increase of unburned combustible fraction in the slag. The average content of
19
the unburned combustible fraction (Table 6) in the combustion residues was 24.06% with a significant value of standard deviation (7.25%). In
20
the main part of the test results, the unburned combustible fraction was within the range of 16e22%. Incidentally, this value was also up to
21
30%. The above-mentioned fuel feeding period with the high amounts of fine fraction had an influence on the high average value of un-
22
burned combustible fraction in the combustion residues. The flow through the grate caused that the content of the unburned combustible
23
fraction significantly exceeded the value of 30%. This was also indicated by selected, additional analyses of the combustion residues. Due to
24
this phenomenon, the unburnt coal heat loss Snc was significantly higher in the V-k and VI series of tests (Table 8). A higher value of the Snc
25
indicator in the VIII series in comparison to the VII-k series was also related to the increased unburnt coal fraction in the slag and ash. On
26
account of the fact that the fuel in the VIII series had a higher than average calorific value and a mediocre granulation, it is likely that the
27
additive had an impact on the obtained results.
28
29
30 3.2. Selected boiler operating parameters during the series of tests
31
32 Determination of the additive influence is a difficult assignment. Complexity and inconvenience of the activity were mainly due to the
33 fact that the boiler was operated in his ordinary and long-term working conditions. In this situation, the energy produced and related boiler
34 output P was adjusted to the current weather conditions as well as daily energy demand. Moreover, there were some issue, occurring in
35 different situations, related to smaller failures and disruptions in the heat and power plants block operation. Thus, the research was not the
36 equivalent of the guarantee type of measurements, fulfilled in stable and steady operating conditions.
37 After the first three series of measurement carried out in April, the results were studied. Relatively high boiler thermal output P facilitated
38 the analysis. Selected magnitudes characterizing the boiler operation at that time are listed in Table 7. As can be observed, thermal boiler
39 output P was close to nominal for all series of tests. The average boiler efficiency hk was higher during the combustion with the fuel additive
40 in comparison to the I and III series of measurements by 0.5 and 1.3 p.p., respectively. The test with additive also showed that the flue gas
41 heat loss Sf is the lowest in comparison to the series carried out without the additive. The unburnt coal heat loss Snc was the lowest in the II-k
42 stage but the differences, expressed as a percentage (in relation to the thermal output), are small. Therefore, one can only compare the
43 absolute differences regarding average values in the particular measurement series. The consequence of the highest boiler efficiency hk that
44 occurred in II-k series is the highest amount of energy produced from fuel unit I3 . The average percentage amount of O2 and the con-
45 centration of CO in the flue gas was also the lowest during the combustion with the additive, however no evident regularity was found
46 regarding other flue gas components. The changes of the flue gas temperatures TFg and their average values, as well as the flow of the flue gas
47 resulted from the boiler characteristics, operation conditions and fuel properties.
48 Regarding the analyzed results, it is difficult to consider the correlation analysis, e.g. to draw conclusions based on the Pearson corre-
49 lation. The correlation between temporary parameters values would not give information about the additive impact. The number of time-
50 averaged values is small and they apply only to combustion periods with and without additive. Thus, it is logical to relate the additive effects
51 to the averaged parameters characterizing boiler operation.
52
53
Table 6
54
Combustion residues parameters.
55
56 Parameter Unit Average value Standard deviation
57 Moisture content % 31.0 e
58 TOC % 24.06 7.25
Carbon content % 15.3 e
59
Size distribution
60 > 10 mm % 45.8 e
61 10 ÷ 5 mm % 17.6 e
62 5 ÷ 3 mm % 8.7 e
63 3 ÷ 1 mm % 13.6 e
1 ÷ 0.5 mm % 6.2 e
64
< 0.5 mm % 8.1 e
65
1 Table 7
2 Average values of magnitudes characterizing boiler operation in the first three series of measurements performed in April.
3 Parameter Measurement series

4 I II-k III
5
Fuel feed rate Bp , kg/s 1.95 1.93 2.01
6
Air volume flow QA , Nm3/s 20.8 19.8 20.7
7 Thermal output P, MW 40.54 40.55 41.14
8 Efficiency calculated by heat loss method (indirect method) hk 89.42 89.90 88.68
9 Standard uncertainty uðhk ) 2.34 2.37 2.35

Flue gas temperature TFG , C (avg. before the dust collector system) 146 152 165
10
O2 in the flue gas, % 9.0 8.3 8.7
11 PM in the flue gas at 6.0% O2, mg/m3 62 67 58
12 SO2 in the flue gas at 6.0% O2, mg/m3 971 1006 1045
13 NOx in the flue gas at 6.0% O2, mg/m3 371 378 357
14 CO in the flue gas at 6.0% O2, mg/m3 112 70 95
Flue gas volume flow QFG , Nm3/s 21.6 20.5 21.7
15
Flue gas heat lossa Sf , % 8.95 8.72 9.81
16 Unburnt fuel heat loss (bottom and fly ash losses) Snc , % 0.939 0.841 0.923
17 Indicator of the flue gas heat loss I1 , - 100.110e3 97.010e3 110.710e3
18 Indicator of the unburnt fuel heat loss I2 , - 105.010e4 93.610e4 104.210e4
Heat generated from the fuel unit I3 , MJ/kg 20.803 20.980 20.490
19
a
20 It is heat loss due to: dry flue gas, evaporation of water formed due to hydrogen and hydrocarbonsin the fuel, moisture content in the fuel and moisture content in the air.
21
22
Table 8
23 Average values of magnitudes characterizing boiler operation in the series of measurements performed in May.
24
25 Parameter Measurement series
26 IV V-k VI VII-k VIII

27 Fuel feed rate Bp , kg/s 1.98 2.03 1.67 1.03 0.97
28 Air volume flow QA , Nm3/s 21.4 21.2 18.5 12.6 11.7
29 Thermal output P, MW 40.35 39.52 35.15 22.23 20.08
Efficiency calculated by heat loss method (indirect method) hk 88.18 87.97 88.73 88.83 88.04
30
Standard uncertainty uðhk ) 2.38 2.28 2.37 2.69 2.69
31 Flue gas temperature TFG , C (avg. before the dust collector system) 167 153 146 131 135
32 O2 in the flue gas, % 9.1 8.9 9.5 10.3 10.7
33 PM in the flue gas at 6.0% O2, mg/m3 50 56 41 47 32
34 SO2 in the flue gas at 6.0% O, mg/m3 944 770 934 931 852
NOx in the flue gas at 6.0% O, mg/m3 354 350 344 289 304
35
CO in the flue gas at 6.0% O, mg/m3 87 99 114 123 44
36 Flue gas volume flow QFG , Nm3/s 22.4 21.7 19.3 13.4 12.5
37 Flue gas heat loss Sf , % 10.04 9.25 9.14 8.89 9.37
38 Unburnt fuel heat loss (bottom and fly ash losses) Snc , % 1.000 1.419 1.237 1.000 1.584
Indicator of the flue gas heat loss I1 , - 113.810e3 105.110e3 103.010e3 100.110e3 106.510e3
39
Indicator of the unburnt fuel heat loss I2 , - 113.810e4 161.710e4 139.210e4 112.710e4 180.210e4
40 Heat generated from the fuel unit, I3 , MJ/kg 20.753 20.213 20.970 21.133 20.856
41
42
43
44 In May the studies started with the research into boiler operation without the additive. They took 7 days and the boiler thermal output P
45 was high at that period of time, i.e. 40.35 MW. In the next series of tests (V-k), the thermal output was decreased twice due to failures. Such
46 situations also occurred in the earlier series of tests, including in April. However, it was decided not to eliminate these measurements and
47 thus, they could affect the averaged values of parameters. Failures are natural phenomena which can happen in a longer period of time. In
48 the V-k series the average thermal output was nearly the same as in IV series of tests (39.52 MW).
49 In the next series of measurements, the boiler thermal output P was decreasing successively, mainly due to weather conditions as well as
50 failures. Table 8 presents the values of magnitudes characterizing boiler operation for tests performed in May. Two comparable periods are
51 observed in the terms of thermal output, i.e. IV - V-k and VII-k - VIII series. Regarding the first two aforementioned series, IV is characterized
52 by the higher boiler efficiency hk (by 0.2 p.p.). On the other hand, the flue gas heat loss Sf as well as the I1 indicator are lower for V-k series.
53 The meaningful influence on boiler efficiency hk change had the relatively high unburnt fuel heat loss Snc in the ash and slag in the V-k series.
54 The average unburnt fuel heat loss was diversified and it reached the value of 2.25%. In certain periods of time, there was a high content of
55 unburned combustible fraction in slag and ash. This was meanly because of the high amount of fine fuel size fraction as well as losses in grate
56 construction.
57 The two latter series of tests showed that the boiler efficiency hk was higher when additive was dosed to the coal. Lower was also the flue
58 gas heat loss Sf (nearly by 0.5 p.p.) as well as the unburnt fuel heat loss Snc . Therefore, the I1 indicator had the lowest value in comparison to
59 all series performed in May. The highest amount of heat produced from fuel unit I3 was observed in VII-k series and it had the value of
60 21.13 MJ/kg. In the analyzed series of measurements the unburnt heat loss changed Snc in a non-regular way, from 1.000 to 1.584%.
61
62 3.3. Results of the selected measurement series
63
64 In this subsection, selected results of measurements are compiled. They apply to the periods of tests in which one can see the influence of
65 the additive on boiler operation. Fig. 4 shows a transitional period between the I and II-k series, i.e. periods without and with the use of the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21 Fig. 4. Comparison of selected boiler operating parameters during 2 days of measurements in April.
22
23
24 additive. Fig. 5 presents the same results averaged for particular days of both series. From the exploitation point of view, the most
25 fundamental parameters were chosen such as thermal output P, air volume flow QA, O2 in the flue gas, flue gas temperature TFG and boiler
26 efficiency hk. April was characterized by ambient conditions that determined stable and high boiler thermal outputs P at the nominal level of
27 40 MW. In the II-k series, as a result of boiler adjustment, the air volume flow QA was lower, on average, by 1 Nm3/s, and the flue gas
28 temperature TFG was higher by 6 C, which can be observed in Fig. 4 and in Table 7. The O2 in the flue gas decreased which can result from the
29 additive application or air volume flow QA changes. Figs. 4 and 5, as well as the calculated value in Table 7, indicate that boiler efficiency hk
30 increased, on average, by about 0.5 p.p. in the II-k series.
31 The thermal output P, air volume flow QA and flue gas temperature TFG presented in Fig. 6 for a transitional period between the VII-k and
32 VIII series had a different character. The ambient conditions caused that the boiler thermal output P was relatively low and oscillated by
33 around 30% in comparison to the averaged value. These changes were reflected in the air volume flow QA, O2 in the flue gas and flue gas
34 temperature TFG values. In this case, the air volume flow QA in the VIII series without the additive (Fig. 7 and Table 8) was lower, on average,
35 by about 0.9 Nm3/s, i.e. opposite to the comparison showed for April in Fig. 5. Moreover, it can be observed in Figs. 6 and 7 and in Table 8 that
36 boiler efficiency hk with the use of the additive was higher by about 0.8 p.p.
37 In all series of tests, when the thermal output P was high, the secondary air was supplied at a constant ratio to the primary air. At low
38 thermal outputs P, the secondary air fan was switched off.
39 Particularly, Figs. 6 and 7 indicate how difficult it is to analyze boiler's operation and the influence of various parameters, including
40 additive application, on efficiency under real operating conditions. Moreover, minor defects and other disturbances cause unforeseen
41 changes in these parameters, complicating this task even more. The adopted research strategy was intended to carry out the studies in a
42 possibly long period of time, in a few (here 8 series) and under different conditions of thermal output P. These conditions are real operating
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65 Fig. 5. Comparison of averaged selected boiler operating parameters during 2 series of measurements in April.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21 Fig. 6. Comparison of selected boiler operating parameters during 2 days of measurements in May.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42 Fig. 7. Comparison of averaged selected boiler operating parameters during 2 series of measurements in May.
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
Fig. 8. Efficiency as a function of boiler thermal output.
1 conditions, and they determine the actual fuel consumption in the production of heating energy. Only long-term observations can give the
2 answer about the possible energy and economic effects of the additive applied.
3
4
5 3.4. The additive influence on boiler efficiency
6
7 Some of the results included in Tables 7 and 8 are presented in Figs. 8e11. They are focused on boiler efficiency as well as the I1 indicator
8 which determines the significant contribution of flue gas heat loss in boiler efficiency. The data proper for April and May are marked with
9 the A and M letters, respectively. Regarding April, it is observable that the boiler efficiency was the highest during the dosing of additive. On
10 the other hand, the value of Sf is the lowest. The boiler thermal output was high and stable and the additive was fed in a relatively long
11 period of time. In May, for the low thermal outputs the boiler efficiency was higher by 0.8 p.p. for the series with the additive which also
12 affected the beneficial variety of the Sf value. On the other hand, when the values of thermal output were higher, the boiler efficiency was
13 also higher in the IV series in comparison to the next series performed with the addition of additive. In the V-k series the value of flue gas
14 heat loss (9.25%) caused that the I1 indicator was significantly lower than in the IV series performed without the presence of additive.
15 Generally, it is prominent that when the additive was added, the flue gas heat loss was lower. However, this difference was small, i.e. 0.5
16 p.p. which translates into 5e6% its absolute value. The credibility of the obtained data is increased by the fact that the studies were carried
17 out in a relatively long period of time like for an industrial unit. This, in turn, had an impact on boiler load as well as other operational
18 parameters. Nevertheless, the regularity of combustion system work was observed each time the additive was fed into the fuel.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42 Fig. 9. The value of I1 indicator as a function of boiler thermal output.
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65 Fig. 10. The physical energy heat loss Sf as a function of boiler thermal output.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Fig. 11. The oxygen concentration in the flue gas as a function of boiler thermal output.
22
23
24 The decrease of Sf corresponded to the reduction of oxygen concentration in the flue gas. This regularity was visible in the whole range of
25 boiler loads. Regarding the pollutants, no evident influence on NOx, SO2 and CO emissions was found during the burning of the fuel additive.
26
27
3.5. Economic effects
28
29
In this research, the economic effects of the fuel additive application in the OR-50N boiler were also investigated. It was assumed that the
30
additive is fed at the current concentration, i.e. 1 L of solution per 1 Mg of fuel. In the economic analysis, the current prices of the additive
31
components in the wholesale trade in Poland were adopted. Thus, the price of isopropanol is 177 EUR/Mg, manganese (II) acetate tetra-
32
hydrate 884 EUR/Mg, acetic acid glacial 95.5 EUR/Mg, N,N-Dimethylethanolamine 141.5 EUR/Mg and demineralized water 32 EUR/Mg.
33
Taking into account the volume fraction of components (Table 2) and their total concentration (20%), as well as the density of components
34
and their prices per mass unit, the unit price of the additive was established at the level of 0.114 EUR/L. Assuming an additional 30% increase
35
of the price for expenses related to transport and preparation of the solution, the unit price finally increases to 0.15 EUR/L.
36
In 2017 the total fuel consumption by the boiler was 48,600 Mg. The contracted price of coal with transport was slightly lower than 80
37
EUR/Mg. For the economic analysis, both the contracted fuel price and the price of 100 EUR/Mg were used. Moreover, it was assumed that
38
the additive increases the efficiency by 0.5 and 1 p.p.
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65 Fig. 12. Reduction of the fuel costs.
1 Fig. 12 graphically presents the reduction of fuel costs during the additive application. It can be observed that the reduction of fuel costs is
2 50,000 EUR when the coal price is 100 EUR/Mg and the efficiency increase is 1%. These savings apply to the situation when the fuel con-
3 sumption is equal to the total fuel consumption in 2017. When the efficiency increase is 0.5 p.p. and the coal price is 80 EUR/Mg, these
4 savings are at the level of 16,000 EUR. The calculations show that even a little increase of efficiency gives a measurable economic effect. The
5 dosing installation requires relatively small one-time expenses, and its supervision is practically limited to periodic replacement of the tank
6 with the additive.
7
8 3.6. Directions of further research
9
10 The impact of the additive on the efficiency of an industrial boiler is revealed only in longer period of tests. Longer time of studies
11 averages the influence of parameters fluctuations and other disturbances accompanying the operation of boilers. The research was carried
12 out with a constant, maximum amount of the additive recommended by its manufacturer. However, it would be worth to check the in-
13 fluence of the increased additive to fuel ratio, e.g. for 72 h under stable boiler load conditions. Moreover, it is also worth to conduct the tests
14 with the installation feeding the additive with the air. The injecting installation should be then located after the air fans. This operation
15 would give the certainty that the additive is immediately fed to the combustion chamber. It is also possible, in the stable combustion
16 conditions, to gradually increase the additive flow and observe the parameters characterizing the boiler operation. In particular, it applies to
17 the temperatures within the combustion chamber, the temperatures of the flue gas, steam parameters, flue gas oxygen concentration and
18 the emissions of NOx and CO. Such observations will provide information about the level of additive concentration in relation to the fuel
19 mass which causes visible changes in boiler parameters and shows if there are repeatability and regularity of these changes.
20
21
4. Conclusions
22
23
The tests were carried out in an industrial moving grate boiler with a nominal steam output of 50 t/h (41.1 MW), working in a heating
24
system and to a limited extent cooperating with a steam turbine. The research took two months. In the first month (April), the boiler worked
25
steadily with nominal thermal output practically throughout the entire study period. In May, in turn, thermal output was gradually reduced
26
and was characterized by large fluctuations throughout the day. The quality and fuel changes, as well as the other boiler operating con-
27
ditions corresponded to the average operating conditions resulting from the CHP plant work. The purpose of the research was to check
28
whether a commercial additive can increase the efficiency of the boiler, reduce emissions and give measurable economic effects. The authors
29
assumed that only long-term studies can give a noticeable effect (if it occurs).
30
The presented results indicate that there is a relatively small, beneficial impact of the additive on OR-50N boiler operation. This effect was
31
mainly demonstrated in boiler efficiency increase, in the range of 0.5e1 p.p., as well as the oxygen concentration in the flue gas which
32
indicates that there was a decreased amount of combustion air. On the other hand, the studies did not show any evident influence on the
33
NOx, SO2 and CO emissions with the applied additive to fuel ratio.
34
This small efficiency increase, when converted into the amount of fuel saved, can give a measurable economic effect. With fuel con-
35
sumption at the level equal to the actual fuel consumption in 2017 and efficiency growth of 0.5 and 1 p.p., this effect can range from 16,000 to
36
50,000 EUR of annual savings, up to the fuel price.
37
38
Acknowledgements
39
40
Q5 The authors are grateful to ECO SA in Opole (Poland) for making possible to conduct the studies on the combustion facility.
41
42
43 References
44
[1] Consumption of fuels and energy carriers, Central Statistical Office of Poland, 2017.
45 [2] M. Tan czuk, W. Radziewicz, E. Olszewski, J. Skorek, Projected configuration of a coal-fired district heating source on the basis of comparative technical-economical
46 optimization analysis, in: International Conference on Energy, Environment and Material Systems (EEMS), E3S Web Conf, vol. 19, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1051/
47 e3sconf/20171901007.
[3] Directive (EU) 2015/2193 of the European parliament and of the council of 25 November 2015 on the limitation of emissions of certain pollutants into the air from
48 medium combustion plants.
49 Q6 [4] B. Miller, Fossil fuel emissions control technologies, Butterworth-Heinemann is an imprint of Elsevier, 2015.
50 [5] T. Kowalczyk, E. Łukoszek, E.W. J, Dokumentacja Techniczno-Ruchowa kotła parowego OR50-N w technologii scian szczelnych, Biuro Techniki Kotłowej Sp. z o.o.
Q7 Tarnowskie Go ry, marzec (2011).
51 [6] L. Tobiasen, R. Skytte, L.S. Pedersen, S.T. Pedersen, M.A. Lindberg, Deposit characteristic after injection of additives to a Danish straw-fired suspension boiler, Fuel Process.
52 Technol. 88 (11) (2007) 1108e1117, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2007.06.017. URL, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037838200700152X.
53 [7] K. Mroczek, S. Kalisz, M. Pronobis, J. SoÅtys, The effect of halloysite additive on operation of boilers firing agricultural biomass, Fuel Process. Technol. 92 (5) (2011)
845e855, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2010.11.020. URL, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378382010003838.
54 [8] L. Wang, J.E. Hustad, A ~eyvind Skreiberg, G. Skjevrak, M. Gronli, A critical review on additives to reduce ash related operation problems in biomass combustion appli-
55 cations, Energy Procedia. 20 (2012) 20e29, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2012.03.004, technoport 2012 - Sharing Possibilities and 2nd Renewable Energy Research
56 Conference (RERC2012). URL, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876610212007345.
[9] T. Bakala r, H. Pavlov sov
a, S. Khouri, I. Prista a, Influence of additives on decrease of temperature of slag flow from energy coal in wet bottom boiler, Metalurgija 56 (3e4)
57
(2017) 402e404.
58 [10] A. Hasna, Reduction of NOx gases using copper zeolite catalyst, in: 8th World Congress of Chemical Engineering: Incorporating the 59th Canadian Chemical Engineering
59 Conference and the 24th Interamerican Congress of Chemical Engineering, 2009.
60 [11] Y. Su, B.B. Gathitu, W.-Y. Chen, Efficient and cost effective reburning using common wastes as fuel and additives, Fuel 89 (9) (2010) 2569e2582, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.fuel.2009.12.009. URL, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016236109005754.
61 [12] S. Daood, G. Ord, T. Wilkinson, W. Nimmo, Fuel additive technology nox reduction, combustion efficiency and fly ash improvement for coal fired power stations, Fuel 134
62 (2014) 293e306, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2014.04.032. URL, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016236114003536.
63 [13] H. Kassman, L.-E. Amand, Simultaneous reduction of NO and KCl during injection of ammonium sulphate in a biomass fired BFB boiler, in: 12th International conference
Q8 on fluidized bed technology, 2017, pp. 1093e1101.
64 [14] W. Nimmo, A. Patsias, E. Hampartsoumian, B. Gibbs, P. Williams, Simultaneous reduction of NOx and SO2 emissions from coal combustion by calcium magnesium
65 acetate, Fuel 83 (2) (2004) 149e155, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-2361(03)00257-6. URL, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016236103002576.
1 [15] A. Mukherjee, B. Debnath, S.K. Ghosh, A review on technologies of removal of dioxins and furans from incinerator flue gas, Procedia. Environ. Sci. 35 (2016) 528e540,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.2016.07.037, waste Management for Resource Utilisation, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1878029616301268.
2
[16] Y. Zhaosheng, M. Xiaoqian, L. Ao, Thermogravimetric analysis of rice and wheat straw catalytic combustion in air- and oxygen-enriched atmospheres, Energy Convers.
3 Manag. 50 (3) (2009) 561e566, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2008.10.022. URL, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0196890408004330.
4 [17] L. Fangxian, L. Shizong, C. Youzhi, Thermal analysis study of the effect of coal-burning additives on the combustion of coals, J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 95 (2) (2009)
5 633e638, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-008-9124-x. URL, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-008-9124-x.
[18] J. Cheng, F. Zhou, X. Xuan, J. Liu, J. Zhou, K. Cen, Comparison of the catalytic effects of eight industrial wastes rich in Na, Fe, Ca and Al on anthracite coal combustion, Fuel
6 187 (2017) 398e402, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2016.09.083. URL, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016236116309462.
7 [19] Z. Wang, C. Hong, Y. Xing, Y. Li, L. Feng, M. Jia, Combustion behaviors and kinetics of sewage sludge blended with pulverized coal: with and without catalysts, Waste
8 Manag. 74 (2018) 288e296, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2018.01.002. URL, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0956053X18300023.
[20] T. Persson, J. Riedel, J. Berghel, U. Bexell, K.M. Win, Emissions and deposit properties from combustion of wood pellet with magnesium additives, J. Fuel Chem. Technol.
9 41 (5) (2013) 530e539, https://doi.org/10.1016/S1872-5813(13)60029-8. URL, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1872581313600298.
10 [21] W. Tic, J. Guzia-Tic, R. Junga, The impact of a catalytic additive for coal fuel on the environmental emissions (in polish), Przem. Chem. 94 (9) (2015) 1557e1559, https://
11 doi.org/10.15199/62.2015.9.26.
[22] R. Junga, P. Chudy, J. Pospolita, Uncertainty estimation of the efficiency of small-scale boilers, Measurement 97 (2017) 186e194, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measure-
12 ment.2016.11.011. URL, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0263224116306492.
13 [23] British coal corporation, The role of fuel additives to control environmental emissions and ash fouling, Tech. Rep., European Commission Technical Coal Research, 1994.
14 [24] M. Tan czyk, M. Masiukiewicz, S. Anweiler, R. Junga, Aspects and energy effects of waste heat recovery from district heating boiler slag, Energies 4 (11) (2018) 796.
https://doi.org/10.3390/en11040796.
15
[25] Material safety data sheet MERGI MNO (X8).
16 [26] M. Afzal, P. Butt, H. Ahmad, Kinetics of thermal decomposition of metal acetates, J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 37 (1991) 1015e1023.
17 [27] A.H. Reidies, Ullmanns encyclopedia of chemical industrial chemistry, Viley-VCH, Weinheim, 2000.
[28] R. Loto, C. Loto, Inhibition effect of N, N’-Dimethylaminoethanol on the corrosion of austenitic stainless steel type 304 in 3M H2SO4, Int. J. Electrochem. Sci. 7 (2012)
18
10763e10778.
19
20

J Joei 2018 12 001

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

J Joei 2018 12 001

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

JOEI542_proof ■ 27 December 2018 ■ 1/14

Journal of the Energy Institute xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of the Energy Institute

1 The assessment of the fuel additive impact on moving grate boiler

2 R. Junga et al. / Journal of the Energy Institute xxx (xxxx) xxx

R. Junga et al. / Journal of the Energy Institute xxx (xxxx) xxx 3

4 R. Junga et al. / Journal of the Energy Institute xxx (xxxx) xxx

R. Junga et al. / Journal of the Energy Institute xxx (xxxx) xxx 5

6 R. Junga et al. / Journal of the Energy Institute xxx (xxxx) xxx

3 Parametera Test procedure/Standard Unit Uncertainty U (k ¼ 2)

16 Parameter Method Range Unit Accuracy Resolution

R. Junga et al. / Journal of the Energy Institute xxx (xxxx) xxx 7

3 Parameter Symbol and unit Average value Standard deviation

8 R. Junga et al. / Journal of the Energy Institute xxx (xxxx) xxx

3 Parameter Measurement series

26 IV V-k VI VII-k VIII

R. Junga et al. / Journal of the Energy Institute xxx (xxxx) xxx 9

10 R. Junga et al. / Journal of the Energy Institute xxx (xxxx) xxx

R. Junga et al. / Journal of the Energy Institute xxx (xxxx) xxx 11

12 R. Junga et al. / Journal of the Energy Institute xxx (xxxx) xxx

R. Junga et al. / Journal of the Energy Institute xxx (xxxx) xxx 13

14 R. Junga et al. / Journal of the Energy Institute xxx (xxxx) xxx

You might also like