\chapter{Results (sometimes different titles, sometimes split in several sections)}
\textit{I generally recommend that the most important "discussion" (e.g. comparison with theory) is included
in the results section.} Might be wise to treat results and discussion as one section to begin with, and later split it up into two sections. \\

\section{Control strucutre}





\section{Mass balance/amount of leakage}

How to present amount of O2-leakage. Could have a graph that shows leakage over time. Might be better to only show calculated average data, and instead include the graphs of the raw data in the Appendix. Then show the calculated amount. The equations that show the calculation should perhaps be included in the experimental part?

\section{Energy balance/energy loss}

Should present energy loss in the same way as the previous section.

\section{Direct economic loss from heating}

Should include calculations on the alternative cost for using electricity or bark (or both). \\

\section{Show that the boiler is constrained}

Show that the boiler is constrained, and also show results that it is constrained because of the flue gas fan.

\section{Show that the leakage causes extra oxygen in the boiler. }

All of the previous


Should have energy and mass balances of the boiler. From this it is possible to present amount of leakage and energy loss. \\

Include some data that shows that the flow measurements are bad \\ 

Discuss if the cfb might in practice be a bfb. \\

This section should also include some calculations on the shunt pump. An energy balance to show the theoretical impact on the flue gas temperature. It should include actual data to show that there is close to no impact on the flue gas temperature. \\

Include the economic loss that stems from using the electric heater instead of having the CFB operating at a higher capacity. Include a discussion about if it is reasonable to assume that the CFB always can operate at maximum capacity regardless of fuel. Think a bit about if it is possible to do some other assumptions to account for lower grade fuel.\\

Including results on the accumulator, "dumpe"-condenser and "friblåsning" might be out of scope for this thesis. If I were to include results on this, I should have an energy balance on the "dumpe"condenser, try to estimate "friblåsning", and discuss how the level in the accumulator affects all this. In the discussion it is important to say something about why the data for the level is so strange(because of the $\Delta$P used for the measurment (splashing might cause irregularities in this measurement). Further work should include a suggestion to change the set-point for the use of this condenser, so that the loss is reduced. Should also include the economic loss based on the estimated price per liter of "dumped" water.

\begin{itemize}
    \item Estimated leaks based on O2 (and flue gas fan?). Energy loss (Higher speed for flue gas fan, heating of unnecessary air)
    \item Energy loss from reduced 
    \item Graph that shows that Kjel6 cant handle tops anymore
    \item Economic loss from electric heater use
    \item Changes caused by turning off shunt pump
    \item Suggestions for new control structure?
\end{itemize}

\begin{equation}
    M_{mix} = 
    %M_flue = dot([4.5 11.28 62.47 21 0.74]*(1-x_air)/100+[0.21 0 0.78 0 0.01]*x_air, [32 44.01 28.01 18.02 39.95])/1000 [kg/mol}
\end{equation}