Erosion-resistant conductive composite material collecting electrode for WESP

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 9387487
  • Patent Number
    9,387,487
  • Date Filed
    Wednesday, March 28, 2012
    12 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, July 12, 2016
    8 years ago
Abstract
A collecting electrode for use in wet electrostatic precipitators, the collecting electrode being fabricated from an electrically-conductive, corrosion resistant and temperature and spark resistant composite material comprising carbon fiber and thermosetting resin so as to pro\ the collecting electrode with an improved arc resistance, as dictated by erosion density and direction, by controlling the weave pattern and/or fabric thickness of the carbon fibers.
Description
FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention is concerned with conductive composite material for wet electrostatic precipitator (WESP) applications.


BACKGROUND TO THE INVENTION

Wet electrostatic precipitators have been used for many years to remove dust, acid mist and other particulates from water-saturated air and other gases by electrostatic means. In a WESP, particulates and/or mist laden water-saturated air flows in a region of the precipitator between discharge and collecting electrodes, where the particulates and/or mist are electrically charged by corona emitted from high voltage discharge electrodes. As the water-saturated gas flows further within the WESP, the charged particulate matter and/or mist is electrostatically attracted to grounded collecting plates or electrodes where it is collected. The accumulated materials are continuously washed off by both an irrigating film of water and periodic flushing.


WESPs are used to remove pollutants from gas streams exhausting from various industrial sources, such as incinerators, wood products manufacturing, coke ovens, glass furnaces, non-ferrous metallurgical plants, coal-fired electricity generation plants, forest product facilities, food drying plants and petrochemical plants.


Traditionally, the collecting surfaces and other parts of electrostatic precipitators exposed to the process gas stream have been fabricated from carbon steel, stainless steel, corrosion and temperature resistant alloys and lead. However, such materials tend to corrode and/or degrade over time especially when the precipitators are used in severe environments. Carbon and stainless steel tend to corrode or erode under severe acid conditions. Reinforced thermoplastics tend to erode and/or delaminate due to severe corrosive conditions and localized high temperature in regions of sparking.


Other methods have been used to fabricate collecting surfaces involving the use of plastic materials; however, these materials rely on a continuous water film to ensure electrical grounding of the equipment, which has proved to be a problem. PVC, polypropylene and other similar materials have been used but have suffered from holes and flashover-induced fires and, therefore, are not widely used.


In PCT publications Nos. WO2008/154,735 and WO2010/108,256, assigned to the assignee hereof and incorporated herein by reference, there is described electrically-conductive, corrosion resistant and temperature and spark resistant composite material with good heat dissipation for use in the fabricating components used in WESPs. Such materials generally comprise carbon fiber with a thermosetting resin in a cross-linked structure.


As described therein, the electrically conductive composite material utilized herein is a conductive composite material designed for highly corrosive operating conditions including dry and saturated mist environments with elevated temperatures. The composite material is a blend of carbon fibers and thermosetting resins developed for wet electrostatic precipitation, where such materials are subjected to corona voltage flash over, spark, erosion, corrosion and power arc.


In particular, the composite material comprises carbon fiber within a thermosetting resin where extremely strong molecular building blocks form totally cross-linked structures bonded to each other and at interconnects. The resultant network has proven to withstand high voltage current after the onset of corona in the tubes of the electrostatic precipitator, obtaining voltage flash over without pitting the conductive hybrid composite material. Such spark resistance and arc-over may be generated at a voltage of approximately 60 to 95 KV at up to 500 to 1000 milliamps for a duration of approximately 1 millisecond. The composite material is also resistant to sustained arcing with a duration of up to 4 to 5 seconds. These properties are highly desirable to minimize corrosion and restrict high intensity heat generation and to prevent structural, mechanical or chemical changes to the conductive hybrid composite material.


The carbon fibers woven into a seamless biaxial material sleeve creates a dense network imparting electrical conductivity and thermal dispersion within thermosetting resins.


Strong molecular building blocks form totally cross-linked structures bonded to each other and as interconnects, producing a three-dimensional network, stitched through the thickness of the laminate. The carbon fibers are woven into seamless biaxial and triaxial material. This arrangement imparts excellent electrical conductivity and superior thermal dispersion through the laminate.


In addition to the electro-conductive characteristics and excellent corrosion resistant properties, the conductive hybrid composite material also provides further advantages as a material of construction, reducing the dead load weight by one half or more, due to the lightweight and high strength qualities of carbon fiber which results in economic benefits before installation especially beneficial for tube bundles made from stainless steel and even higher grades of titanium.


The composite may be prepared by weaving, stitching, alignment through vibration using frequency while the material may be formed into shapes that are tubes and sheets by prior art processes known as vacuum infusion, pultrusion, filament winding and autoclaving.


The conductive composite material overcomes the problems of corrosion affecting stainless steel, alloys and titanium within a highly corrosive environment, saturated mists and elevated temperatures, by improving on prior art thermosetting resins and carbon fiberglass compositions that cannot withstand the corona voltage flash over and power arcs at up to 100,000 Volts.


SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

It has now been found that the erosion direction and density on the WESP collecting electrodes prepared from such electrically-conductive, corrosion resistant and temperature and spark resistant material can be controlled by controlling the weave pattern of the carbon fibers and fabric thickness. In this regard, a tighter weave creates a greater density of erosion lines in the collecting electrode while thicker carbon fiber fabrics create erosion lines with fewer turns and branching.


Accordingly, in one aspect of the present invention, there is provided a collecting electrode comprises of an electrically-conductive, corrosion resistant and temperature and spark resistant composite material comprising carbon fiber in a cross-linked thermosetting resin, wherein erosion direction and density on the electrode is controlled.


The control of the erosion density and direction may be effected by controlling the weave pattern and/or fabric thickness of the carbon fibers. The carbon fibers preferably are woven in a 2×2 twill arrangement, but other weave patterns may be used, such as 4×4 twill, plain weave and satin weave, may be used.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS


FIG. 1 is a schematic of power-arc testing rig used to evaluate samples for power-arc resistance; and



FIGS. 2 to 6 are photographs taken with an optical microscope of samples tested as described in the Examples below.





DESCRIPTION OF PREFERRED EMBODIMENT

Referring to FIG. 1, a single 3 m long 250 mm hexagonal collecting tube was set up on a laboratory test stand, powered by a 50 kV, 8 mA NWL transformer/rectifier (T/R) set.


A capacitor bank was installed in parallel with the hexagonal tube. The capacitance was equivalent to approximately 277 tubes, each 5 m long and 250 mm equivalent diameter. A pointed discharge spike was installed on the mast (emitting) electrode, adjacent to which composite samples were mounted on the test collecting tube. Power arcs generated approximately 67 Joules to be dissipated at the point of arc contact on the sample. The controller on the T/R set was such that arcs could be counted. These power arcs were robust in nature and sufficiently loud that the integrated arc count reading on the controller could be verified using a stopwatch and manual spark count.


EXAMPLES
Example 1

This Example describes the test results obtained for 304L stainless steel (SS304L).


A sample constructed of SS304L was tested in the test rig of FIG. 1 for comparison purposes. It was found that 3400 arcs caused pitting, 10000 arcs caused severe pitting and metal damage, and 13000 arcs resulted in extensive metal damage. The damage at 10000 arcs was quite significant. This level of arcing is not normally experienced in full scale WESP operation. This level was arbitrarily used as the standard for further arc resistance comparative testing.


Example 2

This Example shows the effect of fiber weave pattern and fabric thickness on erosion density and direction.


Four samples of composite materials were formed into collecting electrodes and arranged in the power-arc testing rig illustrated in FIG. 1. Two of the samples were made from woven 2×2 twill carbon fibre with a high heat distortion temperature, corrosion resistant, epoxy vinyl ester resin (Sample 1 and Sample 2). An additional two samples (Sample B1-A and B1-B) were identically constructed from 1×4 twill carbon fibre fabric and subjected to 3000 and 13000 arcs. After arc testing, the samples were anlayzed under an optical microscope to further understand the mechanism providing the carbon composite laminates with their high level of arc endurance.


Overall, the total amount of electrical arc erosion in all of the samples was relatively small compared to the total surface area tested and the thickness of the laminate. FIG. 2 shows a top view and FIG. 3 a cross sectional view of a typical arc pinhole that were found at the perimeter of the testing areas. Crude surface erosion area estimate was performed on Sample 1 giving 200 to 1400 arcs per mm2 of surface erosion. The amount of arc erosion in Sample 1 was comparatively close to Sample B1-A with 3000 arcs.


In Sample 1, the cross section of the erosion running in bundle of transverse direction of the fibers was found to be well defined “V” (FIG. 5) with a depth of the observed burns ranging from 46 to 113 μm with an opening of 39 to 285 μm. The maximum erosion depth observed was relatively small, with only 3.9% of the laminate thickness and 15.6% of the surface lamina thickness eroded. The cross section of the erosion running in longitudinal direction of the tow was found to be less well defined (FIG. 6). The length of the observed burns were around 380 μm with varying depth across its length.


With the addition of more arcs (Sample 1 @2120 arcs vs. Sample 2 @10041 arcs), the majority of the traits previously seen were duplicated; however, the length and width of the erosion increased and the maximum observed cross sectional depth of an erosion increased to 364.2 μm. This translates to 11% of the laminate and ⅔ of the surface lamina.


With Samples 1 and 2, the agglomeration of arc erosion formed straight lines running transversely to the targeted surface tow (see FIG. 4). The erosion in the 2×2 twill samples had a tendency to erode in two parallel lines (pairs of lines circled in FIG. 4. Each of these erosion lines were associated with a corresponding tow in the layer beneath. In FIG. 4, dotted lines were drawn following both edges of a single tow in the weft and a single tow in the warp direction. Following these tows it was possible to see how the cycling of two up and two down twill pattern controls the direction of the erosion lines.


Sample 2, with 10041 arcs, had an additional trend from those seen in Sample 1, with 2120 arcs (see FIG. 4). Once the erosion depth reached tows beneath which are running in the opposite fabric direction, the path of the erosion changed to be transverse to that of the newly targeted tow. This created right angle turns and branches in the erosion lines running in either the warp or weft directions.


As for the 1×4 Twill samples, the difference between the arc erosion of Samples B1-A and B1-B (1×4 Twill) and the previously discussed Samples 1 and 2 (2×2 Twill) was the location of the main erosion concentrations. Sample B1-A and B1-B erosion was focused mainly on the tows of the fabric running in the Twill-1 direction and the Twill-4 direction was relatively clear of any major erosion. In contrast to this Sample 1 (2×2 Twill), arc erosion were evenly distributed on both the warp and the weft directions.


The above findings provide the possibility of controlling the erosion density and direction by controlling the fabric weave pattern and the fabric thickness. As seen in Sample 2, each crossover point in the weave contained one erosion line. Hence it can be concluded that a tighter weave creates a greater density of erosion lines. Thicker fabrics will also create erosion lines with fewer turns and branching.


After arc testing of Sample 2 (10041 arcs) the only observation to the naked eye was surface discoloration caused by the sample's loss of luster, or sheen. Since the damage was so small, it was concluded that the new conductive composite has better resistance to arc erosion than SS304L.


Example 3

This Example shows the arc performance of joints between WESP components.


In the assembly of a WESP from composite carbon fibre materials, components are adhered together using a bonding formulation. The assembly of such WESPs is described in PCT publication No. WO 2011/029186, assigned to the assignee hereof and the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference. Formulations for use as the adhesive are described in PCT publication No. WO 2011/147016, assigned to the assignee hereof and the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference.


The adhesive bonding of sub components is a major aspect in the assembly of the new WESP design. To evaluate arc performance of the joint, two sample plaques were bonded together using a conductive bonding formulation. One sample had a joint line as thin as possible (<0.25 mm) and another had a thick joint line (approximately 1.25 mm).


Two corrosion resistant conductive bonding formulations were tested, one variant with a blend of conductive carbon fibers and another with a carbon nanotubes/conductive carbon fiber blend, which was formulated to the same material cost point as the first.


Prior to applying the bonding formulation, the substrate plaques were sanded to remove insulative surface resin. The sanding stopped once 80% of the surface showed anisotropic reflection caused by the exposure of the carbon fibers. The conductivity of the surface was tested in multiple locations to confirm that the majority of the insulative resin was removed.


The joints were subjected to 10000 power arcs in the test facility at an electrical condition approximating the full-scale application. Visual observations showed similar arc erosion to the non-bonded laminates, discussed above.


SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

In summary of this disclosure, electrically-conductive, corrosion resistant and temperature and spark resistant composite materials comprising carbon fibre and thermosetting cross-linked resin have improved arc resistance in terms of erosion density and direction by controlling the weave pattern and fabric thickness. Modifications are possible within the scope of this invention.

Claims
  • 1. A collecting electrode for a wet electrostatic precipitator fabricated from an electrically-conductive, corrosion resistant and temperature and spark resistant composite material, the composite material comprising a generally evenly woven carbon fiber within a thermosetting resin in a cross-linked structure, wherein erosion direction and density on the electrode is controlled by varying the weave pattern of the carbon fibers and fabric thickness of the carbon fibers.
  • 2. The collecting electrode claimed in claim 1, wherein the carbon fibers are woven in a 2×2 twill arrangement.
  • 3. The collecting electrode claimed in claim 1, wherein increasing the tightness of the weave pattern of the carbon fibers increases the density on the electrode.
  • 4. The collecting electrode claimed in claim 1 wherein increasing the thickness of the carbon fibers creates erosion lines with fewer turns and branching.
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION

This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/468,199 to McGrath filed on Mar. 28, 2011, entitled “EROSION-RESISTANT CONDUCTIVE COMPOSITE MATERIAL COLLECTING ELECTRODE FOR WESP”, the entire content of which is incorporated herein by reference.

PCT Information
Filing Document Filing Date Country Kind 371c Date
PCT/CA2012/000277 3/28/2012 WO 00 2/19/2014
Publishing Document Publishing Date Country Kind
WO2012/129656 10/4/2012 WO A
US Referenced Citations (112)
Number Name Date Kind
687109 Baum Nov 1901 A
710655 Angell Oct 1902 A
1322163 Conover Nov 1919 A
1399422 Chubb Dec 1921 A
1602597 Staude Oct 1926 A
1773073 Beach Aug 1930 A
1773973 Edgar Aug 1930 A
1793664 Anderson Feb 1931 A
1813637 Powers Jul 1931 A
2357355 Penney Sep 1944 A
2567709 Hedberg Sep 1951 A
2696892 Campbell Dec 1954 A
2712362 Winklepleck Jul 1955 A
2720551 Wastvind et al. Oct 1955 A
2794847 Streuber et al. Jun 1957 A
2806896 Streuber et al. Sep 1957 A
2830869 Limerick Apr 1958 A
2935375 Boucher May 1960 A
3046716 Rodger Jul 1962 A
3104963 Bonnett Sep 1963 A
3297903 Riek Jan 1967 A
3403497 Vander Mey Oct 1968 A
3495123 Raddatz Feb 1970 A
3512340 Golucke et al. May 1970 A
3584440 Vigil Jun 1971 A
3595983 Muller et al. Jul 1971 A
3605386 Erwin et al. Sep 1971 A
3716966 De Seversky Feb 1973 A
3721069 Walker Mar 1973 A
3745751 Zey et al. Jul 1973 A
3765154 Hardt et al. Oct 1973 A
3793802 Hardt Feb 1974 A
3798883 Heeney Mar 1974 A
3883328 Spain May 1975 A
3918939 Hardt Nov 1975 A
4070424 Olson et al. Jan 1978 A
4117255 Kawaike et al. Sep 1978 A
4141698 Kihlstedt et al. Feb 1979 A
4155792 Gelhaar et al. May 1979 A
4177047 Goland Dec 1979 A
4247307 Chang Jan 1981 A
4251682 Ebert et al. Feb 1981 A
4290738 Liebert et al. Sep 1981 A
4294591 Kahl Oct 1981 A
4318719 Kato et al. Mar 1982 A
4360367 Prior Nov 1982 A
4375364 Van Hoesen et al. Mar 1983 A
4431617 Farin Feb 1984 A
4439216 Perryman Mar 1984 A
4505776 Murray Mar 1985 A
4507341 Heseltine Mar 1985 A
4522634 Frank Jun 1985 A
4601731 Michelson Jul 1986 A
4704363 Ziegler Nov 1987 A
4846857 Tachibana Jul 1989 A
4885139 Sparks et al. Dec 1989 A
4893752 Spink et al. Jan 1990 A
4908047 Leonard Mar 1990 A
4948399 Reuffurth et al. Aug 1990 A
4957512 Denisov et al. Sep 1990 A
5192517 Spink Mar 1993 A
5248324 Hara Sep 1993 A
5254155 Mensi Oct 1993 A
5295310 Eriksson Mar 1994 A
5308589 Yung May 1994 A
5344481 Pettersson Sep 1994 A
5363567 Best Nov 1994 A
5364457 Cameron Nov 1994 A
5395430 Lundgren et al. Mar 1995 A
5401302 Schulmerich et al. Mar 1995 A
5482540 Trinward et al. Jan 1996 A
5498462 Darfler Mar 1996 A
5599508 Martinelli et al. Feb 1997 A
5603751 Ackerson Feb 1997 A
5603752 Hara Feb 1997 A
5714226 Disselbeck Feb 1998 A
5843210 Paranjpe et al. Dec 1998 A
5855652 Talley Jan 1999 A
5917138 Taylor Jun 1999 A
5922290 Jenne et al. Jul 1999 A
6004375 Gutsch et al. Dec 1999 A
6106592 Paranjpe et al. Aug 2000 A
6156098 Richards Dec 2000 A
6176902 Matsubara Jan 2001 B1
6231643 Pasic et al. May 2001 B1
6267802 Baldrey et al. Jul 2001 B1
6508861 Ray Jan 2003 B1
6579349 Ting et al. Jun 2003 B1
6579506 Spink et al. Jun 2003 B2
6599349 Scharkowski Jul 2003 B1
6620224 Sato Sep 2003 B1
6974494 Zahedi Dec 2005 B1
7160348 Allan Jan 2007 B2
7160358 Spink et al. Jan 2007 B2
7938146 Brooks et al. May 2011 B2
8597416 Allan Dec 2013 B2
20020090873 Moody Jul 2002 A1
20030082315 Mehlman et al. May 2003 A1
20040139853 Bologa et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040169162 Xiao et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040221720 Anderson et al. Nov 2004 A1
20040226449 Heckel et al. Nov 2004 A1
20050028674 Allan Feb 2005 A1
20050045038 Huang Mar 2005 A1
20050123717 Shen et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050229780 Spink et al. Oct 2005 A1
20070051237 Furukawa et al. Mar 2007 A1
20070201183 Komatsu et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070283903 Bologa et al. Dec 2007 A1
20090014378 Hundley et al. Jan 2009 A1
20090142980 Chen Jun 2009 A1
20090241781 Triscori et al. Oct 2009 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (25)
Number Date Country
643389 Jun 1962 CA
2505248 May 2004 CA
2376335 May 2000 CN
30 27 307 May 1981 DE
102004001463 Aug 2005 DE
553420 May 1943 GB
556 939 Oct 1943 GB
1413127 Nov 1975 GB
5335674 Nov 1975 JP
52-1574 Jan 1977 JP
57194001 Nov 1982 JP
60 149449 Aug 1985 JP
1-258754 Oct 1989 JP
06190300 Jul 1994 JP
10202142 Apr 1998 JP
11151410 Jun 1999 JP
9005027 May 1990 WO
9219380 Nov 1992 WO
9601678 Jan 1996 WO
2005007295 Jan 2005 WO
2005097297 Oct 2005 WO
2006113749 Oct 2006 WO
2008154735 Dec 2008 WO
2010108256 Sep 2010 WO
2011120137 Oct 2011 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (67)
Entry
Supplementary European Search Report for European Patent Application No. 12763929.2, dated Nov. 20, 2014.
Third Chinese Office Action, Jan. 14, 2015, CN Application No. 201080022796.0.
Written Opinion, Jan. 23, 2006, International Application No. PCT/CA2004/001037.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability, Jan. 23, 2006, International Application No. PCT/CA2004/001037.
Written Opinion, Aug. 12, 2005, International Application No. PCT/CA2005/000549.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability, Aug. 12, 2005, International Application No. PCT/CA2005/000549.
Communication pursuant to Article 94(3) EPC, Jul. 18, 2012, EP Application No. 04737969.8.
Communication pursuant to Article 94(3) EPC, Sep. 23, 2009, EP Application No. 04737969.8.
Written Opinion, May 1, 2006, International Application No. PCT/CA2006/000238.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability, Oct. 11, 2006, International Application No. PCT/CA2006/000238.
Written Opinion, Aug. 28, 2006, International Application No. PCT/CA2006/000755.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability, Nov. 13, 2007, International Application No. PCT/CA2006/000755.
Communication pursuant to Article 94(3) EPC, Apr. 23, 2014, EP Application No. 05735662.8.
Communication pursuant to Article 94(3) EPC, Sep. 15, 2011, EP Application No. 05735662.8.
EPC Examination, Mar. 10, 2009, EP Application No. 05735662.8.
Supplementary European Search Report, Jul. 12, 2007, EP Application No. 05735662.8.
Canadian Office Action, Sep. 9, 2010, Canadian Application No. 2562372.
Canadian Office Action, Jul. 30, 2012, Canadian Application No. 2598187.
Canadian Office Action, Jun. 14, 2013, Canadian Application No. 2598187.
Canadian Office Action, Feb. 6, 2014, Canadian Application No. 2598187.
Response to Communication, Aug. 26, 2014, EP Application No. 06705193.8.
Communication pursuant to Article 94(3) EPC, Apr. 17, 2014, EP Application No. 06705193.8.
Canadian Office Action, Feb. 24, 2012, Canadian Application No. 2607978.
Communication pursuant to Article 94(3) EPC, Dec. 4, 2012, EP Application No. 08741470.6.
Written Opinion, Jul. 21 2008, International Application No. PCT/CA2008/000752.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability, Jul. 21 2008, International Application No. PCT/CA2008/000752.
Written Opinion, Sep. 19, 2008, International Application No. PCT/CA2008/001157.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability, Sep. 19, 2008, International Application No. PCT/CA2008/001157.
Canadian Office Action, Mar. 12, 2014, Canadian Application No. 2684781.
Canadian Office Action, Oct. 2, 2014, Canadian Application No. 2684781.
EPC Examination, May 14, 2013, EP Application No. 08748166.9.
Written Opinion, May 31, 2010, International Application No. PCT/CA2010/000377.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability, May 31, 2010, International Application No. PCT/CA2010/000377.
Written Opinion, Dec. 22, 2010, International Application No. PCT/CA2010/001404.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability, Dec. 22, 2010, International Application No. PCT/CA2010/001404.
Written Opinion, Aug. 17, 2011, International Application No. PCT/CA2011/000599.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability, Aug. 17, 2011, International Application No. PCT/CA2011/000599.
Canadian Office Action, Aug. 6, 2012, Canadian Application No. 2750691.
Canadian Office Action, May 8, 2013, Canadian Application No. 2750691.
Canadian Office Action, Nov. 20, 2013, Canadian Application No. 2750691.
Supplementary European Search Report, Sep. 26, 2013, EP Application No. 10755346.3.
First Chinese Office Action, Aug. 13, 2013, CH Application No. 201080022796.0.
Second Chinese Office Action, Jul. 30, 2014, CH Application No. 201080022796.0.
Canadian Office Action, Nov. 4, 2014, Canadian Application No. 2773620.
Supplementary European Search Report, Dec. 11, 2103, EP Application No. 10 81 4843.
Written Opinion, Jun. 26, 2012, International Application No. PCT/CA2012/000277.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability, Jun. 26, 2012, International Application No. PCT/CA2012/000277.
Supplementary European Search Report, Nov. 3, 2014, International Application No. PCT/CA2012/000277.
Supplementary European Search Report, Dec. 20, 2103, EP Application No. 10 81 4843.8.
First Chinese Office Action, Sep. 23, 2013, CH Application No. 201180026189.6.
Second Chinese Office Action, May 7, 2014, CH Application No. 201180026189.6.
Response to First Chinese Office Action, CH Application No. 201180026189.6, Jan. 16, 2014.
Response to Second Chinese Office Action, CH Application No. 201180026189.6, Jul. 30, 2014.
International Search Report, Jun. 26, 2012 , International Application No. PCT/CA2012/000277.
Rushton J.D., Sirrine J.E., Collection and Treatment of Odorous Kraft Mill Gases. Paper Trade Journal/ 1972, pp. 36-37. (Dec. 18, 1972).
Fourth Chinese Office Action, Jul. 30, 2013, CH Application No. 200880013191.8.
Response to Third Chinese Office Action, CH Application No. 200880013191.8, Apr. 12, 2013.
Third Chinese Office Action, Apr. 1, 2013, CH Application No. 200880013191.8.
Response to Second Chinese Office Action, CH Application No. 200880013191.8, May 7, 2014.
Second Chinese Office Action, Nov. 27, 2013, CH Application No. 200880013191.8.
Response to First Chinese Office Action, CH Application No. 200880013191.8, Mar. 16, 2010.
First Chinese Office Action, Apr. 16, 2012, CH Application No. 200880013191.8.
Perry et al. Chemical Engineers' Handbook (5th Ed.) McGraw-Hill Book Co. USA;15BN 0-67-049478-9; p. 22-4, 1973.
Notice of Allowance, Dec. 31, 2014, U.S. Appl. No. 13/699,752.
Notice of Allowance, Jan. 21, 2015, U.S. Appl. No. 13/394,828.
Canadian Office Action, Mar. 23, 2009, Canadian Patent Application No. 2532640.
Canadian Office Action, Aug. 5, 2008, Canadian Patent Application No. 2532640.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20140150659 A1 Jun 2014 US
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
61468199 Mar 2011 US