Critical Analysis of Underground Coal Gasification Models. Part I: Equilibrium Models – Literary Studies
Journal of Sustainable Mining, Vol: 13, Issue: 1
2021
- 17Usage
- 2Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage17
- Abstract Views17
- Captures2
- Readers2
Article Description
Purpose Underground coal gasification is a very difficult process due to changes in the parameters over time and within the space of the reactor and a variety of phenomena that occurs there. Consequently, it is necessary to create appropriate mathematical models, which simplify the optimization and forecast of future results (especially final gas properties). The purpose of this work was the detailed critical analysis of the simplest coal gasification simulations methods, based on thermodynamic calculations of the process. These models, called equilibrium models, can be divided into two groups: stoichiometric and non-stoichiometric. The other aim of this paper was to characterize various engineering methods used in the calculation of equilibrium gasification processes. Methods Literary studies, concerned with general aspects of underground coal gasification modeling and the modeling of coal gasification in the manner of equilibrium calculations, were used as a research method applied in presented work. Results The critical analysis of equilibrium models of coal gasification and the characterization (including mathematical formulation of process, range of required parameters, rate of convergence of calculations and methodology of searching solutions) of stoichiometric and non-stoichiometric methods were results of numerous considerations presented in this article. Practical implications The work presented describes practical issues connected with equilibrium models – their advantages, limitations and possible problems (for example with the determination of required constants) and potential applications (preliminary analysis, point of reference to more complex simulations etc.). Originality/value This paper presents state of the art in field of equilibrium coal gasification modeling. This article is also attempt to elaborate on the most important problems connected with thermodynamic models of coal gasification.
Bibliographic Details
https://jsm.gig.eu/journal-of-sustainable-mining/vol13/iss1/7; http://dx.doi.org/10.46873/2300-3960.1272; https://jsm.gig.eu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1272&context=journal-of-sustainable-mining; https://dx.doi.org/10.46873/2300-3960.1272; https://jsm.gig.eu/journal-of-sustainable-mining/vol13/iss1/7/
Glowny Instytut Gornictwa (Central Mining Institute)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know