Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Knightly, W. F.

Publications and source records attributed to Knightly, W. F..

8 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1980

Cogeneration Technology Alternatives Study (CTAS). Volume 2: Analytical approach

The use of various advanced energy conversion systems were compared with each other and with current technology systems for their savings in fuel energy, costs, and emissions in individual plants and on a national level. The ground rules established by NASA and assumptions made by the General Electric Company in performing this cogeneration technology alternatives study are presented. The analytical methodology employed is described in detail and is illustrated with numerical examples together with a description of the computer program used in calculating over 7000 energy conversion system-industrial process applications. For Vol. 1, see 80N24797.

Gerlaugh, H. E.↗
NASA NTRS1980

Cogeneration Technology Alternatives Study (CTAS). Volume 6: Computer data. Part 1: Coal-fired nocogeneration process boiler, section A

About fifty industrial processes from the largest energy consuming sectors were used as a basis for matching a similar number of energy conversion systems that are considered as candidate which can be made available by the 1985 to 2000 time period. The sectors considered included food, textiles, lumber, paper, chemicals, petroleum, glass, and primary metals. The energy conversion systems included steam and gas turbines, diesels, thermionics, stirling, closed cycle and steam injected gas turbines, and fuel cells. Fuels considered were coal, both coal and petroleum based residual and distillate liquid fuels, and low Btu gas obtained through the on site gasification of coal. Computer generated reports of the fuels consumption and savings, capital costs, economics and emissions of the cogeneration energy conversion systems (ECS's) heat and power matched to the individual industrial processes are presented. National fuel and emissions savings are also reported for each ECS assuming it alone is implemented. Two nocogeneration base cases are included: coal fired and residual fired process boilers.

Knightly, W. F.↗
NASA NTRS1980

Cogeneration Technology Alternatives Study (CTAS). Volume 6: Computer data. Part 1: Coal-fired nocogeneration process boiler, section B

About fifty industrial processes from the largest energy consuming sectors were used as a basis for matching a similar number of energy conversion systems that are considered as candidate which can be made available by the 1985 to 2000 time period. The sectors considered included food, textiles, lumber, paper, chemicals, petroleum, glass, and primary metals. The energy conversion systems included steam and gas turbines, diesels, thermionics, stirling, closed cycle and steam injected gas turbines, and fuel cells. Fuels considered were coal, both coal and petroleum based residual and distillate liquid fuels, and low Btu gas obtained through the on site gasification of coal. Computer generated reports of the fuel consumption and savings, capital costs, economics and emissions of the cogeneration energy conversion systems (ECS's) heat and power matched to the individual industrial processes are presented. National fuel and emissions savings are also reported for each ECS assuming it alone is implemented. Two nocogeneration base cases are included: coal fired and residual fired process boilers.

Knightly, W. F.↗
NASA NTRS1980

Cogeneration Technology Alternatives Study (CTAS). Volume 6: Computer data. Part 2: Residual-fired nocogeneration process boiler

About fifty industrial processes from the largest energy consuming sectors were used as a basis for matching a similar number of energy conversion systems that are considered as candidate which can be made available by the 1985 to 2000 time period. The sectors considered included food, textiles, lumber, paper, chemicals, petroleum, glass, and primary metals. The energy conversion systems included steam and gas turbines, diesels, thermionics, stirling, closed cycle and steam injected gas turbines, and fuel cells. Fuels considered were coal, both coal and petroleum based residual and distillate liquid fuels, and low Btu gas obtained through the on site gasification of coal. Computer generated reports of the fuel consumption and savings, capital costs, economics and emissions of the cogeneration energy conversion systems (ECS's) heat and power matched to the individual industrial processes are presented. National fuel and emissions savings are also reported for each ECS assuming it alone is implemented. Two nocogeneration base cases are included: coal fired and residual fired process boilers.

Knightly, W. F.↗
NASA NTRS1980

Cogeneration Technology Alternatives Study (CTAS). Volume 6: Computer data. Part 1: Coal-fired nocogeneration process boiler, section A

Various advanced energy conversion systems (ECS) are compared with each other and with current technology systems for their savings in fuel energy, costs, and emissions in individual plants and on a national level. About fifty industrial processes from the largest energy consuming sectors were used as a basis for matching a similar number of energy conversion systems that are considered as candidates which can be made available by the 1985 to 2000 time period. The sectors considered included food, textiles, lumber, paper, chemicals, petroleum, glass, and primary metals. The energy conversion systems included steam and gas turbines, diesels, thermionics, stirling, closed cycle and steam injected gas turbines, and fuel cells. Fuels considered were coal, both coal and petroleum based residual and distillate liquid fuels, and low Btu gas obtained through the on-site gasification of coal. Computer generated reports of the fuel consumption and savings, capital costs, economics and emissions of the cogeneration energy conversion systems (ECS's) heat and power matched to the individual industrial processes are presented for coal fired process boilers. National fuel and emissions savings are also reported for each ECS assuming it alone is implemented.

Knightly, W. F.↗
NASA NTRS1980

Cogeneration Technology Alternatives Study (CTAS). Volume 5: Cogeneration systems results

The use of various advanced energy conversion systems is examined and compared with each other and with current technology systems for savings in fuel energy, costs, and emissions in individual plants and on a national level. About fifty industrial processes from the largest energy consuming sectors were used as a basis for matching a similar number of energy conversion systems that are considered as candidate which can be made available by the 1985 to 2000 time period. The sectors considered included food, textiles, lumber, paper, chemicals, petroleum, glass, and primary metals. The energy conversion systems included steam and gas turbines, diesels, thermionics, stirling, closed cycle and steam injected gas turbines, and fuel cells. Fuels considered were coal, both coal and petroleum based residual and distillate liquid fuels, and low Btu gas obtained through the on site gasification of coal. The methodology and results of matching the cogeneration energy conversion systems to approximately 50 industrial processes are described. Results include fuel energy saved, levelized annual energy cost saved, return on investment, and operational factors relative to the noncogeneration base cases.

Gerlaugh, H. E.↗
NASA NTRS1980

Cogeneration Technology Alternatives Study (CTAS). Volume 1: Summary report

Large savings can be made in industry by cogenerating electric power and process heat in single energy conversion systems rather than separately in utility plants and in process boilers. About fifty industrial processes from the largest energy consuming sectors were used as a basis for matching a similar number of energy conversion systems that are considered as candidates which can be made available by the 1985 to 2000 time period. The sectors considered included food, textiles, lumber, paper, chemicals, petroleum, glass, and primary metals. The energy conversion systems included steam and gas turbines, diesels, thermionics, stirling, closed-cycle and steam injected gas turbines, and fuel cells. Fuels considered were coal, both coal and petroleum-based residual and distillate liquid fuels, and low Btu gas obtained through the on-site gasification of coal. An attempt was made to use consistent assumptions and a consistent set of ground rules for determining performance and cost in individual plants and on a national level. It was found that: (1) atmospheric and pressurized fluidized bed steam turbine systems were the most attractive of the direct coal-fired systems; and (2) open-cycle gas turbines with heat recovery steam generators and combined-cycles with NO(x) emission reduction and moderately increased firing temperatures were the most attractive of the coal-derived liquid-fired systems.

Gerlaugh, H. E.↗