CLATHRATE HYDRATE

I certainly enjoy reading about and understanding new technologies.  Those technologies that provide “value added” by their very nature.   I just ran across two “new words” that demonstrate old dogs can learn new tricks and seemingly old technology can be new to the uninitiated—in other words me.  Do you know what a clathrate is?  A clathrate hydrate?  OK, neither did I.  Here we go.

Clathrate hydrate technology was first proposed in 1942 by M.E. Benesh as a method of storing natural gas.   An excellent paper entitled “Gas Hydrate Storage Processes for Natural Gas”, written by R.E. Rogers, Yu Zhong, R. Arunkumar, J.A. Etheridge, L.E. Pearson, J. McCowan and K. Hogncamp give basic details as to how this technology would work in a very practical sense.  All gentlemen teach at Mississippi State University and have spent years working to research and perfect a working prototype used to demonstrate that this can be a viable approach to the problem of storage.  I would like to indicate some of the conclusion derived from that study, as follows:

“Formidable problems (forming hydrates rapidly, collecting and packing hydrates, and reacting interstitial water) to make natural gas storage in gas hydrates an economically viable process are overcome by forming the hydrates from a surfactant solution. In the feasibility study, a non-stirred laboratory test cell could be filled with hydrates in less than 3 hours with a capacity of 156 vol/vol. The important attributes of the laboratory process are incorporated in the design for a proof-of concept scale-up. Simplicity and minimum labor requirements are stressed in the design. The process is designed to store 5,000 scf of natural gas in gas hydrates to be formed from surfactant solutions at 550 psig and 35°F. A finned-tube heat exchanger accommodates latent-heat transfer during hydrate formation and decomposition, but the exchanger also serves to collect by adsorption and symmetrically pack hydrate particles as they form.  The proof-of-concept facility is based on experimental results of the laboratory feasibility study; the facility has been constructed, installed and full-scale tests are proceeding. “

As indicated in the first sentence of the paper—“Gas hydrates are clathrates where guest gas molecules are occluded in a lattice of host water molecules.”  Well and good, but for a “gear-head” like me, what does this mean?  A clathrate hydrate is a very special type of hydrate in which a lattice of water molecules encloses molecules of trapped gas.  This gas could be methane, ethane, syngas, etc etc.  You get the picture.  For our purposes, we will discuss methane only.

 Large amounts of methane, naturally frozen in this form, have been discovered in both permafrost formations and sea beds under the ocean’s floor.  Methane hydrates are believed to form by migration of gas from significant depths along geological faults, followed by precipitation or crystallization, upon contact with rising gas streams of cold sea water.   About 6.4 trillion (that is, 6.4×10¹²) tons of methane lie at the bottom of the oceans in the form of clathrate hydrate.  Each kilogram of fully occupied hydrate (actually only about 96% occupancy is found) holds about 187 liters of methane (at atmospheric pressure).  

 One significant fact, ice-core methane clathrate records represent a primary source of data for global warming research, along with oxygen and carbon dioxide.   This is one reason why there is research data available on the huge quantities of entrapped methane gas.   As mentioned above, Mr.  M.E. Benesh first proposed using this technique as a method of storing natural gas as early as 1942. At that time, the methodology of doing so was not available, now it very well may be as demonstrated by Mississippi State.  

There are several classifications of clathrates.  The table below will indicate those classifications with a depiction of the lattice structures given above the table:

Since methane clathrates are stable at higher temperatures than LNG, there is a great interest in converting natural gas into clathrates rather than liquefying it prior to transporting by seagoing vessels.  A significant advantage would be the production of natural gas hydrate from natural gas at the terminal.  This would require a much smaller refrigeration plant and less overall energy as compared to the production of LNG.  The only real issue seems to be the rate of production and the economic viability of production.   Both issues are being addressed at this time by Mississippi State University. 

The real benefits would come from incorporating this storage method for locations in which it is impossible to fabricate transmission piping or transmit the gas in an easy fashion other than tanker or truck.  It is something to be aware of and to think about.  At any rate, it is fascinating.  I hope you agree.

SPACE JUNK

SPACE JUNK

The following resources were used in writing this document:

• “Scientists Battle Space Debris Threat”: CBS News, 23 April 2011
• “Space Debris”: Wikipedia
• “Space Junk Endangers NASA Satellites”: Elizabeth Montalbano, Information Week, 2 September 2011
• “Space Junk Janitors Should Sweep Up 5 Dead Satellites”: Biology & Nature, 27 February 2012
• “Space Junk to Triple by 2030”: Lenord Davis, Space.com, 9 May 2011

I can’t stand dirt.  Dirty house, dirty car, dirty office, and I am making some changes.  Fortunately, my wife is a “neatnick”.  She also—CAN’T STAND DIRT.  To further demonstrate the point, one evening, just before sundown, she looked through our den windows towards the setting sun and pronounced “we WILL clean these filthy windows inside and outside tomorrow”.  I felt her “pane”.  (Pardon the clever play on words!)  Dirt is one thing, but I’m OK with a little clutter.  I have several editions of Machine Design, Design News, Science and Technology, etc. sitting around waiting on the spirit to move me towards picking them up to read.  The older ones I consider collector’s items.  This is perhaps the only way I cannot be considered a hoarder.  

The tiny blue dot we live on does have a significant problem with clutter SPACE JUNK–  I will demonstrate as follows:

The digital photograph above shows the approximate position of debris remaining as a result of exploits in space, both ours and other countries, having the technology to launch rockets that carry payloads.  Perhaps a more enlightening JPEG, given below, will be more helpful and further illustrate the issue faced by NASA and other space-related agencies.   Please keep in mind all objects are moving. None are stationary; consequently, any depiction of position must be an estimate of position. 

It has been estimated by Hugh Lewis from The University of Southampton that over this decade, there could be as much as a fifty percent (50%) increase in debris.  Already, the International Space Station has had to fire thrusters to avoid moving “garbage” orbiting earth.  The result would have been disastrous had this action not been taken.  Some experts from NASA and within several university systems state we have already reached the “tipping point” and corrections would be virtually impossible and remarkably expensive.   NASA estimates there are at least 500,000 pieces of debris orbiting earth and some of that debris is moving at 17,500 miles per hour.  Of course, any “strike” at these speeds could produce life-threating damage to personnel and systems.   Damage such as the one shown below could absolutely destroy delicate equipment and seriously injure, if not kill, astronauts.

The overwhelming number of particles are smaller than one centimeter; i.e., 0.39 inches, but others are of considerable size.  Estimates are as follows:

• 1,500 pieces of debris weighing more than 100 Kg or 200 pounds
• 19,000 pieces of debris measuring between 1 to 10 centimeters; 3.9 inches
• An unestimated number of particles, mostly dust and paint “chips” resulting from collisions that have occurred with larger objects also orbiting.  Some “guesses” put that number into the millions.

For the most part, the debris can be categorized as follows:

• Jettisoned garbage from manned spacecraft, purposefully disposed of into lower earth orbit
• Lost equipment; i.e. cameras, tools, measuring devices, fabric hold-down straps, nuts, bolts, cotter pins, etc.
• Debris from collisions tearing apart structures either jettisoned or lost
• Rocket boosters that orbit yet remain in space.  Some, over time, experience decaying orbits, eventually falling to earth. 
• Satellites that no longer function but still orbit in LEO (Low Earth Orbit) or HEO (High Earth Orbit). Generally satellites operate between 435 to 800 miles above the earth.  When these satellites “die”, they do not accomplish reentry but simply stay aloft as dormant objects.  Think of the number of telecommunication devices now orbiting the earth.    Most will eventually fade and no longer fulfill their purpose, being replaced with newer technology. 

With an ever increasing number of launches, engineers and scientists are designing into their products, systems that will provide for ultimate reentry when that system or component performs its function.   Let’s assume a satellite has performed properly for nine years but now is dormant due to programmed obsolescence.  What if, pulse jets could fire altering trajectory and orbit so reentry could be possible?  If that reentry could be a controlled, one “chunk” of debris would be eliminated; consequently, eliminating possible damage to other orbiting bodies or future launches.  This is the current mind-set being explored.

With at least fifty nations participating within the space environment, the amount of debris can only lessen but not be eliminated.  At the present time, over 20,000 pieces of debris are being tracked from facilities such as the one below:

Facilities such as this can at least estimate collisions and, more importantly, any debris that may be in a decaying orbit that will eventually create reentry into earth’s atmosphere.  Over the past ten to fifteen years several large pieces of debris have reentered although most fall into our oceans or uninhabited land.   It becomes ever so critical to remain aware of location to preclude injury on the ground or provide successful future launches.  Several government agencies, as well as universities, have undertaken programs to explore methodologies to reclaim or at least deflect debris that might be potentially dangerous.   Monetary estimates, technical risk and overall complexities of design are significant, and we seem to be a long way from even mounting demonstration programs that will indicate possible success.  This is one area that will be fascinating to watch over the next twenty years.  Stay tuned.

THE VEGA CHRONICLES

THE VEGA CHRONICLES

Evidence for Planets Around the Star Vega

Before we discuss the possibilities of any planet or planets existing around the star system Vega, let’s take a look at the star itself.  The following bullets will give some perspective as to position, size, mass, temperature, luminosity, etc relative to this celestial body.

• Vega is also know as Alpha Lyrae and is the brightest star in the Constellation Lyra.  The name itself is derived from “Wega” and is Arabic for “Swooping Eagle” (Al Nasr al Waki).  It is the lower right member of the Summer Triangle and is actually visible with the naked eye from the Northern Hemisphere.  The photograph below will show the position relative to other constellation

• Vega is the fifth (5^th) brightest star visible from Earth and the third (3^rd) brightest visible from mid-northern latitudes, after Sirius and Arcturus.
• It is 25.3 light-years from Earth and is the sixth (6^th) closest of the bright start if you exclude Alpha Centauri, which is not easily visible from most of the Northern Hemispheres.
• It has a very distinct blue color with an estimated surface temperature of 17,000 degrees F, making it about 7,000 degrees F hotter than our own Sun.
• Vega has a diameter roughly 2.5 times greater than our Sun and is slightly less in mass.  The internal pressures and temperature make it burn much faster, thus producing thirty-five to forty times the energy of the Sun.
• Around 500 million years old, it is already middle-age and will run out of fuel in another one-half billion years. 
• Vega radiates between thirty-seven (37 %) and fifty-eight (58 %) percent more ultraviolet light than our Sun, demonstrating a sixty-three (63%) greater abundance of elements heavier than hydrogen.

On January 10, 2005, astronomers using the infrared Spitzer Space Telescope announced that the dust ring around Vega was much larger than previously estimated.  The disk appears to be mostly composed of very fine dust particles that were probably created from collisions of protoplanetary bodies around 90 AUs (astronomical units) from the star but blown away by its intense radiation.  On the other hand, the mass and short lifetime of these small particles indicate the disk detected was created by a large and relatively recent collision that may have involved objects as big as the planet Pluto.   The irregular shape of the disk is the clue that it likely contains planets, maybe habitable planets.  Modeling suggests that a Neptune-like planet actually formed much closer to the star than its current position.  As it moved out to its current wide orbit over 56 million years, many comets were swept out with it, causing the dust ring to become “clumpy”.  This is exactly the same process that occurred during the formation of our own solar system.  The model estimates that the “clumps” in the disk will rotate around Vega once every three hundred years.  A rendition of this ring is given as follows:

It is very conceivable that this Neptune-like planet harbors some form of life.  Intelligent life, probably not as we define the term here on Earth, but life.   The irregular shape of the disk is the clue that it is likely to contain planets explains astronomer Mark Wyatt.   Although we can’t directly observe the planets, they have created clumps in the disk of dust around the star.  Another rendition of those “bumps” may be seen below.   This is an infrared photograph of the system with the position of the suggested planet being very prominent. 

Let us now take another look.  In March 2009, NASA launched the Kepler space telescope and as a result, astronomers have spotted two small, Earth-like planets orbiting, one called Kepler-20e and the other Kepler-20f.  Kepler 20-e is 1,000 light years away and in the constellation Lyra.  The very same constellation as Vega.   A graphic of the Kepler telescope is given below:

   Planet Kepler-20e is 1.03 times the diameter of Earth and three (3%) percent larger.   Researchers believe Kepler 20e orbits its sun every six days and is a blend of silicates and iron.  Kepler 20f, which orbits its sun every 20 days, is bigger and very well could have developed an atmosphere of water vapor.     Could it be possible that the star-system Vega is rightly positioned to support some form of life—intelligent or otherwise?   It would be a significant history-making event if life could be found on another planet.  The thought that we are really not alone in the universe would be shattering to some people—maybe most people.  I do think it is imperative that we continue looking with marvelous instruments like Hubble, Kepler and deep-space probes.  I also think SETI offers some aid although the Cosmos is expansive and one has to wonder where to look.  The age-old question of “why are we here”—“where did we come from” has yet to be answered.  Maybe Dr. Sagan was correct when he stated, “We are all made from star-stuff”. 

 

TRIBOLOGY

TRIBOLOGY

I ask our five year old grandson if he could give me the meaning of the word “tribology”.  He thought for a moment then said the following:

“OK Bob, (he calls me Bob) we’ve been studying Indians in school this year and triology (his word) is how a bunch of Indians live in teepees, around a campfire to cook and stay warm in the winter.  That’s trilogy!  What do you think?”

Not too shabby for pre-“K”.  Actually, tribology is defined as, “a study that deals with the design, friction, wear and lubrication of interacting surfaces in relative motion (as in bearings or gears).”  

As stated by the definition, tribology involves the study of three subject areas:  1.) Friction, 2.) Wear and 3.) Lubrication.  The study is interdisciplinary and involves very complex mechanical mechanisms including the weight of the rolling or sliding members, surface roughness of the members, profile of the surfaces, any dirt, grit, etc. that may interfere with movement and several others.  It has been estimated that six percent (6%) of our GNP is wasted and this waste results from friction and unnecessary wear of interacting parts.  I know this is very difficult to believe but my sources are current and reputable.   Even with this being the case, the average four year curriculum for mechanical engineering students involves only two (2) hours devoted to study and understanding friction and wear.  To make bad matters worse, most references on the subject are greatly outdated and provide sketchy information at best.  This is certainly true for more recent polymers and material composites.  The work just has not been done.

Let us very quickly look at the three components relative to tribology.  In this fashion, we will obtain a better understanding of the entire field of study.

Friction is a force that resists the sliding or rolling of one solid object over another.  Sometimes friction is very desirable; i.e. walking, driving a car on city streets, etc.  The negative effects become obvious when we consider we lose approximately twenty percent (20%) of an automobile engine’s power due to friction.  A great number of machinery failures result solely from friction and wear.

Wear is the removal of material from a solid surface as a result of mechanical action exerted by one solid on another.  There are four basic types of wear: 1.) Adhesive, 2.) Abrasive, 3.) Corrosive and 4.) Surface-fatigue.  Wear physically removes material from the surfaces of the interacting member with the harder material wearing the softer material.

Lubrication is the introduction of a lubricant between interacting solid surfaces to mitigate wear and friction.  The need for this dates back at least four thousand years.  The ancient Egyptians understood friction and wear and used animal fats as a lubricant.  There are three classifications for lubricants: 1.) Fluid film, 2.) Boundary and 3.) Solid.  It is fascinating to me that our body produces lubrication in a continuous fashion.  Our joints would not survive without this liquid lubrication and without this lubrication we would have a painful time in trying to bend, stretch, etc.  You get the picture.

As you can see, this is a fascinating field of study but a very complex subject to be studied.  If you are interested, I would recommend you taking a look at “The Journal of Tribology”.  It is found in the ASME digital library and will provide the latest information and data relative to university research and corporate activity.   I am in the process of completing a “white paper” for PDHonline that will provide much more information and basic grounding for the three areas of study we have just mentioned.  If interested, please log on and take a look.

X37B

X37B

This past Saturday a very short article appeared in our Chattanooga Times Free Press, page A4, 5^th column

“Unmanned U.S. Spacecraft Returns After 7-Month Trip”.

Seven months ago the DoD lunched the very first unmanned spacecraft to fly outside the Earth’s atmosphere.  The X37B slipped out of orbit and landed safely at Vandenberg Air Force Base, California this past Friday.  The stubby-winged robotic aircraft began re-entry into Earth’s atmosphere and landed successfully at 0116 hrs PST (Pacific Standard Time).  The mission was secret and the “official” purpose was to test the aircraft itself.  I was born at night but not last night consequently, I suspect there was more to the voyage than we need to know.

My comments do not address the secrecy of the mission but the marvelous engineering that made this mission a resounding success.  Can you imagine the remarkable complexity such an endeavor would bring?  I was a lowly Captain in the USAF Logistics Command and worked on the missile that fired the Gemini crews so I have an appreciation for the split-second timing and planning that must be accomplished for success.  I know that all engineering disciplines had to be in play to bring this project to completion.  Mechanical, electrical, civil, engineering physics, etc etc—all were needed and used.   I am also amazed that communications were maintained throughout the entire seven months—ASTOUNDING!!!     I can’t walk from my front porch to the mail box without my cell phone dropping out fifteen times.  ( DoD must not use Virgin Mobile. )

 It takes smart, trained, energized, optimistic, hard-working engineers and scientists to pull something like this off.  You don’t make this happen with high school drop-outs.  Drop-outs will not find themselves as members of a DoD or NASA team. You are not allowed to write code that would affect trajectory and a flight plaths with merely a high school degree and certainly not as a drop-out.   It is a national tragedy that approximately 30 % of high school students choose to drop out before graduation.

I think what we have just witnessed is a forecast of things to come.  “The Rise of the Machines”—OK, maybe not but, more unmanned flights-definitely!  The technology involved and project management are just stunning. I think we need to keep this story alive so high school students, and even grammar school students, realize that engineering is a most exciting profession and there are still jobs available—even in our country.  The best is yet to come.

UNIVERSAL LANGUAGE

UNIVERSAL LANGUAGE

Merriam-Webster defines language as “A systematic means of communicating ideas or feelings by the use of conventionalized signs, sounds, gestures or marks having understood meanings.”  The operative words in this definition are ‘means of communicating’ and ‘understood meanings’.  There are 116 different “official” languages spoken on our planet today but 6900 languages AND dialects. The difference between a language and a dialect can be somewhat arbitrary so care must be taken when doing a “count”.  English, French, German, Greek, Japanese, Spanish etc, all have specific and peculiar dialects; not to mention slang words and expressions so the discernment between a language and a dialect may be somewhat confusing to say the least.. 

The book of Genesis (Genesis 11: vs. 1-9) recounts a period of time, during the reign of King Nebuchadnezzar, when an attempt was made, by mankind, to become equal with God and that one language was spoken by all the people.  We are told that the attempt was not met with too much favor and God was pretty turned off by the whole thing.  Go figure!    With this being the case, He, decided to confound their language so that no one understood the other.  This, as you might expect, lead to significant confusion and a great deal of “babbling” resulted.  (Imagine a session of our United States Congress.)  Another significant result was the dispersion of mankind over the earth—another direct result from their unwise attempt.  This dispersion of the populace “placed” a specific language in a specific location and that “stuck”. 

Regardless of the language spoken, the very basic components of any language are similar; i.e. nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, pronouns, etc.  You get the picture. The use and structure of these language elements within a sentence do vary.  This fact is the essence of a particular language itself. 

Would mankind not benefit from a common language?  Would commerce not be greatly simplified if we could all understand each other? Think of all the money saved if everything written and everything spoken—every road sign and every label on a can of soup—could be read by 6.8 billion people.  Why oh why have we not worked towards that over the centuries as a collective species.  Surely someone has had that thought before.  OK, national pride, but let’s swallow our collective egos and admit that we would be well-served by the movement, ever so gradual, towards one universal language.  Let me backup one minute.  We do have one example of a world-wide common language—

MATHEMATICS

Like all other languages, it has its own grammar, syntax, vocabulary, and word order, synonyms, negations, conventions, abbreviations, sentence and paragraph structure.  Those elements do exist AND they are universal.  No matter what language I speak, the formula for the area of a circle is A=π/4 (D)². 

• π  =  3.14159 26535 89793
• log(10)e  =  0.43429 44819 03252
• (x+y)(x-y)  =  x²-y²
• R(1),R(2)  =  [-b ± ( b²-4ac)]^0.5/2a
• The prime numbers are 2,3,5,7,11,13,17,19,23,29,31,37—You get the picture.
• sinѲcscѲ = 1

 Mathematics has developed over the past 2500 years and is really one of the very oldest of the “sciences”. One remarkably significant development was the use of zero (0)—which has only been “in fashion” over the past millennium.  Centuries ago, men such as Euclid and Archimedes made the following discoveries and the following pronouncements:

If a straight line be cut at random, the square on the whole is equal to the squares on the segments and twice the rectangle contained by the segments. (Euclid, Elements, II.4, 300 B.C.) This lead to the formula:  (a + b)² = a² + b² + 2ab

The area of any circle is equal to a right-angled triangle in which one of the sides about the right angle is equal to the radius, and the other to the circumference, of the circle. (Archimedes, Measurement of a Circle, (225 B.C.)  Again, this gives us the following formula: 

A = 2pr·r/2 = pr ² 

These discoveries and these accompanying formulas work for ANY language we might speak. Mathematics then becomes the UNIVERSAL LANGUAGE.

With that being the case, why do we not introduce the “Language of Mathematics” to our middle-school and high school pupils?  Is any school district doing that?  I know several countries in Western Europe started this practice some years ago with marvelous results.  This “language” is taught prior to the introduction of Algebra and certainly prior to Differential Equations.  It has been proven extremely effective and beneficial for those students who are intimidated by the subject.  The “dread” melts away as the syntax and structure becomes evident.  Coupled with this introduction is a semester on the great men and women of mathematics—their lives, their families, were they lived, what they ate, what they smoked, how they survived on a math teacher’s salary.  These people had lives and by some accounts were absolutely fascinating individuals in their own right.  Sir Isaac Newton invented calculus, was a real grouch, a real pain in the drain AND, had been jilted in his earlier years.  Never married, never (again) even had a girlfriend, etc etc.  You get the picture.  The greatest mathematicians of all time are said to be the following:

Isaac Newton Carl F. Gauss Archimedes Leonhard Euler Euclid		Bernhard Riemann Henri Poincaré David Hilbert Joseph-Louis Lagrange Gottfried W. Leibniz		Alexander Grothendieck Pierre de Fermat Niels Abel Évariste Galois John von Neumann
Srinivasa Ramanujan Karl W. T. Weierstrass Brahmagupta René Déscartes Augustin Cauchy		Carl G. J. Jacobi Hermann K. H. Weyl Peter G. L. Dirichlet Leonardo `Fibonacci’ Georg Cantor		Arthur Cayley Emma Noether Eudoxus of Cnidus Muhammed al-Khowârizmi Pythagoras of Samos

What do we really know about these guys?  Do we ever study them when we use their wonderful work?  I think not.  I honestly believe the study would be much more enjoyable IF we knew something about the men and women making the contributions they did.   Think about it.  PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!