You are on page 1of 10

Presented at the Joint Power Generation Conference and Exposition

Burlingame, California
July 25-28, 1999.

ASME PTC47.4 - IGCC PERFORMANCE TESTING ISSUES FOR THE POWER BLOCK

Ashok K. Anand Jeff Parmar


General Electric Power Systems National Power PLC
Schenectady, NY 12345 Swindon Wiltshire SN5 6PB, UK

ABSTRACT and/or diluent streams (nitrogen, steam) returned to


Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) which improve thermal efficiency, net power output and capital
utilizes solid and unconventional liquid fuels has now reached cost (Anand, et al., 1995).
commercialization stage as evidenced by their world wide ASME Performance Test Code 47 (PTC 47) and
construction and new orders. The complex nature of the codes for its associated subsets are being written to
integration between the power generating and the fuel gas provide owners/users of IGCC power plants guidance and
generating gasification units of an IGCC has created a need to procedures in conducting the performance test and
provide guidance and procedures on how to conduct the evaluate the deviation of its various units from specified
performance test for the users and owners of these power guarantees. PTC47 will address the performance test code
plants. ASME Performance Test Code 47 (PTC47) and the needs of an overall IGCC as a single block; thus ignoring
associated subsets (PTC47.1, PTC47.2, PTC47.3 and the performance related interactions between its various
PTC47.4) are being written to define the significant units. Subsets PTC47.1, PTC47.2, PTC47.3 and PTC47.4
performance factors and provide recommendations how these will cover the performance test codes individually for the
factors should be applied on test measurements to evaluate Cryogenic Air Separation Unit (if required), Gasification
the deviation from the IGCC equipment guarantees. This Unit, Fuel Gas Cleaning Unit and the IGCC Power Block
paper reports the progress and issues pertaining to the PTC unit respectively. Members of PTC47 committee have
47.4 for the IGCC Power Block and how it differs from ASME taken the challenge to develop the codes and review the
PTC 46 test code. The paper also discusses the creation of a progress in various public forums and publications (for
thermodynamic Power Block model of Wabash River example Horazak et al., 1998, Mirolli & Doering, 1998,
Repowering IGCC plant using a proprietary software. Smith, 1998).
Correction curves derived from the model, which define the This paper describes the progress and issues in
performance at design and off design from site conditions are developing PTC 47.4, the performance test codes related to
also presented. the IGCC Power Block.

INTRODUCTION POWER BLOCK DESCRIPTION


IGCC power plants have emerged as a viable The IGCC Power Block is defined to cover the
economic option for solid, waste and unconventional liquid performance test codes for the same equipment as the
fuels (for example, heavy residual oil) due to their superior conventional Combined Cycle Power Plant in the PTC 46,
thermal efficiency and environmental performance. Unlike consisting of gas turbine combined cycle, the associated
conventional gas turbine combined cycle power plants balance of plant and heat sink equipment, the electrical
fueled with natural gas or distillate oil, in most IGCC generating and station transformer equipment. However,
designs, the power block is also thermally integrated to the the IGCC Power Block performance and test procedures
gasification unit, which provides it with medium or low Btu differ considerably due to the presence of many additional
synthesis fuel gas. In many instances, air is extracted from thermal and energy transfer streams. An example of an
the gas turbine to support oxidant needs of gasification IGCC Power Block is shown in Figure 1. The gas turbine

1
Figure 1. Typical IGCC Power Block

is fired with syngas from a gasification unit, which may be correction factors is shown for Public Service of Indiana
supplemented by a secondary fuel (such as natural gas), Wabash IGCC Power Block.
which is also used in the fuel burner of the Heat Recovery Issues, which require further consideration, are:
Steam Generator (HRSG). Steam produced in HRSG 1) Lack of a complete commercially available
drives a Steam Turbine Generator Unit and furnishes performance simulation computer program for an IGCC
export steam for cogeneration application. The additional Power Block which could be used by the owner to
input fluid streams are the gasification steam/water to validate test results.
HRSG, diluent (nitrogen from the air separation unit)
injection to the gas turbine. The output streams are boiler 2) Validity of the additive and multiplicative nature of
feed water, gasifier steam, extraction air and auxiliary various test correction factors.
power (energy stream) to the gasification and air separation
units. TEST BOUNDARY, FUNDAMENTAL EQUATIONS
& MEASUREMENTS:
CODE DEVELOPMENT STATUS The Test Boundary is an imaginary line that
A framework document has been developed for surrounds the specific IGCC Power Block equipment to be
PTC 47.4, the performance test codes for an IGCC Power tested. It is used to identify the energy streams, which must
Block, describing the objectives, test boundary, test be measured to calculate corrected results Some or all of
procedures, fundamental equations and the test correction the typical streams required for common power block for
factors. The input and output fluid and energy streams the IGCC Power Block are shown in Figure 2. Solid lines
required for performance test measurements have been indicate some or all of mass flow rate, thermodynamic
defined. Various performance test correction factors have conditions, and chemical analysis of streams crossing the
been identified and the procedure for their application test boundary, which have to be determined to calculate the
developed. An example test case on the use of test results of the performance test. The properties of streams
indicated by dashed lines may be required for an energy
and mass balance. Physical properties of all input and

2
output energy streams, required for test calculations, must Make up water
be determined with reference to the point at which they Cooling water/air
cross the Test Boundary. Energy streams within the Test The two major output streams Net Power

Input Steam #2 HRSG Exhaust


Secondary Fuel
Net
Power

PTC 47.3 Fuel Gas


Fuel Gas Export
Input Steam #1
Cleaning Steam
Output Water#1
Output Water #2
PTC 47.2 Output Steam #1 Cooling
Gasification Input Water #1 Water/Air
Block PTC 47.4
(PTC 46)
Power
Block

Aux. Power PTC 47.4


Output Air Test Boundary
PTC 47.1 Output Water #3
Air Separation Output Steam #2 Required for
Unit Input Water #2 test calculation
Nitrogen
Not required for
Ambient Air test calculation

Makeup
Cooling
Water
Water/Air

Figure 2 IGCC Power Block Test Boundary


Boundary need not be determined unless they verify base and Export Steam are calculated to evaluate the
operating conditions or they relate functionally to conditions performance of an IGCC Power Block. The first three input
outside the boundary. streams are characterized as energy inputs into the IGCC
The input and output streams across the test Power Block test boundary, while the rest of five input
boundaries are listed below. streams and four minor output steams are accounted as
Input Streams Output Streams correction factors.
Fuel Gas Net Power When point-by-point traverses are required, the
test run should be long enough to complete two full
Secondary Fuel Export Steam traverses. Typical stabilization times for an IGCC and the
Input steam (multiple) Output steam (multiple) recommended test run duration for the Power Block are
Input water (multiple) Output water (multiple) given in Table 1.
Input Nitrogen Output Air
Ambient air Auxiliary Power

3
Energy Inputs. Multiple energy inputs are also a
characteristic feature of an IGCC Power Block. The
fundamental performance equations for major Energy inputs
includes Fuel Gas, Input steam and secondary fuel to the
Power Block are:
TABLE 1. TYPICAL STABILIZATION TIMES AND Corrected Fuel Gas Input Qpf,c
RECOMMENDED TEST RUN DURATIONS
Qpf,c = [(Qpf + Σ Φi) Π βj)], i=1,n; j=1,m (4)
where Qpf is the measured total energy contained in the Fuel
TYPE OF GASIFIER STABILIZATION TEST RUN Gas flows entering the Power Block during the test, as
determined in (11). Φi is the additive correction factors and βj
Entrained Flow 24 hours 4 hours is the multiplicative correction factors for the Fuel Gas input.
Corrected Input steam Qest,c
Fluidized Bed 8 hours 4 hours Qest,c = [(Qest + Σ Θi) Π θj)], i=1,n; j=1,m (5)
where Qest is the measured total energy of the Input steam
Moving Bed 24 hours 4 hours flows from individual steam flows into the Power Block test
boundary during the test, as calculated in (12). Θi is the
additive correction factors and θj is the multiplicative correction
Test run duration should also consider transit times of factors for the Input steam flows.
samples. Procedures relating to test uncertainty are based on Secondary Fuel Input
concepts and methods described in PTC 19.1, “Measurement Qsf,c = [(Qsf + Σ Ψi) Π νj)], i=1,n; j=1,m (6)
Uncertainty.” PTC 19.1 specifies procedures for evaluating where Qsf is the measured total energy containing in the
measurement uncertainties from both random and fixed errors, secondary fuel injected into the HRSG during the test, as
and the effects of these errors on the uncertainty of a test determined in (13). Ψi is the additive correction factors and νj is
result. the multiplicative correction factors for the secondary fuel flow.
Total Energy Input to an IGCC Power Block is sum of the
Fundamental Equations results from Eqs. (4) to (6).
Outputs. Because an IGCC Power Block comprises multiple Qin,c = Qpf,c + Qest,c + Qsf,c (7)
generating processes: electric power generation and steam Heat Rate. Heat Rate has been traditionally used to
export, the fundamental performance equations for outputs characterize effectiveness of energy conversion in a power
include: Net Power and Export Steam as expressed in generation system, as defined in PTC46. However, because
Equations (1) and (2) respectively. Each output is calculated IGCC Power Block is characterized by multiple energy input
based on its measured value with two types of corrections and multiple outputs, heat rate may not always be indicative of
counted by additive correction factors and multiplicative IGCC Power Block performance. Heat rate is defined as IGCC
correction factors. Power Block performance.
Corrected Net Power Pc HR = Qin,c / Pc ( 8)
Pc = [(Pm + Σ ∆i) Π αj)], i=1,n; j=1,m (1) Measured Parameters in the Fundamental Equations
where Pm is the measured total net power flows from individual Measured Net Power for IGCC Power Block. Measured Net
generators out the IGCC Power Block test boundary during the Power in equation (1) for an IGCC Power Block with multiple
test as determined in (9). ∆i is the additive correction factors for prime generators is express as:
power generation, and αj is the multiplicative correction factors Pm = [Pm,n] generator - Paux. - Ptranf.loss - Pline loss (9)
for power generation. where n is an individual generator.
Corrected Export Steam Qst,c The net power input is equal to the power generation
Qst,c = (Qst + Σ Ωi) Π τj)], i=1,n; j=1,m (2) less the total auxiliary power consumption, transformer loss
where Qst is the measured total energy of individual exports and line loss within the test boundary.
steam flows out the IGCC Power Block test boundary during Measured Export Steam. Net thermal heat output containing
the test as determined based on (10). Ωi is the additive in export steam streams from the Power Block is expressed as:
correction factors for the export steam flows, and τj is the Qst = Σ[(Mst,n) (hst,n)] ex (10)
multiplicative correction factors for the export steam flows. where n is an individual steam stream.
Total Net Output from an IGCC Power Block is sum of the Steam flow rate Mst is directly measured and steam
results from the two equations. enthalpy hst is calculated based on measured steam pressure
Qout,c = Pc + Qst,c ( 3) and temperature. Qst is an input for the equation (2).

4
Measured Fuel Gas Input. Thermal heat input from Fuel Gas
Input to the Power Block is expressed as: TABLE 3. SUMMARY OF ADDITIVE CORRECTION
Qpf = Σ[(HVpf,n)(Mpf,n)] (11) FACTORS
where n is an individual fuel input to the Power Block.
Measured Input steam. Thermal heat input from Input steam No. Requiring Correction and comments
to the Power Block is expressed as:
1 Total energy of thermal efflux.
Qest = Σ[(Mst,n)(hst,n)]in (12)
where n is an individual steam input. 2 Generator(s) power factor(s).
Secondary Fuel Input. Thermal heat input from Secondary 3 Steam generator blow down different than
fuel(s) is expressed as: design.
Qsf = ¦²[(HVsf,n)(Msf,n)] power (13)
where n is an individual secondary fuel input. 4 Heat energy from input water / make up
TEST CORRECTION FACTORS: water streams.
Regardless of the test goals or operating mode, the results 5 Heat energy from input nitrogen stream.
of a Code test will be Corrected Net Power and Corrected Heat
6 Ambient air conditions at cooling tower and
Rate. The calculation of results described by this Code
turbine inlet.
requires adjusting the test determined values of thermal input
(Q) and power (P) by the application of additive and 7 Circulating water temperature different
multiplicative correction factors. These correction factors than design for once-through condenser
correct for allowable variations in controllable operating cooling system or air-cooled condenser in
parameters and uncontrollable external effects, such as the test boundary.
ambient temperature.
Additive and Multiplicative correction factors applicable to 8 Condenser pressure for the heat rejection
the measured parameters in Equations (1) to (2), and (4) to (6) system outside the test boundary.
are expressed in Table 2: 9 Measured power different than
predetermined or required power.
TABLE 2. TEST CORRECTION FACTORS FOR IGCC
POWER BLOCK 10 Export Steam flow rate correction if the
steam flow rate and parameters is
connected to power generation process.
PARAMETERS Additive Multiplicative
Correction Correction 11 Auxiliary power different than design or
Factors Factors predetermined loads.
NET POWER ∆ α 12 Air Output flows rate different than design
EXPOERT STEAM Ω τ or predetermined rates.

FUEL GAS INPUT Φ β 13 Heat energy from output water streams.


INPUT STEAM Θ θ The Additive correction factors, which are not
SECONDARY FUEL Ψ ν applicable to the measured results for the specific type of plant
INPUT being tested, or to the test objectives, are simply set equal to
zero.
Additive Correction Factors. There are 13 Additive Multiplication Correction Factors
correction factors used in the 7 fundamental performance There are 13 Multiplicative correction factors used in
equations, as summarized in Table 3. the 7 fundamental performance equations for power block of
the IGCC Power Block, as summarized in Table 4.

5
EXAMPLE CASE
It was difficult to obtain any detailed performance
related data for any of the IGCC power plants due to
proprietary and confidential issues, and as a result, the
authors had to resort to modeling the Power Block using
TABLE 4. SUMMARY OF MULTIPLICATIVE CORRECTION
some data available in the public domain. A proprietary
FACTORS TM
flexible power plant simulation program called GateCycle
No. Requiring Correction and comments (Enter Software, Inc. et, al., 1998) was utilized to model the
1 Ambient temperature PSI Wabash River IGCC Power Plant. The plant which
came in commercial operation consists of oxygen blown,
2 Ambient pressure slurry feed, two stage entrained flow gasifier, heat recovery,
dry filtration and a conventional amine based sulfur removal
3 Ambient humidity
to provide clean synthetic gas to the GE 7FA gas turbine.
4 Fuel Gas temperature TM model
The GateCycle of the Wabash Power Block
5 Fuel Gas Heating Value and property was created using the limited data available to the PTC47
Committee. Some of the design and operating data based
6 Secondary Fuel Gas Heating Value and property on site conditions is shown in Table 5.
7 Cooling water temperature
8 Input water temperature
TABLE 5. OPERATING AND DESIGN DATA FOR
9 Export steam temperature WABASH RIVER IGCC PLANT
10 Export steam pressure
PARAMETERS DATA
11 Output water temperature
Ambient Temperature 59 °F
12 Output steam temperature
Relative Humidity 60%
13 Output steam pressure Elevation 520FT
Ambient Pressure 14.43 PSIA
The Multiplication correction factors, which are not GT inlet Pressure drop 3.5in H2O
applicable to the measured results for the specific type of plant GT Exhaust losses 14in H2O
being tested, or to the test objectives, are simply set equal to Coal Properties (UA dry):
unit. The fundamental performance equations can be
Carbon 70.80%
simplified to be specific to the particular plant and test program
objectives. The format of the fundamental equations allow Hydrogen 4.91%
decoupling of the appropriate correction effects relative to the Nitrogen 1.30%
measured parameters, so that measured performance can be Sulfur 3.09%
corrected to the reference conditions. Corrections are Oxygen 8.44%
calculated for parameters at the test boundary different than
Ash 11.46%
base reference conditions, which affect measured performance
results. HHV (dry) 12704Btu/lb
Correction curves applied to measured performance Product of Syngas (vol. Dry)
are calculated by a heat balance model of the thermal systems Hydrogen 32.82%
contained within the test boundary of IGCC Power Block. Each Carbon monoxide 50.54%
correction factor is calculated by running the heat balance Methane 2.85%
model with a variance in only the parameter to be corrected for
Carbon dioxide 10.95%
over the possible range of deviation from the reference
conditions. Correction curves thus developed are incorporated Nitrogen 1.64%
into the specific test procedure document. The model is Argon 1.20%
finalized following purchase of all major equipment and receipt Moisture 22.72%
of performance information from all equipment vendors, Dry Syngas flow 337.5Klb/hr
particularly, for gasifier, air separation unit, power train, and
Wet Syngas flow 422.5Klb/hr
plant engineering.
Lowing Heating Value 4006Btu/lb

6
Higher Heating Value 4286Btu/lb
Syngas Pressure to GT 340PSIA
Syngas Temperature to GT 530°F
Steam Injection of NOx control
Temperature 530°F
Pressure 415PSIA
Flow 111.3Klb/h Steam Turbine exhaust pressure 1.7in of Hg
Power Generated:
TM
Gross Generated Power GT 192.0MW The GateCycle has a full set of almost all of the gas
Gross Generated Power ST 101.9MW turbines now operating worldwide. However, the GE 7FA gas
Total Gross Power 293.9MW turbine for IGCC operation did not converge to the desired
power output and the target fuel flow. After some fine tuning of
Auxiliary Power:
the program, the user-defined model matched the Power Block
Gasification Plant 7.4MW power output, the required air and fuel flows and other
Air Separation Unit 24.7MW characteristics of the GE 7FA gas turbine. All the steam and
Power Block 4.2MW water streams for the gasifier were assigned as shown in Table
Total Auxiliary Power 36.3MW 5. To derive the off-design data, only one variable at a time
Net Power 257.6MW was altered so that the impact on output and heat rate was
observed for that particular variable. For the purpose of this
Interconnecting Steam/water Streams exercise, minor flows such as the gland steam flows and
for Gasification Process: leakages were ignored in the model. The GateCycle model
TM

HP Steam from Gasifier of the Wabash River Power Block is shown in Figure 3.
Temperature 609.5°F Once the parameters of the hardware of the Power
Pressure 1655PSIA Block were fixed, several off-design cases were created to
Flow demonstrate the impact on power output and heat rate by
498.9Klb/h
varying such variables as the ambient temperature, ambient
IP Steam to Gasifier
pressure, syngas fuel temperature and heating value, steam
Temperature 485.0°F turbine condenser cooling water temperature and high
Pressure 430.0PSIA pressure steam from the coal gasifier. It was realized that there
Flow 49.9Klb/h are other variances that would have impact on power output
Hot Boiler Feed Water to Gasifier and heat rate, but for this exercise this was deliberately
Temperature avoided. It is also assumed that there are no constraints within
560.0°F limit on the Power Block due to these variances such as high
Pressure 1793PSIA pressure steam import and the syngas temperature and
Flow 754.1Klb/h heating value. It is assumed that the gas turbine was operating
Cold Boiler Feed Water from Gasifier on fixed exhaust temperature. The correction factors are
Temperature 410°F represented in Figures 4 to 9. It must be emphasized that
Pressure these correction curves may differ from the ones supplied by
1793PSIA the Original Equipment Suppliers. The curves portrayed here
Flow 121.6Klb/h are for demonstration purposes only.

Cold Condensate Water to Gasifier


Temperature 81.1°F
Pressure 159.0PSIA

7
Presented at the Joint Power Generation Conference and Exposition
Burlingame, California
July 25-28, 1999.

FIGURE 3. HEAT BALANCE BASED ON WABASH REPOWERING IGCC POWER BLOCK

S26

MU1
S20
MAKE UP
M3
S30

S21
CNDPMP

CONDST
S41 HPST S48 IPST S28
S47

V2 S42 V3
SP6
CONDEN
S13 S23

VENT
SP1
S17

S45
S3 S38

SP2 S16
S25

S7 DEAER

SYNGAS FUEL TMX1


SP4
M4
S31
SP5

S15
M2
S11 S19
S27 S9
S35
TMX2 S12 S18
S49 HPPUMP

S22 S43

S50 S6 S33
S8
S32
S1 S4 S37
S2
HPSHT M1
HPECON
SP3 HPEVAP
DUCT ECON1

AIR S10 BLOW DOWN


S5
S29 S46
S39 S34 V1
GTD1
S24
S14
S36
RHTR
S40

S44

IP STFIGURE 3. HEAT BALANCE BASED HP SAT ST HP BOILER FEEDCOLD BOILER FEEDWARM COND

COAL GASIFICATION ISLAND


COLD COND

REPOWERING IG
S26

WABASH RIVER REPOWERING IGCC PLANT WABASH RIVER REPOWERING IGCC PLANT
I N D I C A T I VE R EL A T I VE C H A N GE I N N ET H EA T R A T E WI T H I N D I C A T I VE R EL A T I VE C H A N GE I N N ET P OWER WI T H
A M B I EN T T EM P ER A T U R E A M B I EN T T EM P ER A T U R E

1 .030 1 .040

1 .020 1 .000
COND
S41 HPST S48 IPST
S47

V2 S42 V3
SP6
1 .01 0 0.960
S13 S23

SP1
1 .000 0.920
S17

S3 S38
0.990 0.880
SP2
50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 S25 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85

A M B I EN T T EM P ER A T U R E °F A M B I EN T T EM P ER A T U R E
S7 °F

SYNGAS FUEL TMX1


SP4

M2
S11
S27 S9

FIGURE 4. RELATIVE NET POWER WITH AMBIENT S49


TMX2 FIGURE 5. RELATIVE NET HEAT RATE WITH AMBIENT S35
S12

TEMPERATURE TEMPERATURE
S22

S50 S6 S33
S8
S32
S1 S2
HPSHT M1
HPECON
SP3 HPEVAP
DUCT

AIR S10 BLOW DOWN


S29 S46
S39 S34
GTD1
S14
S36
RHTR
S40

8
WABASH RIVER REPOWERING IGCC PLANT
WABASH RIVER REPOWERING IGCC PLANT I N D I C A T I VE R EL A T I VE C H A N GE I N N ET P OWER WI T H
I N D I C A T I VE R EL A T I VE C H A N GE I N N ET P OWER WI T H
S YN GA S F U EL T EM P ER A T U R E
A M B I EN T P R ES S U R E
1 .040
1 .040

1 .020

1 .000
1 .000

0.980

0.960
0.960
445 465 485 505 525 545 565 585
1 3.92 1 4.1 2 1 4.32 1 4.52 1 4.72
S YN GA S F U EL T EM P ER A T U R E °F
A M B I EN T P R ES S U R E P S I A

FIGURE 8. RELATIVE CHANGE IN NET POWER WITH


FIGURE 6. RELATIVE NET POWER WITH AMBIENT
SYNGAS TEMPERATURE
PRESSURE

WABASH RIVER REPOWERING IGCC PLANT


WABASH RIVER REPOWERING IGCC PLANT
I N D I C A T I VE R EL A T I VE C H A N GE I N N ET H EA T R A T E WI T H
I N D I C A T I VE R EL A T I VE C H A N GE I N N ET H EA T R A T E WI T H
S YN GA S F U EL T EM P ER A T U R E
A M B I EN T P R ES S U R E
1 .040
1 .005

1 .000

1 .000

0.995

0.960
0.990
445 465 485 505 525 545 565 585
1 3.92 1 4.1 2 1 4.32 1 4.52 1 4.72
S YN GA S F U EL T EM P ER A T U R E °F
A M B I EN T P R ES S U R E P S I A

FIGURE 7. RELATIVE NET HEAT RATE WITH AMBIENT


PRESSURE FIGURE 9. RELATIVE CHANGE IN NET HEAT RATE WITH
SYNGAS TEMPERATURE

9
CONCLUSION
The paper reports the progress on the development
of PTC 47.4, the performance test code for the IGCC
Power Block. It is found possible to apply the procedure of
test correction factors to the specified test performance
parameters (net electric power, net heat rate) in a manner
similar to PTC46, the performance test code for simple
combined cycle, despite the complexity and increased
numbers of test measurements required of the input and
output streams in an IGCC Power Block.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors wish to acknowledge Doug McNeilly
and Ron Weiner of Enron Engineering for providing initial
working document on the Power Block Test Procedures.
We also wish to express our thanks to Dave Breton of
Dynegy for providing technical support and data from the
gasification model needed for the evaluation of test
correction factors in the example case of PSI Wabash
IGCC cited in the paper.

REFERENCES
Anand, et. al., New Technology Trends for Improved
IGCC System Performance, ASME Journal of Engineering
for Gas Turbines and Power, p 732-736, October 1996.
Horazak, et. al., Distinctive Characteristics of
ASME Performance Test Code 47, and Comparison with
Performance Test Code 46, 1998 International Joint Power
Conference & Exposition, Baltimore, Maryland, August 24-
26, 1998.
Mirolli Mark D. and Doering Egon L., ASME PTC
47- IGCC Performance Testing: Gasification Island Thermal
Performance Testing, International Joint Power Conference
& Exposition, Baltimore, Maryland, August 24-26, 1998.
Smith Arthur R., ASME PTC 47- IGCC
Performance Testing: Air Separation Issues, 1998
International Joint Power Conference & Exposition,
Baltimore, Maryland, August 24-26, 1998.
TM
GateCycle 5.2 – Enter Software, Inc. & Electric
Power Research Institute 1989 -1998

10