Chemicals & Materials Now!

From basic to specialty, and everything in between

Select category
Search this blog

Air vs. Steam Atomization Part 11 – Project Justification

Posted on December 4th, 2017 by in Chemical Manufacturing Excellence

Previous posts systematically described the process and modifications necessary to substitute compressed air in place of steam to atomize liquid wastes in a hazardous waste incinerator. Subsequent posts quantified the economic ramifications of these changes. Continue reading “Air vs. Steam Atomization Part 11 – Project Justification” »

Air vs. Steam Atomization Part 10 – Economics (Capital Costs)

Posted on October 31st, 2017 by in Chemical Manufacturing Excellence

Previous posts discussed incineration, atomization and their associated operational costs. Implementation of this project will require changes to the existing equipment and existing operation. Continue reading “Air vs. Steam Atomization Part 10 – Economics (Capital Costs)” »

Air vs. Steam Atomization Part 9 – Economics (Atomizing Air vs. Atomizing Steam Production)

Posted on October 13th, 2017 by in Chemical Manufacturing Excellence

Previous posts discussed incineration, atomization, stack losses and plant air production. From previous discussion, atomizing approximately 210 lb/min of liquid waste would require approximately 70 lb/min of atomization gas, which corresponds to 4200 lb/hr of steam or 933 cfm (70 lb/min / 0.075 lb/ft3) of atomizing air. Continue reading “Air vs. Steam Atomization Part 9 – Economics (Atomizing Air vs. Atomizing Steam Production)” »

Air vs. Steam Atomization Part 8 – Economics (Plant Air Production)

Posted on October 5th, 2017 by in Chemical Manufacturing Excellence

Previous posts discussed incineration, atomization and associated stack losses. The air compressor is loaded for approximately 30 seconds while drawing 400 kW of electrical energy and unloaded for approximately 60 seconds while drawing 60 kW. Continue reading “Air vs. Steam Atomization Part 8 – Economics (Plant Air Production)” »

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3