78th Conference on Glass Problems E-Book

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Fachliteratur
• Serie: Ceramic Engineering and Science Proceedings
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 427

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2018

Beschreibung

The 78th Glass Problem Conference (GPC) including the 11th Advances in Fusion and Processing of Glass (AFPG) Symposium is organized by the Kazuo Inamori School of Engineering, The New York State College of Ceramics, Alfred University, Alfred, NY 14802 and The Glass Manufacturing Industry Council (GMIC), Westerville, OH 43082. The Program Director was S. K. Sundaram, Inamori Professor of Materials Science and Engineering, Kazuo Inamori School of Engineering, The New York State College of Ceramics, Alfred University, Alfred, NY 14802. The Conference Director was Robert Weisenburger Lipetz, Executive Director, Glass Manufacturing Industry Council (GMIC), Westerville, OH 43082. Donna Banks of the GMIC coordinated the events and provided support. The Conference started with a half-day plenary session followed by technical sessions. The themes and chairs of four half-day technical sessions were as follows: Modeling, Sensors, and Furnace Design James Uhlik, Toledo Engineering Company, Inc., Toledo, OH and Michelle Korwin-Edson, Owen Corning Composite Solutions, Granville, OH Refractories & Testing Laura Lowe - North American Refractory Company, Pittsburgh, PA, Larry McCloskey - Anchor Acquisition, LLC, Lancaster, OH, and Laura Lowe - North American Refractory Company, Pittsburgh, PA and Larry McCloskey - Anchor Acquisition, LLC, Lancaster, OH Combustion Glenn Neff, Glass Service USA, Inc., Stuart, FL and Uyi Iyoha, Praxair Inc., Tonawanda, NY Environmental & Safety Phil Tucker, Johns Manville, Denver, CO and Elmer Sperry, Libbey Glass, Toledo, OH

Leseprobe

78th Conference on Glass Problems

A Collection of Papers Presented at the 78th Conference on Glass Problems Including the 11th Advances in Fusion and Processing of Glass (AFPG) Symposium Greater Columbus Convention Center, Columbus, Ohio, November 6–9, 2017

Edited by

S. K. Sundaram

This edition first published 2018 © 2018 The American Ceramic Society

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by law. Advice on how to obtain permission to reuse material from this title is available at http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions.

The rights of S.K. Sundaram to be identified as the author of the editorial material in this work have been asserted in accordance with law.

Registered OfficeJohn Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA

Editorial Office111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA

For details of our global editorial offices, customer services, and more information about Wiley products visit us at www.wiley.com.

Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats and by print-on-demand. Some content that appears in standard print versions of this book may not be available in other formats.

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of WarrantyIn view of ongoing research, equipment modifications, changes in governmental regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to the use of experimental reagents, equipment, and devices, the reader is urged to review and evaluate the information provided in the package insert or instructions for each chemical, piece of equipment, reagent, or device for, among other things, any changes in the instructions or indication of usage and for added warnings and precautions. While the publisher and authors have used their best efforts in preparing this work, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this work and specifically disclaim all warranties, including without limitation any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives, written sales materials or promotional statements for this work. The fact that an organization, website, or product is referred to in this work as a citation and/or potential source of further information does not mean that the publisher and authors endorse the information or services the organization, website, or product may provide or recommendations it may make. This work is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a specialist where appropriate. Further, readers should be aware that websites listed in this work may have changed or disappeared between when this work was written and when it is read. Neither the publisher nor authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available.

ISBN: 9781119519645 ISSN: 0196-6219

Cover design by Wiley

Contents

Foreword

Preface

Acknowledgments

78th Glass Problems Conference

Modeling, Sensors, and Furnace Design

Optimization of Regenerator Design

Abstract

Impact Lownox Firing on Evaporation & Regenerator Integrity

Regenerator Modeling

Conclusions

References

Glass Defects Identification Using A Mass Spectrometer, Sem-Edx Microanalysis and HTO Analysis

Abstract

Introduction

Bubble Analyses Using Mass Spectrometry

High Temperature Observation (HTO)

Solid Glass Defects Analyses Using Sem-Edx Microanalysis

Conclusions

References

A New Radiometric Measurement Device for the Temperature of Ribbon Zones in Tin Bath and Lehrs

Abstract

Introduction

Physical Principle of A Newly Developed Device

Industrial Results

Measurement Precision

Implementation of the Radiometric Devices

Summary and Conclusions

Litterature

Furnace Design and Equipment for Extended Furnace Life

Use of Continuous Infrared Temperature Image to Optimize Furnace Operations

Abstract

Introduction

Site Trial Findings

Conclusions

References

Refractories & Testing

Acceptance Test of Fused Cast Azs Sidewall Blocks Using Ground Penetrating Radar

Abstract

Introduction

Background

Feasibility

Evaluation of Cut Blocks

Correlation to Corrosion

Algorithm Development

Key Findings Using GPR

Use of Back Surface Reflection to Gage Quality

Back Surface Interface

Scan Locations

Apparent Block Narrowing (ABN) Compared to Reflection Strength

Correction for 12 Inch Thick Blocks

Odd Shaped Blocks

Signal Collection and Processing

Inspections

Use of Inspection Data

Scanner Calibration

Equipment Repeatability

Multiple Melter Inspections

Conclusions

References

New Industry Standard in Furnace Inspection

Abstract

Current Needs of Industry

Smartmelter Radar-Based Sensors

Smartmelter Radar Technology Validation

Furnace Risk and Asset Management

Sidewall Thickness Monitoring

Other Critical Furnace Areas

Throat Thickness Monitoring

Conclusions and Future Work

Combustion

Design and Implementation of Optimelt™ Heat Recovery for An Oxy-Fuel Furnace at Libbey Leerdam

Abstract

Introduction

Operation at Pavisa

Optimelt Design for a Commercial Tableware Furnace

Process Safety Approach

Implementation Safety

References

Maintaining Full Production in Furnaces With Failing Regenerators Using Oxy-Fuel Combustion

Abstract

Introduction

Field Installations Two Plants With Similar Challenges

PLANT #1 Background

Discussion

Cfd Modeling

Results

Plant #2 Background

Phase I: Oxygen Lancing Discussion

Phase II: Thruport Oxy/Fuel Burners Discussion

Summary

Heat-Oxy-Combustion Bi-Fuel Burner - Heavy Fuel Oil Trials

Abstract

Introduction

Experimental Setup

Results

Discussion

Conclusion

References

Environmental & Safety

Glass Furnace Catalytic Ceramic Filter Installation and Operation Experience

Abstract

Project Introduction

The Treatment System Selection

The Physical Equipment Arrangement and Timeline

Development And Improvement of Reagent Dosing Control

Achievement and Running Cost

CCF Running Experience and Future Installation Recommendation

Reference

Operational Considerations and Lessons Learned For Dry Sorbent Injection Systems

Abstract

Introduction

Hydrated Lime Sorbents Revisited

DSI System Design Considerations

Common DSI System Operational Issues and Lessons Learned

Conclusions

Abbreviations

References

Glassil Dustshield™: A Materials Engineering Solution to Meet Osha’S New Respirable Silica Regulations

Abstract

Introduction

Glassil Dustshield™ Treated Sand Versus Untreated Sand

Acceptability For Glass Applications

Execution For Industry Trials

Conclusions

References

Deadly Dust: Reducing the Risks of Silica Dust in Glass Working Operations

Abstract

Introduction

What is Silica and Why is It A Problem?

The New Rule And Its Implementation

The Importance of Meeting the New Regulations

Steps To Take To Reduce Silica Dust Exposure

Conclusion: the Case For Clean Air

References

Notes

New Approach To Safety Estimation of Heat Soak Tested Thermally Toughened Safety Glass

Abstract

Introduction

Impact of the Nickel Sulphide Inclusions’ Positions

Impact of the Nickel Sulphide Inclusions’ Sizes

Conclusion

Note

References

Advances in Fusion and Processing of Glass Symposium

Design of SLS Compositions For Accelerated Chemical Strengthening

Abstract

Introduction

Minimum Case Depth (d

max

) Considerations

Interdiffusion Rates in Commercial Sls Glass

The Role of MGO in ION-Exchange Kinetics

The Mixed Alkali Effect

Summary

References

Warp Reduction in Thin Chemically Strengthened Float Glasses

Abstract

Introduction

Part Shape Modification Prior To Chemical Strengthening

Method of Heat-Treatment Prior To Chemical Strengthening

“Booster Shot” Method of Differential Time Chemical Strengthening

“Differential Chemistry” Method of Chemical Strengthening

“Differential Areal Density” Method of Chemical Strengthening

Discussion

Conclusions

Acknowledgments

References

Research And Development of New Energy-Saving, Environmentally Friendly Fiber Glass Technology

Abstract

Introduction

Research Approach

Experimental

Result And Discussions

Summary

Acknowledgement

Reference

The Relation Between Furnace Efficiency And the Physics And Chemistry of the Melting Process

Abstract

Introduction – Observations in UP-Scaling Campaigns

Systematic Approach To the Intrinsic Processes

Systematic Approach To Furnace Performance

Conclusion

References

Gyrotron Based Melting

Abstract

Introduction

Anylytical Basis

Experiments

Surface Melts

Cruched Granite Cold Crucible Melt

Basalt Pour

Nuclear Waste Glass Batch Fill Melts

Discussion

Acknowledgement

References

How the Industrial Revolution 4.0 Will Impact the Glass Industry Image Analysis That Is Part of Es 4.0 Is A Key Component Towards Industry 4.0

Abstract

Introduction

Details And Applications

Future

References

Modification of the Glass Surface During Manufacturing

Abstract

Introduction

Online Deposition Processes

Online Embedding Processes

Conclusions

Acknowledgement

References

Disclaimer

EULA

Guide

Cover

Table of Contents

Foreword

List of Table

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

Table 1

Table 1

Table 2

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

Table 1

Table 2

Table 1

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 1

Table 1

Table 2

Table 1

Pages

ix

x

xi

xiii

1

3

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

121

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

157

158

159

160

161

162

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177

179

181

182

183

184

185

186

187

188

189

191

192

193

194

195

196

197

198

199

200

201

202

203

204

205

206

207

208

209

210

211

212

213

214

215

216

217

218

219

220

221

222

223

224

225

226

227

228

229

230

231

233

234

235

236

237

238

239

240

241

242

243

244

245

246

247

248

249

250

251

252

253

254

255

256

257

258

259

260

261

263

264

265

266

267

268

269

270

Foreword

The 78th Glass Problems Conference (GPC) including the 11th Advances in Fusion and Processing of Glass (AFPG) Symposium is organized by the Kazuo Inamori School of Engineering, The New York State College of Ceramics, Alfred University, Alfred, NY 14802 and The Glass Manufacturing Industry Council (GMIC), Westerville, OH 43082. The Program Director was S. K. Sundaram, Inamori Professor of Materials Science and Engineering, Kazuo Inamori School of Engineering, The New York State College of Ceramics, Alfred University, Alfred, NY 14802. The Conference Director was Robert Weisenburger Lipetz, Executive Director, Glass Manufacturing Industry Council (GMIC), Westerville, OH 43082. Donna Banks of the GMIC coordinated the events and provided support. The Conference started with a half-day plenary session followed by technical sessions. The themes and chairs of four half-day technical sessions were as follows:

Modeling, Sensors, and Furnace Design

James Uhlik, Toledo Engineering Company, Inc., Toledo, OH and Michelle

Korwin-Edson, Owen Corning Composite Solutions, Granville, OH

Refractories & Testing

Laura Lowe – North American Refractory Company, Pittsburgh, PA, Larry McCloskey – Anchor Acquisition, LLC, Lancaster, OH, and Laura Lowe – North American Refractory Company, Pittsburgh, PA and Larry McCloskey – Anchor Acquisition, LLC, Lancaster, OH

Combustion

Glenn Neff, Glass Service USA, Inc., Stuart, FL and Uyi Iyoha, Praxair Inc.,

Tonawanda, NY

Environmental & Safety

Phil Tucker, Johns Manville, Denver, CO and Elmer Sperry, Libbey Glass,

Toledo, OH

In addition, there were four parallel half-day technical sessions on Modeling, Fiber Glasses, Glass Strengthening, and Melting and Characterization under the AFPG program.

Preface

This volume is a collection of papers presented at the 78th year of the Glass Problems Conference (GPC) including the 11th Advances in Fusion and Processing of Glass (AFPG) Symposium in 2017. The GPC continues the tradition of publishing the papers that goes back to 1934. The manuscripts included in this volume are reproduced as furnished by the presenting authors, but were reviewed prior to the presentation and submission by the respective session chairs. These chairs are also the members of the GPC Advisory Board. I appreciate all the assistance and support by the Board members and AFPG organizing committee members.

As the Program Director of the GPC, I am thankful to all the presenters at the 78th GPC including the 11th Advances in Fusion and Processing of Glass (AFPG) Symposium and the authors of the papers in this volume. This year’s meeting was a great success with 16% increase in attendance including 45 students. I appreciate all the support from the members of Advisory Board. Their volunteering sprit, generosity, professionalism, and commitment were critical to the high quality technical program at this Conference. I also appreciate continuing support and strong leadership from the Conference Director, Mr. Robert Weisenburger Lipetz, Executive Director of GMIC and excellent support from Ms. Donna Banks of GMIC in organizing the GPC. I look forward to continuing our work with the entire team in the future.

Please note that The American Ceramic Society and myself did minor editing and formatting of these papers. Neither Alfred University nor GMIC is responsible for the statements and opinions expressed in this volume.

S. K. SUNDARAMAlfred, NY February 2018

Acknowledgments

It is a great pleasure to acknowledge the dedicated service, advice, and team spirit of the members of the Glass Problems Conference (GPC) Advisory Board in planning this Conference, inviting key speakers, reviewing technical presentations, chairing technical sessions, and reviewing manuscripts for this publication:

Kenneth Bratton – Bucher Emhart Glass, Steinhausen, Switzerland Martin Goller – Corning Incorporated, Corning, NY Uyi Iyoha – Praxair Inc., Charlotte, NC Michelle Korwin-Edson – Owens Corning Composite Solutions, Granville, OH Robert Weisenburger Lipetz – Glass Manufacturing Industry Council, Westerville, OH Laura Lowe – HarbisonWalker International, Charlotte, NC Larry McCloskey – Consultant, Lancaster, OH Glenn Neff – Glass Service USA, Inc., Stuart, FL Adam Polcyn – Vitro Architectual Glass, Cheswick, PA Jans Schep – Owens-Illinois, Inc., Perrysburg, OH Elmer Sperry – Libbey, Inc., Toledo, OH Phillip J. Tucker – Johns Manville, Denver, CO James Mark Uhlik – Toledo Engineering Co., Inc., Toledo, OH Justin Wang – Guardian Industries Corporation, Auburn Hills, MI Andrew Zamurs – Rio Tinto Minerals, Greenwood, CO

In addition, I appreciate the support provided by the AFPG Organizing Committee members, Dr. Hong Li (PPG Industries, Inc), Dr. Katherine R. Rossington (Corning Incorporated), Mr. Mark Mecklenborg (The American Ceramic Society), Mr. Robert Weisenburger Lipetz (GMIC), Dr. Reinhard Conradt (Rheinisch Westfalische Technisch Itochschule AAChen), and Dr. Randall E. Youngman (Corning Incorporated).

Finally, I am indebted to Donna Banks, GMIC for her patience, support, and attent- ion to detail in making this conference a big success and these Proceedings possible.

78th GLASS PROBLEMS CONFERENCE

Modeling, Sensors, and Furnace Design

OPTIMIZATION OF REGENERATOR DESIGN

Oscar Verheijen1, Luuk Thielen1, Goetz Heilemann2, Elias Carrillo2

1CelSian Glass & Solar B.V., Eindhoven, the Netherlands

2RHI Glas, GERMANY

ABSTRACT

Improving energy efficiency and cost reduction in glass production are of key importance to maintain glass as a cost-competitive product with an environmentally sound footprint. Regenerators of glass furnaces have a major impact on energy efficiency in glass production, investment costs for new glass furnaces and maintenance costs (cleaning regenerators) during operation. The aim of improving design of regenerators is to maximize heat recovery from the hot flue gases (and to preheat combustion air) while minimizing its volume (to limit purchasing expensive regenerator bricks) and ageing. In practice, regenerator efficiency (and lifetime) depends also on the degree of clogging and fouling of the regenerator mainly caused by condensation of sodium sulfate in the regenerator condensation zone. Next to energy savings, the glass industry is further challenged to lower emissions by stricter legislation. Reducing NOx emissions tends to direct glass companies to near-stoichiometric combustion lowering the excess of air or oxygen. However, the presence of CO at near-stoichiometric combustion increases the evaporation of volatile species in the glass furnace. Thereby, and in combination with increased CO-levels, increased clogging and fouling of regenerators are observed affecting glass furnace energy efficiency and furnace and regenerator integrity.

Optimal design of regenerators (in view of heat recovery, costs and lifetime) requires detailed 3D CFD simulations in order to determine the turbulent flows in the complete regenerator, the local temperatures of the gases and complex shaped regenerator bricks and the convective and radiative heat exchange between gases and checkers for both flue gas and air phase. This paper reports on results of detailed modeling of a single-pass regenerator. Next to 3D-temperature fields, the distribution of flue gas (and air) over cross-sectional checker layers is shown. In addition, the impact of lowNOx firing conditions (and more specifically ‘reducing conditions’) on dust loading and fouling of the regenerator chambers is discussed.

IMPACT LOWNOX FIRING ON EVAPORATION & REGENERATOR INTEGRITY

Improving glass furnace energy efficiency is one of the key targets for glass companies to keep glass production a sustainable and cost-competitive industry. One way of reducing energy consumption of regenerative glass furnaces is improving the heat recovery from flue gases by preheating combustion air. The theoretical maximum regenerator efficiency is in the order of 77%. However, practical values vary in the range of 60 – 65% [1]. As each percent (absolute) increase in regenerator efficiency results in a reduction of energy consumption with about 1.3% for container glass furnaces, significant energy savings can be accomplished by improving the flue gas heat recovery behavior of regenerators. Besides reducing energy consumption of glass furnaces, improving the flue gas heat recovery in regenerators also might lead to a more compact regenerator design with lowered investment costs.

Next to lowering energy consumption, glass companies are also forced to reduce emissions. A way to reduce NOx emissions is near-stoichiometric combustion at which the excess of air or oxygen is lowered. A negative side-effect of near-stoichiometric combustion is the presence of CO that might result in increased evaporation of volatile components [2], like alkaline and sulfur species, from the batch blanket and hot glass melt. Increased volatilization rates of these species will increase the concentration of these components in the flue gas that can deposit in the regenerator chambers. The mechanism of condensation and the type of products formed depends on the oxidation state of the flue gas entering the regenerator.

The impact of reducing conditions (increased CO-levels and concentration of alkaline and sulfur species) on the integrity of the checker-work in regenerator chambers has been under investigation recently. To assess the chemical resistance of various types of refractory material as a function of flue gas composition (including flue gas oxidation state) and temperature, long corrosion tests have been performed with experimental systems as shown in Figure 1. A gas-air/oxygen flame (with a defined content of O2 or CO) is established to which alkaline (sodium) and sulfur species are dosed. The flue gas is led over an array of various species of checker-work material in the temperature range similar to the condensation zone in regenerator chambers. The corrosion behavior of the checker-work is evaluated over a period of typically one week. Afterwards, the pieces of checker-work material are evaluated on corrosion products by means of SEM analysis.

Figure 1. Experimental set-up to study behavior of regenerator refractory material exposed to well-defined flue gas composition (i.e. the oxidation state of the flue gas (CO/O2 content), and content of alkaline and sulfur species) as a function of temperature.

Generally, in the top-zone of the regenerator chamber (see Figure 2), the refractory material should resist interaction with carry-over products comprising e.g. fine sand, fine cullet and decrepitating limestone and/or dolomite. No flue gas condensates are expected to be formed in this zone and therefore the choice of refractory material in this zone does not depend on oxidation state of the flue gas. Also for the hot-zone of the regenerator chamber (>1100°C) a similar flue gas behavior is expected for both oxidizing and reducing conditions. The predominant reacting gaseous species in this hot-zone are alkaline compounds. The main sodium species for both oxidizing and reducing conditions is NaOH. In case of reducing conditions, the evaporation rate of sodium from the batch blanket and glass melt might be slightly higher than at oxidizing conditions resulting in (slightly) higher sodium concentrations in the flue gas at reducing conditions.

Figure 2. Schematic view of a single-pass regenerator with different zones having different requirements with respect to choice of refractory material.

In the condensation zone (800-1100 °C) of the regenerator chamber, the condensation products formed during cooling of the flue gas depend on the oxidation state of the flue gas. At oxidizing conditions, for soda-lime-silica glasses with salt cake as fining agent, the predominant flue gas condensation reaction is given by 2 NaOH (g) + SO2 (g) + ½ O2 (g) → Na2SO4 (l,s) + H2O (g). At reducing conditions, with no or limited O2 present, the amount of Na2SO4 condensates is reduced and sodium is also present as NaOH and Na2CO3. At these reducing conditions, refractory should be resistant towards attack by a mixture of NaOH, Na2CO3 (+ Na2SO4). RHI indicates that at CO-levels exceeding 1.000 vol-ppm the most suitable refractory material is material composed of 97% MgO with direct MgO bonding and C2S (2CaO.SiO2) binder (Type ‘Anker DG1’) is applied. Basic products show excellent performance under these conditions whereas non-basic products, e.g. mullite-based products, are not suitable, due the formation of nepheline resulting in large volume changes.

An industrial example of the impact of reducing conditions on alkaline evaporation is shown by Figure 3. This figure shows the sodium evaporation rate for 3 similar furnaces with varying combustion conditions. From this figure it is clear that alkaline evaporation increases with increasing (local) CO content of the flue gas and the local flue gas velocities in the vicinity of the surface of the batch blanket and hot glass melt. In other words, excessive evaporation that might lead to intensified clogging and corrosion of refractory material in regenerator chambers can be controlled by optimizing combustion conditions avoiding amongst others high (local) CO-levels, temperatures and flue gas velocities.

Figure 3. Sodium evaporation rate for 3 similar furnaces with varying combustion conditions.

REGENERATOR MODELING