80th Conference on Glass Problems E-Book

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Fachliteratur
• Serie: Ceramic Transaction Series
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 254

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2020

Beschreibung

The 80th Glass Problem Conference (GPC) was 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. The GPC Advisory Board (AB) included the Program Director, the Conference Director, and several industry representatives. The Board assembled the technical program. 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 technical sessions were as follows: Melting and Combustion Uyi Iyoha, Praxair, Inc., Peachtree City, GA, Jan Schep, Owens-Illinois, Inc., Perrysburg, OH, and Justin Wang, Guardian Industries, Auburn Hills, MI Batch, Environmental, and Modeling Phil Tucker, Johns Manville, Littleton, CO and Chris Tournour, Corning Inc., Corning, NY Refractories Larry McCloskey, Anchor Acquisition, LLC, Lancaster, OH and Eric Dirlam, Ardagh Group, Muncie, IN Sensors and Control Adam Polycn, Vitro Architectural Glass, Cheswick, PA and Glenn Neff, Glass Service USA, Inc., Stuart, FL

Leseprobe

Table of Contents

Cover

80th Conference on Glass Problems

Copyright

Foreword

Melting and Combustion

Batch, Environmental, and Modeling

Refractories

Sensors and Control

Preface

Acknowledgements

PLENARY SESSION

FUTURE OF OXY‐FUEL GLASS MELTING: OXYGEN PRODUCTION, ENERGY EFFICIENCY, EMISSIONS AND CO

2

NEUTRAL GLASS MELTING

INTRODUCTION

ECONOMICS OF OXY‐FUEL FIRING

OXYGEN GENERATION TECHNOLOGY

ENERGY EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENTS FOR FUTURE

CURRENT CO

2

EMISSIONS FROM GLASS PRODUCTION

HYDROGEN AND BIOMASS DERIVED FUELS FOR REDUCING CO

2

EMISSIONS

SUMMARY

REFERENCES

PECULIAR WEAR BEHAVIOR OF SODA LIME SILICATE GLASS IN HUMID AIR AND ITS IMPLICATIONS

INTRODUCTION

WEAR OF THE GLASS SURFACE

SODA LIME GLASS RESISTANCE TO MODERATE WEAR

INFLUENCE OF SODA LIME GLASS PROCESSING CONDITIONS ON WEAR BEHAVIOR

WEAR BEHAVIOR OF SODA LIME GLASSES UNDER SEVERE WEAR CONDITIONS

PATH FORWARD

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.

REFERENCES

MELTING AND COMBUSTION

A GLASS PROBLEM SOLVED

INTRODUCTION

THE FIRES

WHY LEFT SIDE?

THE GLB

THE WAIST AREA

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

ELECTRIC POWER ADJUSTMENT IN GLASS FURNACE WITH VARIVOLT TRANSFORMER

CONCLUSION:

SYNCHRONIZED OXY‐FUEL BOOST BURNERS FOR ZERO‐PORT PERFORMANCE OPTIMIZATION IN FLOAT GLASS MELTING FURNACES

INTRODUCTION

THE CLEANFIRE

®

HRx™ BURNER

SYNCHRONIZED BOOSTING SYSTEM

RESULTS OF COMMERCIAL DEMONSTRATION

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

REFERENCES

ELECTRIC BOOSTING AND HYBRID FURNACES (PRACTICAL APPLICATION OF HIGHER LEVELS OF ELECTRIC HEAT INPUT)

INTRODUCTION

COST EVALUATION FOR MELTING ENERGY

LIMITATIONS OF CURRENT MELTING TECHNOLOGY

HEAT TRANSFER, CONVECTION CURRENTS AND BATCH MELTING

HEAT INPUT BY ELECTRICAL BOOSTING

FLEXIBILITY OF THE HEAT INPUT BY COMBUSTION

FLEXIBILITY OF THE HEAT INPUT BY ELECTRICAL BOOSTING

DESIGN PRINCIPLES OF A HIGHLY FLEXIBLE HYBRID MELTER

500TPD CONTAINER TANK EXAMPLE AND MODELLING RESULTS

RESULTS OF ROOF TEMPERATURE AND SURFACE HEAT FLUX

RESULTS ON BATCH EXTENSION, MELT CONVECTION AND HOT SPOT

COMBUSTION SPACE WITH 20 AND 80% INPUT

RESULTS ON MELT FINING AND GLASS QUALITY

CONCLUSIONS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

REFERENCES

CARBON REDUCTION WITH SUPER BOOSTING AND ADVANCED ENERGY MANAGEMENT USING RENEWABLE RESOURCES

INTRODUCTION

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

FIGURE REFERENCES

TABLE REFERENCES

BATCH, ENVIRONMENTAL, AND MODELING

DESIGNING FURNACE FEED SYSTEMS THAT WORK

INTRODUCTION

LINKING MATERIAL FLOW AND PLANT PERFORMANCE

COMMON SOLIDS PROBLEMS

FLOW PATTERNS

FLOW PROPERTIES

SEGREGATION MECHANISMS

DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

CONCLUSIONS

REFERENCES

BAG FILTER AND CATALYST (SCR) – DOES THIS FIT TOGETHER?

INTRODUCTION

SECONDARY MEASURES FOR NO

X

REDUCTION IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY

REMARKABLE ASPECTS FOR THE COMBINATION BAG FILTER ‐ SCR

REFERENCE EXAMPLE

CONCLUSIONS

REFERENCES

CULLET – ANOTHER STEP TOWARDS GLASS SUSTAINABILITY

INTRODUCTION

SOURCES OF CULLET

BATCH CHEMISTRY

BATCH PHYSICS

MODEL STUDY

CULLET

CONCLUSIONS

REFRACTORIES

NEW TUCKSTONE REFRACTORY SOLUTION FOR LONG LIFE GLASS FURNACE SUPERSTRUCTURE

INTRODUCTION

UNDERSTANDING OF TUCKSTONE RUPTURE

WAYS OF TUCKSTONE IMPROVEMENT

CONCLUSION

OPTIMIZATION AND ENERGY SAVINGS ESPECIALLY IN CONTAINER GLASS PRODUCTION BY USING A REFRACTORY COATING

INTRODUCTION

TECHNOLOGY & RESULTS

ECONOMICAL RELEVANCE

FUTURE

CONCLUSIONS

REFERENCES

SENSORS AND CONTROLS

APPLICATION OF ADVANCED SENSORS IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY

INTRODUCTION

ALL DOMAINS WORK TOGETHER TO OBTAIN GOOD QUALITY

LIBS TECHNOLOGY

OUTLOOK

CONCLUSIONS

REFERENCES:

LIGHTER AND STRONGER

INTRODUCTION

HOT END FORMING: QUALITY FOCUS

USE OF SENSORS

INSPECTION VERSUS PROCESS MONITORING

LOWERING DISTURBANCES

MANAGING PROCESS VARIATIONS: EVEN GLASS WALL THICKNESS VARIATION

COMBINING AND ANALYZING DATA: CREATING INTELLIGENCE

STRONG ORGANIZATION: SOP’S OR IF POSSIBLE, FORMING PROCESS AUTOMATION

CONCLUSIONS

HTX

TM

– HIGH PERFORMANCE, HIGH TEMPERATURE THERMOCOUPLE WIRE

INTRODUCTION

MEASUREMENTS

RESULTS

DISCUSSION

CONCLUSIONS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

REFERENCES

NOT JUST A PRETTY PICTURE – IN‐FURNACE THERMAL IMAGING

INTRODUCTION

EQUIPMENT AND EXPERIMENTAL PLAN

OBSERVATIONS

CONCLUSIONS

REFERENCES

End User License Agreement

List of Tables

Chapter 1

Table 1. Fuel and oxygen consumption and cost of biomass derived fuels relati...

Chapter 2

Table 1. Summary of moderate wear behavior of the glass substrate in high hum...

Chapter 5

Table 1. Average cullet as a percentage of charged material for each of the b...

Table 2. Optimal staging mode and primary oxygen valve positions for the sync...

Chapter 6

Table I. Input values for melt energy cost evolution diagrams

Chapter 7

Table 1 – Emissions shown as the amount of CO

2

required per kWh

Chapter 9

Table 1 : Catalyst poisons [8]

Chapter 11

Table 1 – Maximum of first principal stress on two areas of tuckstone

Chapter 12

Table 1 : influencing the crystallization behavior of the glass

Table 2 : potential of batch change

Chapter 15

Table 1 . A list of the seven wires used in each multiwire thermocouple.

Table 2 . Wire combinations for TC1.

Table 3 . Wire combinations for TC2.

List of Illustrations

Chapter 1

Figure 1. fuel and oxygen costs for a generic 300 mtpd (metric ton per day) ...

Figure 2. Historical trend of specific electric power consumption to make VP...

Figure 3. Potential improvements in specific fuel consumption for a 300 mtpd...

Figure 4. Comparison of CO2 emissions from 300 tpd container glass furnaces ...

Chapter 2

Figure 1. Architectural glazing product lifecycle.

Figure 2. The wear depth of soda lime float glass as a function of humidity ...

Chapter 3

Fig. 1 – Defect level on October 1

Fig. 2 – Defects on December 16

Fig. 3 – December 16 defects over 24 hours

Fig. 4 – Port fires

Fig. 5 – Fire comparison

Fig. 6 – Typical combustion space flows

Fig. 7 – Client’s furnace flows representation

Fig. 8 – Client furnace fires

Fig. 9 – Typical float furnace glass flows

Fig. 10 – Furnace glass level bowl

Fig. 11 – Waist sidewall wear

Fig. 12 – Client’s left side waist area at cooler

Fig. 13 – Furnace metal line; waist cooler build‐up

Fig. 14 – Defects after fires adjustment, December 19‐21

Fig. 15 – Defect level at end of TECO’s visit

Chapter 5

Figure 1. A zone of recirculated gases can develop between the charge wall a...

Figure 2. CFD modeling results showing the effect of recirculation patterns ...

Figure 3. Photo of Cleanfire

®

HR

x

™ burner from the burner block hot fac...

Figure 4. Various staging modes of the HR

x

burner

Figure 5. Right side oxy‐fuel boost burners with opposed (left) side air‐fue...

Figure 6. Left side oxy‐fuel boost burners with opposed (right) side air‐fue...

Figure 7. Normalized average energy consumption (MMBTU/ton) per ton of glass...

Figure 8. The normalized average energy consumption (MMBTU/ton) per ton of g...

Figure 9. The average glass bottom temperature at the left and right side of...

Figure 10. Temperature difference of the nearest crown thermocouple in proxi...

Figure 11. Defects per ton of glass normalized to the HR

i

Advanced Boost bur...

Chapter 6

Figure 1. Electric power short term fluctuations of availability, consumptio...

Figure 2. Energy costs in glass melting for the two cases listed in Table I...

Figure 3. Principal heat fluxes and melt convection in glass tanks

Figure 4. Relationship of radiative heat flux density and combustion mean te...

Figure 5. schematic illustration of batch blanket melting process (after (1)...

Figure 6. Batch blanket temperature and heat flux profiles for high combusti...

Figure 7. Batch blanket temperature and heat flux profiles for a temperature...

Figure 8. Horizontal heat transport mechanism pushing for a homogenization o...

Figure 9. Lower face heat flux densities deduced from melting rates in two c...

Figure 10. Fives Stein hot top vertical shelf melter with lower section for ...

Figure 11. principal design elements of the flexible hybrid melter

Figure 12. Melt convection with a double recirculation and a waist + barrier...

Figure 13. heat flux densities over the tank length for a 500 tpd flexible h...

Figure 14. Roof temperatures over the tank length for a 500 tpd flexible hyb...

Figure 15. Batch blanket extension for a 500 tpd flexible hybrid melter

Figure 16. Burner arrangement and flame development for a 500 tpd flexible h...

Figure 17. Critical trajectory for high temperature fining in a 500 tpd flex...

Chapter 7

Figure 1 [1] – CO

2

reduction is a must to rescue planet earth for our childr...

Figures 2 and 3 [2 and 3] – Can fossil fuel be the future?

Figure 4 [4] ‐ Fossil Fuel Related Carbon Emissions

Figure 5 [5] – Required surface area to harvest sufficient renewable solar e...

Figure 6 [6] ‐ Is renewable energy the future?

Figure 7 [7] – Netherlands

Figure 8 [8] – Share of renewable energy per total gross used energy in EU 2...

Figure 9 [9] – Installed present renewable energy in Germany. 20% of total e...

Figures 10, 11, and 12 [10, 11, and 12]

Figure 13 [13] – Offshore windmill plans are huge with 200‐meter‐high windmi...

Figure 14 [14] – Vienna Area

Figure 15 [15] – Dogger Bank Plan

Figure 16 [16] – Electricity costs from renewables are close to fossil fuel ...

Figure 17 [17] – Power to Pathways Using H

2

– Buffering Peaks and Dips

Figure 18 [18] – Melting Costs Comparison, electricity 8

€ cents

per...

Figure 19 [18] – Melting Costs Comparison, electricity 0.05

€

/kWh

Figure 20 [18] ‐ Melting Costs Comparison, CO

2

100 EUR/ton

Figure 21 [18] – Melting Costs Comparison, Hydrogen gas 0.4 EUR/Nm

3

Figure 22 [18] – Melting Costs Comparison, Hydrogen gas, 0.1 EUR/Nm

3

Figure 23 [18] – Hybrid breakeven point as function of Electricity price

Figure 24 [19] – First Electric Glass Melting in 1905

Figure 25 [20] – Continuous All Electric Horizontal Melter for Container Gla...

Figure 26 [18] – Electric melting has ±double thermal efficiency compared to...

Figure 27 – Horizontal Hybrid Electric Melter – GS|H

2

EM CH

4

Figure 28 – Optimizing electric heating configurations with CFD. Including t...

Figure 29 – GS

Expert System III

MPC automatically controlled furnace, follo...

Figure 30 [21] – The future may be T furnace (not Tesla)

Chapter 8

Figure 1. Examples of a Cohesive Arch and a Rathole

Figure 2. The Results of Stagnation Within a Furnace Feed Bin

Figure 3. Abrasive Wear on Feed Bin Sections Requiring Patches

Figure 4. Mass Flow and Funnel Flow

Figure 5. General Arrangement for a Wall Friction Test

Figure 6. General Arrangement for a Cohesive Strength Test

Figure 7. Example Flow Functions and Trends in Cohesive Strength

Figure 8. Sifting Segregation During Filling and Discharge of a Bin

Figure 9. Sifting Segregation During Discharge of a Bin

Figure 10 Particle Entrainment (Dusting) Segregation During Filling of a Bin...

Figure 11 Constant Pitch vs. Variable Pitch Screw

Figure 12 Abrasive Wear Testing

Figure 13 Abrasive Wear Analysis

Chapter 9

Figure 1 : NO

x

formation mechanisms [1]

Figure 2 : Process for the NO

x

reduction with SCR technology

Figure 3 : Comparison of efficiency of different separators for solid matters...

Figure 4 : General design of an SCR plant

Figure 5 : Honeycomb catalyst elements and catalyst module [8]

Figure 6 : Design parameters for catalysts

Figure 7 : NO

x

separation efficiency as function of temperature [8]

Figure 8 : Catalyst temperature as function of SO

x

[9]

Figure 9 : Steam pressure graphs of different compounds [9]

Figure 10 : Basic scheme of a combination bag filter ‐ SCR

Figure 11 : Flat‐tube heat exchanger [9]

Figure 12 : Three examples for the combination of bag filters with an SCR pla...

Figure 13 : Screen shot

Figure 14 : Trend curves for clean gas values

Chapter 10

Figure 1 : Theoretical energy to produce glass consist of sensible energy to ...

Figure 2 : Mixed Cullet Density ‐ The more cullet the higher the density.

Figure 3 : Batch Thermal Conductivity ‐ No cullet compared to cullet.

Figure 4 : Energy Consumption Reduces with the use of Cullet.

Figure 5 : CO

2

Production Decreases with the use of Cullet, Lowering its Carb...

Chapter 11

Figure 1 – Issues triggered by tuckstone rupture (view on a furnace cross sec...

Figure 2 – Crack stopped in most transformed area (17 years old tuckstone) a...

Figure 3 summarizes these cases.

Figure 3 – Stress pattern on tuckstones (whitish bottom areas are the most s...

Figure 4 – Crack survey on 14 tuckstones (after 17 years of use)

Figure 5 – Example of composite‐insulated tuckstone

Figure 6 – “Box furnace” set‐up and comparison between insulated and not ins...

Figure 7 – Post‐mortem AZS tuckstone vs Post‐Mortem High Zirconia (HZFC) Tuc...

Figure 8 – Corrosion of sealing blocks installed in glass furnaces (18 month...

Figure 9 – Toughness measurement / 3‐pt bending chevron notched samples

Figure 10 – Sample of a rounded Tuckstone

Figure 11 – Ratio modulus of rupture on modulus of elasticity, AZS 32%, 3‐pt...

Figure 12 – The ideal “TuckPro” Tuckstone

Chapter 12

Figure 1 : coating effect ‐ strong infiltration (left) and beading effect by ...

Figure 2 : influence of the refractory corrosion to the crystallization tempe...

Figure 3 : coated rings at the place of the company ancorro

Figure 4 : coated silica (right side) to increase the radiative heat transfer...

Chapter 13

Figure 1 – Example of a thermal image and batch position software

Figure 2 – ReadOx sensor on the left and CelSian laser sensor on the right

Figure 3 – Paneratech SmartMelter Radar Inspections

Chapter 14

Fig. 1 , bird swing detected and rejected. Root cause in swabbing. Improving ...

Fig. 2 , swabbing is a main disturbance in the glass making process and creat...

Fig. 3 , vertical (left) and horizontal (right) glass distribution

Fig. 4a , gob length decreased due to increased friction in deflector

Fig. 4b , decreased gob length causes increase of parison neck temperature…

Fig. 4c , ... which results in shift of glass distribution and finally a thin...

Chapter 15

Figure 1 . Diagram showing the experimental set up.

Figure 2 . The emf drift of six different thermocouple pairs in TC1 over 1450...

Figure 3 . The difference between the emf drift of an HTX

TM

thermocouple and ...

Figure 4 The emf drift of six different thermocouple pairs in TC2 over 65 th...

Figure 5 The difference between the emf drift of an HTX

TM

thermocouple and a...

Figure 6 . The emf drift of a standalone 0.5 mm HTX

TM

type S thermocouple (TC...

Guide

Cover

Table of Contents

Begin Reading

Pages

iv

vii

ix

xi

1

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

23

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

35

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

95

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

131

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

149

150

151

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177

178

179

80th Conference on Glass Problems

Ceramic Transaction, Volume 268

A Collection of Papers Presented at the 80th Conference on Glass Problems Greater Columbus Convention Center, Columbus, Ohio October 28‐31, 2019

Edited byS. K. Sundaram

This edition first published 2021

© 2020 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 authors of the editorial material in this work have been asserted in accordance with law

Registered Office

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

Editorial Office

111 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 Warranty

In 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.

Names: Conference on Glass Problems (80th : 2018 : Columbus, Ohio) |

  American Ceramic Society, issuing body.

Title: 80th conference on glass problems / The American Ceramic Society.

  Description: Hoboken, NJ : Wiley-American Ceramic Society, 2021. | Series:

  Ceramic transactions; volume 268 | Includes index.

Identifiers: LCCN 2020036165 (print) | LCCN 2020036166 (ebook) | ISBN

  9781119744900 (cloth) | ISBN 9781119744917 (adobe pdf) | ISBN

  9781119744924 (epub)

Subjects: LCSH: Glass—Congresses. | Glass manufacture—Congresses. |

  Glass—Defects—Congresses. | Glass melting—Congresses.

Classification: LCC TP786 .C66 2021 (print) | LCC TP786 (ebook) | DDC

  666/.1—dc23

LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020036165

LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020036166

Cover design by Wiley

Foreword

The 80th Glass Problem Conference (GPC) was 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. The GPC Advisory Board (AB) included the Program Director, the Conference Director, and several industry representatives. The Board assembled the technical program. 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 technical sessions were as follows:

Melting and Combustion

Uyi Iyoha, Praxair, Inc., Peachtree City, GA, Jan Schep, Owens‐Illinois, Inc., Perrysburg, OH, and Justin Wang, Guardian Industries, Auburn Hills, MI

Batch, Environmental, and Modeling

Phil Tucker, Johns Manville, Littleton, CO and Chris Tournour, Corning Inc., Corning, NY

Refractories

Larry McCloskey, Anchor Acquisition, LLC, Lancaster, OH and Eric Dirlam, Ardagh Group, Muncie, IN

Sensors and Control

Adam Polycn, Vitro Architectural Glass, Cheswick, PA and Glenn Neff, Glass Service USA, Inc., Stuart, FL

Preface

This volume is a collection of papers presented at the 80th year of the Glass Problems Conference (GPC) in 2018. 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.

As the Program Director of the GPC, I am thankful to all the presenters at the 80th GPC. This year’s meeting was record breaking in many sense. We had a total of 570 registered attendees including 40 students from across the country. 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, NYMarch 2020

Acknowledgements

It is my great pleasure to acknowledge the dedicated service, advice, and team spirit of the members of the GPC AB in planning this Conference, inviting key speakers, reviewing technical presentations, chairing technical sessions, and reviewing manuscripts for this publication:

Kenneth Bratton‐

Bucher Emhart Glass, Windsor, CT

Chris Bloom‐

Owens Corning, Granville, OH

Weijian Chen‐

Libbey Glass, Toledo, OH

Eric Drilam‐

Ardagh Glass, Muncie, IN

Uyi Iyoha–

Praxair Inc., Peachtree City, GA

Robert Lipetz‐

Glass Manufacturing Industry Council, Westerville, OH

Larry McCloskey–

Anchor Acquisition, LLC, Lancaster, OH

Glenn Neff‐

Glass Service USA, Inc., Stuart, FL

Adam Polcyn–

Vitro Architectural Glass, Cheswick, PA

Jan Schep–

Owens‐Illinois, Inc., Perrysburg, OH

Christopher Tournour–

Corning Incorporated, Corning, NY

Phillip Tucker‐

Johns Manville, Littleton, CO

James Uhlik–

Toledo Engineering Co., Inc., Toledo, OH

Justin Wang–

Guardian Industries, Auburn Hills, MI

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

PLENARY SESSION

FUTURE OF OXY‐FUEL GLASS MELTING: OXYGEN PRODUCTION, ENERGY EFFICIENCY, EMISSIONS AND CO2 NEUTRAL GLASS MELTING

Hisashi Kobayashi

Praxair, Inc.

Danbury, CT, 06810

ABSTRACT

Over 300 commercial glass melting furnaces have been successfully converted to oxy‐fuel firing worldwide since 1991 when the first full oxy‐fuel conversion of a large container glass furnace took place. The main benefits of oxy‐fuel conversion are fuel reduction, glass quality improvement, emissions reduction (CO2, CO, NOx, SO2, particulates), and productivity improvements. Significant changes in the melting and fining behaviors were observed under oxy‐fuel firing. Most furnaces required some batch modifications to optimize the glass fining chemistry and to control foam. Improved oxy‐fuel burner and furnace designs have reduced alkali volatilization and silica crown corrosion. Silica crown is expected to last for a full furnace campaign, especially with new no‐lime silica bricks. Today most of high‐quality specialty glass products such as LCD display glass and fiber glass are melted in oxy‐fuel fired glass furnaces. Oxy‐fuel conversion of large soda lime glass furnaces, however, has been limited to about sixty container and ten float/flat glass furnaces due to the additional cost of using oxygen. Key factors to improve the economics of oxy‐fuel fired such as efficiency of air separation technology and waste heat recovery are reviewed. The potential of using hydrogen and renewable fuels with oxygen to reduce CO2 emissions is also discussed.

(key words: oxy‐fuel, glass melting, CO2 reduction, hydrogen combustion)

INTRODUCTION

In 1988, the U.S. Department of Energy awarded a program to Praxair, Inc. (a member of the Linde group now) to demonstrate the use of oxy‐fuel combustion in a large commercial glass furnace using an on‐site vacuum‐pressure swing adsorption (VPSA) technology. A container glass furnace at Gallo Glass Company was rebuilt in 1991 as the first large scale oxy‐fuel fired furnace1. The successful conversion of the furnace and the demonstration of significant fuel savings (15%) and emissions reduction (80% reduction in NOx and CO, and 30% particulates) stimulated the glass industry to adopt the new technology at a rapid rate. By 1996 about 90 commercial glass furnaces were converted to oxy‐fuel firing worldwide2. Although the rate of oxy‐fuel firing conversions slowed down since then, over 300 commercial glass furnaces are fired with oxygen today. Most of specialty glass furnaces such as LCD glass furnaces are fired with oxygen as high glass melting temperature, relatively small furnace size and the high glass quality requirement made oxy‐fuel firing more economic. Over one hundred insulation and reinforcing glass fiber furnaces have been converted to oxygen firing as large fuel savings are achieved when air fired recuperative furnaces are converted to oxy‐fuel firing. About fifty container glass furnaces and about ten float/flat glass furnaces have been converted for NOx reduction, production rate increase, and capital cost reduction.

Most of fuel efficiency gains of oxy‐fuel fired furnaces come from the elimination of nitrogen contained in combustion air (i.e., about 78% N2 and 1% Ar by volume) and the corresponding reduction in the flue gas sensible heat loss3. Fuel savings of 5 to 50% have been achieved without using any flue gas heat recovery systems under oxy‐fuel firing as compared with various air fired furnaces. Fuel savings achievable by oxy‐fuel conversion depend on the type of heat recovery systems used in the air fired furnaces and their conditions. About 10 to 15% fuel savings have been achieved on the furnace campaign average for large container and float glass furnaces equipped with efficient regenerators to preheat combustion air to about 1300C. The efficiency of regenerators deteriorates with furnace age due mainly to deposits build up in the regenerator passage and to increase in air infiltration4. For example, specific fuel consumption for an air fired regenerative furnace may increase by 16% over 12 years (i.e., 1.35% per year)5, while that for oxy‐fuel fired furnace without heat recovery may increase only by 6% over 12 years. Thus, fuel savings by oxy‐fuel firing is relatively small in early furnace campaign and increases as the furnace ages. For fiber glass furnaces with metallic recuperators fuel savings by oxy‐fuel conversion are typically in a range of 30 to 50%. Metallic recuperators can preheat combustion air only up to about 800C and the furnace energy efficiency is significantly lower than the furnaces equipped with regenerators. For small specialty glass furnaces operating at high temperatures, fuel savings over 50% have been achieved in some furnaces since small recuperators and regenerators are not very efficient.

Reduction of NOx emissions was an important benefit and an economic driver for oxy‐fuel conversion, especially in the U.S.. Due to the high furnace temperature required for glass melting significant “thermal NOx” is formed in the flame region. The rate of formation of thermal NOx is strongly temperature dependent and approximately proportional to the concentration of nitrogen in the furnace. The conversion of an air fired furnace to oxy‐fuel firing typically results in NOx reduction by 80 to 90% as the nitrogen concentration in the furnace is reduced from about 70% in the air fired furnace to about 5 to 10% in typical oxy‐fuel fired furnaces. Other key factors influencing NOx emission are oxy‐fuel burner design which influences the peak flame temperature, excess oxygen and batch niter content 6.