Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Adsorbed Natural Gas Technology

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Re: Adsorbed Natural Gas Technology

    That analogy with the soil doens't really work, as it is an irregular mixture of particle size and shapes. This allows it to pack into a tight volume, with little to know gap space. The engineered adsorbant pellets are all relatively uniform in size and shape, and designed to always provide gap space for flow of gas.

    Also, there is no other gasses in there taking the place of the methane. It is ALWAYS methane in contact with the pellets, all that is changing is the density (pressure) of the methane. The only reason fast fills wouldn't work is that the adsorbtion might take some time to take place. It isn't the working of the gas through the adsorbant matrix, its just the bonding process. So after pressing the tanks up to 3600#, and stopping, it will still be adsorbing, dropping pressure. You would then have to apply the 3600# perssure again to 'top off' the tank. This is why it would be ideally suited to slow-fill systems.
    1997 Factory Crown Victoria w/ extended tanks ~~ Clunkerized!
    2000 Bi-Fuel Expedition --> ~~ Sold ~~ <--

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Adsorbed Natural Gas Technology

      This technology, while not the same, is similar to Fuel Cell Technology. A while back, an ATK Engineer told me of R & D work the did on adsorbtion of Hydrogen. While they developed some tanks, they never did release any.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Adsorbed Natural Gas Technology

        Originally posted by CraziFuzzy View Post
        That analogy with the soil doens't really work, as it is an irregular mixture of particle size and shapes. This allows it to pack into a tight volume, with little to know gap space. The engineered adsorbant pellets are all relatively uniform in size and shape, and designed to always provide gap space for flow of gas.
        I agree with you there, good point. An engineered packing-exclusive particulate is a very different animal from, say, red clay.

        Originally posted by CraziFuzzy View Post
        Also, there is no other gasses in there taking the place of the methane. It is ALWAYS methane in contact with the pellets, all that is changing is the density (pressure) of the methane. The only reason fast fills wouldn't work is that the adsorbtion might take some time to take place. It isn't the working of the gas through the adsorbant matrix, its just the bonding process.
        Here I disagree with you. If there is sufficient surface energy in the methane cloud, the adsorption of the single particles can be hindered by the wave action of the dispersing body--kinda like trying to park a whole fleet of cars in numbered spaces right next to each other at 75mph, or like when the reaction at the beginning of a polymer enchainment gets going too fast--it can blow the reactor to smithereens. Also, I suspect that the kind of adsorption bond will also effect filling speed.

        Originally posted by CraziFuzzy View Post
        So after pressing the tanks up to 3600#, and stopping, it will still be adsorbing, dropping pressure. You would then have to apply the 3600# perssure again to 'top off' the tank. This is why it would be ideally suited to slow-fill systems.
        It would work great with slow-fill, I have no argument with you there. However, you are assuming that a big push that is allowed to seep down from a steady-state maximum is the most efficient dynamic model, and that dozen crullers from Daylight Doughnuts (we can only get Krispy Kreme here--) still says that the best way to do it is not that one. Hence my original fumblings around the diffusion filler. As we only need to run at a little over 500psi to deliver a 500 psi fill, perhaps less energy (pressure) would allow adsorption parking to happen faster by way of stepped ladng (pulsing the gas in at intervals so that transient peaks run to, at a SWAG, 750 psi, with transient minima that step up from 50 psi up to 500 psi when the medium is filled) Also, if you have to press to 3.6kpsi to get a final pressure of 500 psi, haven't you defeated the purpose of a 500 psi tank which is to lower cost, shape it like a standard gasoline tank to facilitate retrofits and ease future automotive design considerations?

        Andy-Paul
        Last edited by Andy-Paul; 07-16-2008, 08:26 PM. Reason: I had to wash the kid midway through the diatribe

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Adsorbed Natural Gas Technology

          Well, I've seen two schools of thought. One is the lower-pressure, irregular shaped to fit in the nooks and cranies. This COULD get decent range, depending on the vehicle. I have also seen discussed the addition of an adsorbant system to high-pressure cylinders, drastically improving the range. Pros and cons to both of course, but I like the idea of the high pressure cylinders, as it would require less fueling station changes. Personally i like the higher integrity of the cylinder shape, even if used at a lower pressure.

          It all really comes down to the speed at which the adsorbtion occurs, which i have no real numbers on.

          I think a part of the problem is that all CNG vehicles are gasoline vehicles with CNG cyulinders stuck in. If a car was actually designed around a CNG storage system, you could have VERY good range, as the cylinder size could be maximized.
          1997 Factory Crown Victoria w/ extended tanks ~~ Clunkerized!
          2000 Bi-Fuel Expedition --> ~~ Sold ~~ <--

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Adsorbed Natural Gas Technology

            I think that the gasoline-shaped tank will be the way to go--at least on this next generation of passenger cars-- because evolutionary technological transformation doesn't scare the sheep around us nearly as much. Also, a low-pressure side line on a three-based system should be relatively easy, shouldn't it--even given NFPA, DOT, EPA, and any other parts of the alphabet soup?

            One of my personal peeves is that the US has allowed itself to keep a one-fuel mindset. Spreading our bets a little wider might help us avoid the economic shocks that come up every time something looks de-stabilizing in the oil regions.

            Based on those premises, it makes more sense to fit the tank into the current artifacture paradigm, even though what we are proposing is quite a change from business as usual. I would just like to see us diversify our fuel diet like we have done with our investment portfolios.



            Andy-Paul
            Last edited by Andy-Paul; 07-17-2008, 06:26 AM. Reason: extra data

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Adsorbed Natural Gas Technology

              are there other things beside carbon that could be used to adsorption. Like zeolite adsorbs water in some solar refrigeration systems using water as the refrigerant.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Adsorbed Natural Gas Technology

                Believe it or not, Corn Cobs, check it out.
                http://www.greencar.com/features/ang/

                I can't wait for a ANG Hybrid.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Adsorbed Natural Gas Technology

                  At what PSI ? That has to enter into the equation. Otherwise a 8 gge tank would have to be 992 cubic ft.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Adsorbed Natural Gas Technology

                    Originally posted by ed.oliver View Post
                    At what PSI ? That has to enter into the equation. Otherwise a 8 gge tank would have to be 992 cubic ft.
                    The trick with adsorbed storage systems is that the gas is not stored as an ideal gas. This allows the same volume to hold more at a lower pressure. The methane is not 'pressed' into the tank as a conventional CNG tank, but instead it gets bonded to the adsorbant (in this case, a carbon matrix) when under a pressure, and as pressure is reduced, it detaches.
                    1997 Factory Crown Victoria w/ extended tanks ~~ Clunkerized!
                    2000 Bi-Fuel Expedition --> ~~ Sold ~~ <--

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Adsorbed Natural Gas Technology

                      Originally posted by ed.oliver View Post
                      Believe it or not, Corn Cobs, check it out.
                      http://www.greencar.com/features/ang/

                      I can't wait for a ANG Hybrid.
                      corn cobs are turn into activated charcoal which is carbon.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Adsorbed Natural Gas Technology

                        Originally posted by Idarusskie View Post
                        corn cobs are turn into activated charcoal which is carbon.
                        Do you think other types of activated charcoal will work as well like coconut shell which is abundant in tropical countries. I would say one of the best activated charcoal in my belief.

                        Energtek, who owns this technology is now currently implementing this for commercial operation on two wheels and three wheeler vehicles in the Philippines and rest of Asia.

                        I thought this is very encouraging development since these types of transport shares so much in polluting our environment and with the spiralling cost of gasoline this will immensely help third world countries who relies so much with this type of tranport.


                        http://www.energtek.com/news/recent?nid=218
                        Last edited by brownrat; 07-24-2008, 03:00 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Adsorbed Natural Gas Technology

                          Our family in the Philippines owns couple of units similar to the picture shown below. With the promise of this new technology ( Adsorbed Natural Gas ) We are planning to convert them. Hope to seek any opinion on what are the pros and cons of this new form of technology, thanks in advance.


                          Last edited by brownrat; 07-29-2008, 02:18 AM. Reason: spelling

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Adsorbed Natural Gas Technology

                            Welcome Brown Rat!

                            Right now, I think the other guys on this forum and I would probably agree that two questions for us here in the US are fueling rate, and whether or not the carbon in the tank produces any downstream hazards to the rest of the system--clogging filters, etc. The carbon matrix in the tank is also an issue with the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) because it *could* produce the kind of pollution that the EPA is trying to remove from diesel engine combustion products at this time.

                            Other than that, I envy the fact that your market gets to try it out before we do here. I would love to test it on a motor scooter, or even an automobile.

                            Make sure you read old threads, these guys know a lot.

                            Andy-Paul

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Adsorbed Natural Gas Technology

                              In the diagrams of the adsorbed tank tests that Honda ran, there is a device located just after the tank. I will try and find the diagrams and post them here. I don't recall it being a carbon trap, but that may have actually been it's specific purpose.

                              Camryman, if you still have that report you sent me post the second half of the info. I already posted the text portion of it. If not, I think I have it on my other computer.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Adsorbed Natural Gas Technology

                                Originally posted by Andy-Paul View Post
                                Welcome Brown Rat!

                                Right now, I think the other guys on this forum and I would probably agree that two questions for us here in the US are fueling rate, and whether or not the carbon in the tank produces any downstream hazards to the rest of the system--clogging filters, etc. The carbon matrix in the tank is also an issue with the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) because it *could* produce the kind of pollution that the EPA is trying to remove from diesel engine combustion products at this time.

                                Other than that, I envy the fact that your market gets to try it out before we do here. I would love to test it on a motor scooter, or even an automobile.

                                Make sure you read old threads, these guys know a lot.

                                Andy-Paul
                                First, thanks for welcoming over here.

                                I've been following-up your threads since I am very much interested with this start-up venture. Just wondering why an american firm decided to test this in our country, maybe they can't. wait any longer of your strict requirements. Seems a smart move since our three wheelers are being considered for a ban due to pollution will have a lease of life with this technology and you cannot just phased out almost 3 million trike driver jobless by which includes my family. Much more with those motorcycle company who find market with their old but longlife models.

                                The've been testing this for almost a year now and most of the question being raised here like how a two-stoke engine run on naturak gas without 2t-Oil, as well as the other hazard it may create and how much is the cost of convertion kits should be answered. I've been trying to contact the local company there to hopefully addresed this matter. Good to read in the news that they will soon start on their commercial phase for us to see it for real. So hopefully we could get more info in relation with their prototype implementation of this technology.

                                By overall I am very enthusiastic with this development since this could address some Petroleum economic issues.

                                I would like to ask also if Natural Gas and Methane are in simialar properties that could subtitute Natural Gas. Just being currious since landfills even in our locality is being extracted now.
                                Last edited by brownrat; 07-26-2008, 12:33 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X