Evaluation of the uncertainty associated to tar sampling with solid phase adsorption cartridges

Ortiz, I.; Pérez, Rosa; Sánchez, José María

doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2013.07.009

Cited by 8 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the study of Ortiz et al, the dominant uncertainty contributors are derived from the extraction stage, followed by chromatographic analysis and volumetric measurements. Such a discrepancy from findings of the present study is due to a different chromatographic quantitation method and due to the fact that Ortiz et al did not evaluate uncertainty associated with the sampling from real gasification experiments. The MSD response diversity shown in Figure is also supported by the work of Eom et al They determined that the response factors for compounds in the pyrolytic bio-oils varied from 0.59 to 5.83.…”

Section: Discussion: Demonstration Of Dominant Contributorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The overall expanded uncertainty varied from 11% to 22%, for the phenanthrene and phenol model compounds, respectively. The novelty of the present study, when compared to the work of Ortiz et al, is uncertainty evaluation of SPA–GC measurement system during real gasification experiment measuring total GC detectable tar by employing a single calibration curve.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Measurement uncertainty is a quantitative parameter that accounts for random and systematic variations in measurements systems. 25 Ortiz et al 26 established an early benchmark in estimating measurement uncertainty for the SPA−GC measurement system, identifying four sources of uncertainty, namely, chromatography, liquid sample volume, gas sample volume, and efficiency of the extraction recovery. Five model compounds in the range from benzene to phenanthrene were chosen as representative tar compounds for the uncertainty estimation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A GC-MSD was calibrated by means of external quantitation for each tar compound. Ortiz et al 26 found that the major contribution to the overall uncertainty originated from the extraction stage of the SPA−GC measurement system. The overall expanded uncertainty varied from 11% to 22%, for the phenanthrene and phenol model compounds, respectively.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Detailed Measurement Uncertainty Analysis of Solid-Phase Adsorption—Total Gas Chromatography (GC)-Detectable Tar from Biomass Gasification

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Thermochemical gasification offers an attractive solution for the conversion of low-grade biomass and waste. However, practical experiences of the gasification processes reveal that the formation of tar is troublesome to continuous operation. Therefore, tar measurement protocols and tar reduction systems are priorities in the development of effective biomass gasification. Results of tar measurements often raise questions regarding their reliability and accuracy, because of calibration, sampling, and discrimination issues. The present work evaluates the solid phase adsorption (SPA)−gas chromatography (GC) measurement system for tar in product gas by comparing the mass spectroscopy detector (MSD) and flame ionization detector (FID) and their associated measurement uncertainty. The measurand is defined as the total GC detectable tar in a normal cubic meter of dry product gas when employing the common quantitation method, "quantitation as naphthalene". The GC-FID measurements were significantly higher than the GC-MSD measurements. Their overall uncertainties also vary by a significant margin. The measurement uncertainty analysis shows that this difference is taken into account by the uncertainty induced by the particulars of the GC-MSD and GC-FID measurement systems, where the relative expanded uncertainty is shown to be 109.4% and 35.0%, respectively. While a quantitative method based on a single calibration curve offers significant advantages, in terms of speed and simple quantitation of total GC detectable tar, such an approach introduces greater uncertainty within the reported results.

show abstract

Section: Discussion: Demonstration Of Dominant Contributorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Detailed Measurement Uncertainty Analysis of Solid-Phase Adsorption—Total Gas Chromatography (GC)-Detectable Tar from Biomass Gasification

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, this method needs to take a lot of gas sample, requiring hours for one sampling. Therefore alternative methods have been developed, but none of them are yet standard, like SPA/SPE methods [15] or online methods such as UV spectrometry [16], optical methods [17], laser-induced fluorescence [18] among others. This makes quite difficult to compare the different removal methods, since each method has a different efficiency with respect to different substances, and report tar yield using a different classification.…”

Section: The Complexity Of Tar Minimisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of plasma in syngas tar cracking

Rueda

Helsen

2019

Biomass Conv. Bioref.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gasification of biomass and municipal solid waste is a technology that has been proposed as a dualpurpose solution for mitigating environmental impacts as well as for producing syngas, a very useful intermediary product for energy valorization and organic synthesis. However the presence of pollutants, notably tar, hamper this raw syngas (producer syngas) to be used in high-efficient energy applications such as jet engines, fuel cells or in Fischer-Tropsch synthesis, limiting its economic value. For reducing tar a lot of scientific and technical effort has been devoted. In this paper, the state-of-the-art of plasma tar removal from syngas is done, focusing on the use of plasma in tandem with existing technologies, underlining its advantages and the remaining challenges. The most promising ways to get a syngas with very low tar levels using plasma seem to be: (i) tandem tar cleaning techniques (e.g. secondary plasma enhanced catalytic unit) and (ii) secondary thermal plasma cracking units. Keywords tar cracking • plasma • syngas cleaning 1 IntroductionThe conversion of carbon-rich raw materials such as biomass and Municipal Solid Waste(MSW) into syngas has been proposed as the perfect solution for decreasing the amount of waste and byproducts discarded while obtaining a syngas that can be used for organic

show abstract

Experimental comparison of solid phase adsorption (SPA), activated carbon test tubes and tar protocol (DIN CEN/TS 15439) for tar analysis of biomass derived syngas

Neubert

Reil²,

Wolff

et al. 2017

Biomass and Bioenergy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluation of the uncertainty associated to tar sampling with solid phase adsorption cartridges

Cited by 8 publications

References 14 publications

Detailed Measurement Uncertainty Analysis of Solid-Phase Adsorption—Total Gas Chromatography (GC)-Detectable Tar from Biomass Gasification

Detailed Measurement Uncertainty Analysis of Solid-Phase Adsorption—Total Gas Chromatography (GC)-Detectable Tar from Biomass Gasification

The role of plasma in syngas tar cracking

Experimental comparison of solid phase adsorption (SPA), activated carbon test tubes and tar protocol (DIN CEN/TS 15439) for tar analysis of biomass derived syngas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About