Wht Afft th Ct f t G ltr Sttn? - ASMEproceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/data/...h UI t hv n ddd prvn fr n nlt bffl nd rfrtr lnn n rdr t rrv t vl dtr In prprn t tt tht r rfrrd

THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS345 E. 41St.. New York. N.Y. 10017

The Society shall not be responsible for statements or opinions advanced in papers or in dis-cussion at meetings of the Society or of its Divisions or Sections, or printed in its publications.Discussion is printed only if the paper is published in an ASME Journal. Papers are available

iii ^ from ASME for fifteen months after the meeting.

Printed in USA.

92-GT-221

What Affects the Cost of Hot Gas Filter Stations?J. F. ZIEVERS and P. EGGERSTEDT

Industrial Filter & Pump Mfg. Co.Cicero, IL

E. C. ZIEVERSUniversal Porosics, Inc.

LaGrange, ILD. NICOLAI

SETEC GmbHBietigheim, Germany

This technical paper examines the various aspectsof hot gas filter station design which ultimately affectboth initial and operational costs. Process conditionssuch as temperature and pressure, and design constraintssuch as face velocity are discussed with respect to theirbearing on filter station costs. More subtle parameterssuch as pulse gas cleaning requirements and filterelement geometry also directly impact filter design andhence, cost. As all of the information presented isbased upon actual filter applications, it will provideuseful insight for those involved in filter designing andrecommendations.

IntroductionThe "filter stations" referred to in the title are

of the closed pressure vessel(s) type, utilizing ceramicfilter elements which are supported by a tube sheet orsimilarly functioning plenum and are cleaned by a reversejet pulse of high pressure gas.

Although filter element types that capture solidson the outside (S.O.) and those that capture solids onthe inside (S.I.) are both discussed, the emphasis of thepaper and the cost data is based on 5.0. type elements.

In this paper, the authors attempt to use theiraccumulated experience 23r om sizing and pricing many hotgas filter stations to set forth some obviousinterrelationships and indicate the cost effect.

Finally, these interrelationships will be utilizedto create some cost estimating curves that may be of helpto other engineers.

Process ParametersIt is obvious from the gas laws that the

temperature and pressure of the to-be-filtered gas streamwill affect the volume flow of gas and therefore, thesize of the filter station. To a certain extent, thevolume of gas is also affected by the type of fuel feed.For example, a 50/50 coal/water slurry feed will producea larger flow of gas at the filter station as compared toa "dry" coal feed. A 75/25 coal/water "paste" will havea lesser affect, but the influence is still present. Inthe same thought, if "sorbents" are fed as a liquid

slurry, the liquid portion increases the gas volume andconsequently the cost of the filter station.

The gas temperature and required vessel skintemperature both affect the thickness of refractorylining as well as the ultimate vessel diameter and cost.

Filter Vessel SizeSince refractory thickness can vary widely, the

authors have found it useful to begin pressure vesseldesign by defining the Useful Interior Diameter (UID).UID is the diameter into which the required quantity offilter elements can be fitted in an appropriate pattern.The UID must have an added provision for any gas inletbaffle and refractory lining in order to arrive atvessel diameter. In preparing cost estimates that arereferred to later in this paper, UID's were calculatedand a uniform refractory thickness of 12.5 cm was addedto arrive at vessel diameters which were then costestimated.

Design Pressure & TemperatureThe design pressure of the filter system obviously

affects the vessel wall thickness. Gas temperature andallowable pressure differential affect the tube sheetmaterial of construction, thickness, and method ofsuspension, the choice of ceramics to be used for filterelements, and brings about a decision as to whether thetube sheet will be cooled or uncooled. All of theaforementioned have a direct bearing on filter stationcost. The method of cooling the tube sheet can increaseoverall heat loss and result in higher procesc costs.Line pressure directly affects the pressure of the jetpulse gas and, of course, the cost of compressing thatjet pulse gas to operating level.

MaterialsIt should be pointed out that the choice of

ceramic materials for filter elements is also affectedby the feed gas chemistry and the ultimate corrosivenature of the feed gas. The ceramic material selectedwill also affect the cost, as shown in Figure #1.Figure #1 also illustrates the relative characteristicsof some commonly used ceramic materials.

Presented at the International Gas Turbine and Aeroengine Congress and ExpositionCologne, Germany June 1-4, 1992

This paper has been accepted for publication in the Transactions of the ASMEDiscussion of it will be accepted at ASME Headquarters until September 30, 1992

Copyright © 1992 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/08/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

CERAMIC MATERIALSFOR FILTER ELEMENTS

_ -

MULL ITE SIC BONDED CORDIERITE VACULM FOR.EDCERAMIC FIBER

(VFCF)RELATIVE VALUES

1.6 1.95>1250 >1250 3. 2 1.85

ma900

2.B2.2 1'D

1.a1,25

D.^D.s

D.<

TEMPERATURE''; WEI(M COST 8051 STANCE TO

(BASED ON 10Im WALL) THERMAL/ PHYS I CAL5HDCK

FIGURE: 1

If a ceramic is chosen that has poor resistance tothermal shock, it may be necessary to heat the jet pulsegas. The heating of jet pulse gas can be expensiveitself and can also affect the choice and cost of jetpulse delivery valves and measuring instrument probes.On at least one occasion, in order to prevent theintrusion of corrosive gas into the jet pulse nozzles, asmall amount of jet pulse gas had to be constantlymetered through the nozzles, resulting in additionalcost.

The choice of ceramic material and supplier canaffect quality control costs. On the matter of qualitycontrol, a decision must be made as to what minimum testswill satisfactorily determine the suitability of productfor process use and what percentage of the product mustbe tested. How and where will such quality controlrecords be kept, and by whom? The authors feel that eachceramic element should have a serial number and a locatorcode, but this also is a cost.

The number of ceramic elements needed to do a givenjob is determined by the volume of gas and the designface velocity, but, these are not the onlyconsiderations. The volume of particulate, the particlesize, and particle size distribution must also beconsidered * . Note the word volume was used. Oft times,particulate loading is measured in terms of weight. Insizing a filter, the volume of solids used in conjunctionwith the attainable cake thickness at a given allowablepressure drop may have a greater affect on the size ofthe filter station than the volume of gas to be filtered.Although true particle density is often cited, filtersizing. element spacing, and other filter designconsiderations are based upon the dry bulk density of thedust. In such cases, the alternate cost of additionalcyclones must be considered.

In categorizing solids loads reaching the filterelements, the authors use the following criteriacalculated from candles 60mm O.D. x 1500mm long andoperating at a FV of 183m/hr., as illustrated in Figure#2:

Particle size distribution of dust can be manipulatedusing selected dust or selected "sorbents". See U.S.Patent No. 4,865,629.

CATEGORIZING SOLIDS

HIGH - > 1132cc/ m 3 GAS FEED

MEDIUM - 88cc/m 3 GAS FEED

LOW - <33CC/m 3 GAS FEED

BASIS:

FILTER ELEMENT. 60mm O.D. — 1500mm LONG

CONFIGURATION: SOLIDS OUTSIDE (S,O.)

FACE VELOCITY: 183m/HR.

NOTE.

SOLIDS INSIDE CS, I.) ELEMENTS - FIGURES WILL BE SLIGHTLY LOWER.

FIGURE: 2

- High solids loads produce a cake 6mm or morethick in 15 min. (132cc/m 3 gas feed).

- Medium solids loads produce a cake approximately4mm thick in 15 min. (88cc/m 3 gas feed).

- Low solids loads produce a cake 1.5mm or lessthick in 15 min. (33cc/m 3 gas feed).

Element GeometryBe icie the ceramic material used for the filter

elements Il4 , the physical size of the elements willultimately affect the filter station cost. Furtherexamination may prove fruitful. First, and generallyspeaking. two ceramic filter element configurations arecurrently commercially available: (See Figure #3.)

ALTERNATE FORMS

SOLIDS OUTSIDE CS, O.)

CLEAN PRODUCT

LftJ,>>

DIRTY FEED

SOLIDS INSIDE CS.I.)

DIRTY FEED

CLEAN PRODUCT

FIGURE: 3

A) 60mm O.D. x 1500mm long, monolithic, solidsoutside. (S.O.)

B) 172mm I.D. x 3000mm long, sectioned, solidsinside. (S.I.)

S.O. elements may be obtained in a fluted designas well. A fluted element of any given outside diameterwill yield more filtration surface. To date, denserceramic structures (those of Silicon Carbide, Mullite,and Alumina) are made with a non-fluted I.D., resultingin the following considerations:

2


1) Should the design engineer utilize the entirefluted surface area? As dust accumulates radiallyoutward, it will tend to change the actualfiltration surface; the effects of which can bedetermined in testing.

2) At a selected design face velocity, what affectdoes an increase in surface area per element haveon the velocity of clean gas through the orifice ofthe filter element? This velocity can reach apoint of criticality; the effects of which arecovered below and in Figure #4.

ORIFICE VELOCITY EFFECT20

A A

18

p 16_ 14Cv 12

0.o 10

e

36)a

^ 4

a

1 5 10 15' 20 125 305 10 .15 20 25 30 35 40

FACE VELOCITY Cft/min)

SYMBOL I.D.[mm) LGTH. CmmD m 2

30 1500 26

30 2000 .35

........... 30 1500 FLUTED . 35cr^woeriwu 30 1500 FLUTED .44*

.__._._._._ 40 1500 .26

A A A 40 2000 .35

' READ UPPER F.V. SCALE

FIGURE: 4

Fluted elements made of a less dense, vacuum formedmaterial, (Alumino-Silicate, Mul1ite, etc.), usually havea uniform wall thickness, being that both the O.D. andI.D. are fluted. To maintain orifice velocity, the O.D.may be adjusted to 80mm with a 50mm I.D..

Critical Orifice VelocityThe 60mm O.D. elements are available in two I.D.'s;

40mm and 30mm. While the available filtration surfaceareas are identical, one must consider the interior areaof the element at the flange as a restrictive orifice.When the velocity of the filtered gas at the elementflange exceeds about 30 meters per second, the flangeorifice begins to contribute a considerable additionalpressure drop. This added pressure drop can effectivelylimit the selection of design face velocity andtherefore, affect the cost. For want of a better term,the a ihors will call this the Critical Orifice Velocity(COV) Y21 . The relationship between COV and 60mm O.D.candle dimensions is shown in Figure #4. Notice that a2.Om long candle has been included because such elementsare now in limited presence in the market. The veryexistence of a 2.Om long element deserves another commenton cost. It is this: When planning a filter station itseems prudent to include the cost of extra filter vesselheight to allow for possible future use of 2.Om longelements.

Jet Pulse VolumeJet Pulse Volume (JPV) may be defined as that

volume (in liters) of jet pulse gas that must bedelivered to the filter in order to clean 1 m 2 of filtersurface. Typically, because of the geometry involved infilter designs currently on the market, JPV for S.O.filter elements will be in the 25-30 1/m 2 range. ForS.I. elements, the JPV can reach considerably above 1001/m 2 . Obviously, JPV affects the installation andoperating costs of a hot gas filter station.

Perhaps a little mathematics would be in orderher?. Assume a filter with 50 m 2 surface, a JPV of 251/m , operating at a face velocity of 400 m/hr., and apulse frequency of 4 times per hour. This filter willclean 20,000 m 3 of gas and will utilize 5,000 liters ofjet pulse gas per hour at 6-8 Bar over line pressure.If, on the other hand, the JPV is 100 1/m 2 , the jet pulsegas requirement would rise to 20,000 liters per hour.

Element Packing DensityElement Packing Density (EPD) is still another

factor. If one considers the diameter of the filterelement itself, plus anticipated cake accumulation, plussome dimensional safety, (clearance) as comprising asmall circle, the EPD is derived from the number ofthose small circles that can be arranged in a largecircle, which is the filter vessel UID. Strictlydefined, EPD is the number of square meters of filteringsurface per cubic meter of filter vessel that isoccupied by the filter elements. In calculating EPD,the total volume, including the volume occupied by thefilter elements themselves, is used. The space beneaththe filter elements, (i.e. cake hopper, etc.), however,is not used. Figure #5 illustrates some examples using60mm 0.0. x 1500mm long candles on varying centerlinespacings.

ELEMENT PACKING DENSITY

20 , 89 24 , 89 0 1 .115

RECTANGULAR STAGGERED STAGGERED

PATTERN PATTERN PATTERN

919. 9 mm q 89.9 mm C e0 , 0 mm C

BASIS.

FILTER ELEMENT' 60mm O.D. - 1500mm LONG

VESSEL U. I D. 1800 mm

FIGURE: 5

Staggered patterns for element centerlines resultin greater EPD values. Fluted S.O. elements with areasonable COV will usually yield 12-17% greater EPDthan their S.I. counterparts, which would seemingly havean advantage, but normally these are made with a greaterO.D. (to accommodate cake in the I.D.), thereby reducingthe EPD value.

Element FixingEPO is also affected by the method of fixing and

sealing the elements in the tube sheet W . Oft times,element fixing and sealing can have more effect on thesize of the "small circle" mentioned earlier than the


cake thickness and clearance factor. Besides affectingEPO, the method of fixing and sealing filter elements inthe tube sheet directly relates to original equipmentcost, installation cost, and maintenance costs.Operating pressure does not greatly affect fixing cost;it does not affect EPD at all. If the tube sheet iscooled, allowance for the cooling serpentine will mostcertainly affect EPD, filter vessel size, and cost. Agood general statement is "the more complicated, the morecostly".

Jet Pulse SystemThe "more complicated, more costly" statement above

can also be made about the jet pulse system. The cost ofthe jet pulse system is ultimately determined by:

1) Required volume of jet pulse gas used per unit oftime (say, per hour), volume of solids, size ofsolids, nature of solids (stickiness), and allowablepressure drop, all of which must be considered.Volume of jet pulse gas is also affected by theinternal volume of the filter elements, in thecase of solids outside elements (S.O.), or by theinternal volume of the filter housing section, inthe case of solids inside elements (S.I.).Typical values for jet pulse volume are given inFigure #6. The data used in compiling Figure #6 wasobtained from commercial literature, laboratorytests, and the referenced papers.

2) Required pressure of jet pulse gas is determinedby feed gas line pressure, inherent pressure dropacross the porous ceramic elements, and thenature of particulate.

3) Required temperature of jet pulse gas is mainlygoverned by the capability of the ceramic elementsto withstand thermal shock.

4) The materials of construction of the jet pulsedelivery system will be determined by the operatingtemperature and the gas chemistry.

JET PULSE VOLUME

(liters GAS/m 2 SURFACE)

SOLIDS OUTSIDE CS.O.) - 25-3D liters/m 2

SOLIDS INSIDE CS. I.) - 100+ liters/m 2 1

FIGURE: 6

Lastly, the physical design(s) of the jet pulsedelivery system will also affect the manufacturing cost,the installation cost, and maintenance costs. Items 1,2, or 3 will define the size and cost of the jet pulsegas compressor system. In all cases, the simpler andmore compact, the better.

Tiered DesignsThe overall cost of a hot gas filter station can

theoretically be lowered, and possibly overall plantgeometry improved as well, by installing 2 or 3 tiers(levels) of filter elements in a common pressure housing.Tiered designs have been proposed for both S.O. and S.I.type elements. At this point in time, tiered S.I. typefilters are more widely used. To date, no really large

tiered filters have been reported. Figure #7illustrates four types of tiered designs.

TIERED DESIGN C S ^N

GAS ISLE

if RESEGVO IP

our

o^^ yOUTLET

H OuT

REVERSE I FIOMEASIA ING TANKS

DTL-

FIGURE: 7

Integral Tubesheet System ^p6,27,281

In a series of earlier papers 26 ' 27 ' 28 , the authorscompared:

- "Hard" (SiC, Mullite, Cordierite) vs. "soft"(Al 20 3/Si0 2 ) ceramic fiber ("Fibro") filterelements

- Metal vs. ceramic tube sheets- Metal vs. ceramic filter element positioning

systems- Metal vs. ceramic "integral" jet pulse delivery

systems

The general conclusions drawn were:

1) Soft ceramic fiber ("Fibro") filter elements arelighter in weight (by a factor of 8-10), havesuperior tolerance for thermal shock, have equalremoval efficiency, and are less expensive thantheir hard ceramic counterparts.

2) Ceramic fiber ("Fibro") tube sheets have very lowcoefficients of thermal expansion, can operate attemperatures of +1500 ° C, are lighter in weight (bya factor of 8-10), are relatively insensitive totemperature variations, and are less expensive thanalloy tubesheets.

3) Whether metal or ceramic, the simplest and leastexpensive filter element fixing/positioning systemis the "hold down plate".

4


/

a. ^ METAL TUBE SHEET

COOLING PASSAGE

INSULATION

COOLED METAL TUBE SHEET W/INTEGRAL METAL FOLD-DOWN PLATE& JET DELIVERY - INSULATED

FIGURE: 8(A)

REFRACTORY LINING

INSULATION

INTEGRAL FIBFDHOLD DOWN-PLATE

AND JET PULSE DELIVERYjET PULSE

G-OLING PASSAGE

LAYERED INSULATION

COOLED METAL TUBE SHEET & INTEGRALFIRED HOLD DOWN PLATE AND JET DELIVERY

FIGURE: 8(B)

TYPICAL JETPULSE INLET

REFRACTORY LINING

RO HFIBOLD-DOWNPLATE W/ ROPED INTEGRAL

JET PULSE DELIVERY

FI BRO TUBE SHEET

FISRO TUBE SHEET & FIBRO HOLD-DOWNPLATE W/ INTEGRAL JET PULSE DELIVERY

FIGURE: 8(C)

A) Metal/Metal - A cooled metal tube sheet andmetal hold down plate with integral jet pulsedelivery system.

B) Metal/Fibro - Cooled metal tube sheet with ceramic("Fibro") hold down plate and integral ceramic jetpulse delivery system.

C) Fibro/Fibro - Ceramic ("Fibro") tube sheet andceramic ("Fibro") hold down plate with integral jetpulse delivery system.

Combinations A, B, and C are illustrated in Figure #8.

After cooling, at either programmed orunprogrammed down times, the integral system can belifted out in one piece and quickly replaced with acomplete one-piece spare. In the case of a Fibro/Fibrosystem, overall down time is shortened considerably dueto a shorter "cool down" time.

Failure Detection SystemUse of the expression "unprogrammed down times"

above implies a failure in the filter system. Shouldone or more filter elements fail for any reason it isimportant to know of the failure as early as possible.Passing particulate can be detected by placing a smallfilter element on the clean gas side of the filter andoperating it at approximately 10 or more times thefilter station design face velocity. Variation inpressure drop across this "sentinel" will signal anelement failure.

ConclusionThe authors have attempted to incorporate all of

the statements made to this point into Figures #9, #10,and #11, which illustrate that the cost of a hot gasfilter station can vary by as much as 30-50% once theincoming volume of gas has been defined.

In preparing the rather extensive cost data, theauthors categorized the cost affecting factors discussedin this paper as low, medium, or high in terms of theirpotential affect on costs and used the specific rangesshown in Figure #9. Note; tiered designs have not beenincluded in preparation for Figures #8, #9, #10, or #11.

RELATIVE COST EFFECT

COST FACTOR E 3 E E E E

ELEMENT PACKING DENSITY (m'/m') 28-35 22-27 < 20

FACE VELOCITY (nVHr.) 400 200 100

SOLIDS (cc/ni') 32 88 132

JET PULSE VOLLME (I/mz ) < 20 24-30 > 40

ALLOY & ALLOY &MATERIAL (INTERNALS) ALL CERAMIC

SOFT CERAMIC HARD CERAMIC

FIGURE: 9The hold down plate lends itself to the integral

system, wherein the jet pulse delivery system isincorporated within the hold down plate and the tubesheet. Integral systems can be designed as:

5


Gas flows, temperature, pressure, efficiency, fuel,etc. , all were taken from a presentation made at the EP^filtration workshop in San Francisco, November 1989.In that presentation, gasifier and PFBC 100 MWE powerplants were compared.

Because the input for Figures #10 and #11 areidentical, with the exception of operating pressure, theycan be discussed together. Included in the costs werethe pressure vessel, refractory lining (in the field),tube sheet, raw materials, machining and/or milling asrequired, filter candles, gaskets, fixing system forcandles, jet pulse delivery system, jet pulse measuringtank, jet pulse solenoids, and jet pulse system autocontrol. Also included was the pressure drop measuringequipment, a high solids detection and monitoring deviceon the "clean side" with an alarm triggered by a small"sniffer" candle, temperature sensors and engineering forall of the above. All of which were based on "Ex works"prices.

Q 15 BAR

100PPPO PO

OAF ^6 O {I5 OI O iI SSG

A 90 F ^ gP POF ,,° PN' 0̂ êP P^Ô

CT 80UA 70

s0m 3 H

40

V

30 /HR

2 00D

1

o ô

0 /HR0

0 .5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4U.S, DOLLARS x1,000,000

FIGURE: 10

0 30 BAP

100

PO Po 0fQ^6 yI SSG ^^9P

0 P°9^

^+r,^G

A 90 P^- F P^. F OP^,c

T 80UA 70

L6 ❑

m 3 FV = 100 m/HR

HR, 40

x 30 FV = 200 m/HR

1 00

1

100 o

0 FV = 400 n,/HR0

0 . 5 1 15 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4,5U.S. DOLLARS x1,000,000

FIGURE: 11

Not included in the cost build-ups were freight tosite, erection/installation, start up assistance, sparecomponents, main line valves, lock hoppers, or licensefees, etc.

Some comparisons may be of interest. Since thespecifications of the pressure vessel did not change,variables were assigned to the projected cost of some ofthe components of a complete filter at 15 Bar. Here aresome interesting multiples, taking the vessel as a 1.0multiplier:

Cooled metal tube sheet.. ................... 0.6Cooled metal tube sheet

metal hold down platewith integral jet pulse.. ................... 1.0Cooled metal tube sheet

Fibro hold down platewith integral jet pulse.. ................... 0.65SiC candles .............. ................... 1.25Fibro candles............ ................... 0.65

In summary, many factors contribute to the finalcost of a hot gas filter station. Some are dictated byprocess conditions and cannot be changed, while othersare a function of the filter design itself and can betailored to any given application.

As hot gas filtration technology continues toevolve, design breakthroughs will produce more costeffective filter systems. Advances in materials ofconstruction, particularly in the area of ceramicstructural components, will allow for greater componentselection, durability, and corrosion resistance.

Finally, as with any expanding market, competitionbetween suppliers will effectively help keep costs "incheck".

References

1. W. Hemplemann, Kernforschungszentrum,"Incineration of Low Level Radioactive Waste",Karlsruhe, (August 9, 1978).

2. J. G. Patel, Institute of Gas Technology, and F. L.Jones, ANR Venture Management Company,"Performance of Utah Bituminous Coal in the U-GasGasifier", Fifth EPRI Contractors Conference onCoal Gasification, (June, 1985).

3. S. Laux, H. Schiffer, U. Renz,Rheinisch-Westfalische Technische HochschuleAachen,"Performance of, Ceramic Filter Elements forCombined Cycle Power Plant High Temperature GasClean-Up", Fluidized Bed Combustion Meeting ASME,(1991).

4. 0. J. Tassicker, A. J. Leitch, Electric PowerResearch Institute, G. K. Burnard, Grimethorpe PFBCEstablishment, G. P. Reed, Coal ResearchEstablishment, "Performance of a Large FilterModule Utilizing Porous Ceramics on a PressurizedFluidized Bed Combustor", Tenth InternationalConference on Fluidized Bed Combustion, (April30-May 3, 1989).

5. A. J. Leitch, Electric Power Research Institute, "ASummary of the EPRI Hot Gas Filter Experience atthe Grimethorpe PFBC Establishment", EPRI Workshop,(November 29 & 30, 1989).

6. S. H. D. Lee, 0. K. Sscmalzer, M. J. Steindler, W.M. Swift, Argonne National Laboratory, "Measurementof Alkali Vapors in PFBC Exhaust", Proceedings ofthe Seventh Annual Coal-Fueled Heat Engines and GasStream Cleanup Systems Contractors Review Meeting",U. S. DOE, Morgantown, WV, (March, 1990).


7. L. H. Cowell, A. M. Hasen, R. T. Lecren, and M. D.Stephenson, Solar Turbines, Inc., "Coal-FueledTwo-Stage Slagging Combustion Island and CleanupSystem for Gas Turbine Application", Gas Turbineand Aeroengine Congress and Exposition, (June11-14,1990).

8. M. J. Baird, L. A. Jarr, J. R. Longanbach, M. C.Williams, U. S. Department of Energy, MorgantownEnergy Technology Center, "Proceedings of theSeparations Technology Workshop for CoalGasification", (December 8, 1988).

9. R. Jensen, U. Mahagaokar and A. Krewinghaus, ShellDevelopment Company, "SCGP - Progress in a Proven,Versatile, and Robust Technology", Ninth EPRIConference on Coal Gasification Power Plants,(September, 1990).

10. C. Wilkes, C. B. Santanam, DeJulio, Allison GasTurbine Division, G.M.C., and P. Eggerstedt,Industrial Filter & Pump Mfg. Co., "Gas StreamCleanup Program for Coal-Fueled Gas Turbines", U.S.DOE, METC Heat Engines Conference, Morgantown, WV,(March 25-28, 1990).

11. D. M. Hudson, A. N. Twigg, R. K. Clark a nd P.Holbrow British Coal Corporation, and A. J. LEITCH,Electric Power Research Institute, "Durability ofCeramic Filtration Systems for Particulate Removalat High Temperature", Fluidized Bed CombustionMeeting ASME, (1991).

12. M. Durst, A. Reinhardt, H. Vollmer, W. Koch,Schumacher GmbH & Co. KG, "The Performance of HighEfficiency High Temperature Ceramic Gas FilterElements", Vth World Filtration Congress, (June5-8,1990).

13. J. Sawyer, Acurex Corporation, R. J. Vass, N. R.Brown, and J. J. Brown, Virginia PolytechnicInstitute State University, "Corrosion andDegradation of Ceramic Particulate Filters inDirect Coal-Fired Turbine Applications", GasTurbine and Aeroengine Congress and Exposition,(June 11-14,1990).

14. J. Stringer and W. Bakker, E.P.R.I., J. Oakey,British Coal Corporation, C. Semler, SemlerMaterials Services, and M. Durst, Schumacher GmbH,"Materials Considerations for Removing Dust at HighTemperature from Reducing Gases", San Francisco, CA(November 29-30, 1989).

15. M. A. Alvin, T. E. Lippert, J. E. Lane,Westinghouse Electric Corporation, "Assessment ofPorous Ceramic Materials for Hot Gas FiltrationApplications", AIChE Annual Meeting, (November11-16, 1990).

16. J. P. K. Seville and R. Clift, University ofSurrey, C. J. Withers, Foseco International, Ltd.,and W. Keidel, Foseco GmbH, "Rigid Ceramic Mediafor Filtering Hot Gases", Filtration & Separation,(July/August 1989).

17. C. J. Withers and A. A. West. Foseco InternationalLtd.. A. N. Twigg and R. S. Courtney, British CoalCorporation, J. P. K. Seville and R. Clift,University of Surrey, "Improvements in thePerformance of Ceramic Media for Filtration of HotGases".

18. C. J. Bower, M. St. J. Arnold, J. E. Oakey and P.J. I. Cross, British Coal Corporation, "HotParticulate Removal for Coal Gasification Systems".

19. A. Jahkola and J. Jalovaara, Helsinki University ofTechnology, and S. Hulkkomen, Imatran Voima Oy,"Testing of Ceramic Candle FIlters at Otaniemi PFBCTest Rig", FLuidized Bed Combustion Meeting ASME,(1991).

20. J. Stringer and A. J. Leitch, E.P.R.I., R. K.Clark, Grimethorpe PFBC Establishment, "The EPRIHot Gas Filter Pilot Plant at Grimethorpe: WhatWorked, What Broke and Where Do We Go Now?",Fluidized Bed Combsution, ASME, (1991).

21. Zievers, J. F., Eggerstedt, P., and Aguilar, P.,Industrial Filter & Pump Mfg. Co., and Zievers,E. C., Universal Porosics, Inc., "Some OperatingExperience with Porous Ceramic Filters", Seminaron Fluidized Bed Combustion Technology for UtilityApplications, Palo Alto, CA, (May 3-5, 1988).

22. Zievers, E. C., Universal Porosics, Inc., Zievers,J. F. , and Eggerstedt, P. , Industrial Filter & PumpMfg. Co., "Porous Ceramics Can be Tailored to theHot Gas Filtration Job, and V.V.", EighthInternational Conference on Thermal Destruction ofHazardous, Radioactive, Infectious & Mixed Wastes,(May 2-5, 1989).

23. Zievers, J. F., Industrial Filter & Pump Mfg. Co.,"A Comparison of Cylindrical Porous CeramicElements Used for Hot Gas Filtration", Vth WorldFiltration Congress, (June 5-8, 1990).

24. Cheung, W., Seville, J. P. K., and Clift, R.Department of Chemical and Process Engineering,University of Surrey, C. J. Withers,Foseco International Ltd. and Keidel, W., FosecoGmbH, "Rigid Ceramic Media for Filtering HotGases".

25. Eggerstedt, P., Lab Report 61587 "Effect of HighCandle I.D. Velocities on Differential Pressure",(1987, reissued 1991).

26. Zievers, J. Z., and Eggerstedt, P., IndustrialFilter & Pump Mfg. Co., and Zievers, E. C.Universal Porosics, Inc., "Cylindrical PorousCeramic Elements for Hot Gas Filtration in theChemical Industry", American Institute of ChemicalEngineers Meeting, Chicago, Illinois, (November,1990).

27. Zievers, E. C., Universal Porosics, Inc., Zievers,J. F., Eggerstedt, P., and Aguilar, P., IndustrialFilter & Pump Mfg. Co, "Porous Ceramics in MedicalWaste Incineration", 1991 Incineration Conference,Knoxville, Tennessee, (May 13-17, 1991).

28. Zievers, J. F., and Eggerstedt, P., IndustrialFilter & Pump Mfg. Co., Zievers, E. C., UniversalPorosics, Inc., and Nicolai, D., SETEC GmbH,"Lightweight Ceramic Materials Make HighTemperature Gas Filtration Simpler", DeutscheKeramische Gesellschaft e.V. (DKG),Erlangen/Nurnberg, (October 17, 1991).

29. E.P.R.I. Gas Filtration Workshop, San Francisco,California, (November, 1989). Lecture by OwenTassicker - unpublished.


Wht Afft th Ct f t G ltr Sttn? - ASMEproceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/data/...h UI t hv n ddd prvn fr n nlt bffl nd rfrtr lnn n rdr t rrv t vl dtr In prprn t tt tht r rfrrd

Documents