The present invention relates to a heater element and a heater incorporating the element and it particularly relates to a heater which can be used for heating fluids such as gases.
Conventional gas heating systems rely on the use of indirect heating via gas fired or electrically heated tubes, as in traditional heat exchangers, or via direct heating using electrical elements. However there are a large number of potential applications where gas heating is a critical requirement and where the known systems cannot be used and there is a need for an improved system.
The major disadvantage of these traditional systems when applied to smaller applications or to lower temperature process streams is their poor heating efficiency that then leads to high surface temperatures relative to the required process temperature. This leads to severe problems when the stream to be heated is thermally unstable and where the stream is combustible and high surface temperatures could lead to ignition or where the power availability is limited.
We have now devised a heating element and a heater which reduces these problems.
According to the invention there is provided a heater for fluids in which a fluid is passed over a heater element characterised in that the heater element comprises an electrically conductive porous monolith.
The invention also provides a heater comprising a container in which there is an electrically conductive porous monolithic heater element connectable to an electrical power source, the container having a fluid inlet and a fluid outlet in which fluid entering the container via the inlet passes over and through the heater element and then passes out through the outlet, the element being heated when an electric current is passed through the element.
A wide variety of materials can potentially be used to produce the monolithic elements provided only that they are electrically conducting, their resistance characteristics match those of the available power systems and their thermal and chemical stability is suitable for the desired application. The porous monolithic element is preferably a porous synthetic carbon monolith and its effectiveness is thought to derive from its unique combination of controlled resistivity and controlled structure. The preferred material is a synthetic porous carbon the structure of which is shown schematically in
By “porous” is meant that the carbon has continuous channels through which liquid or vapours can pass combined with a micro-macroporous structure within the walls of the monolith.
By “monolith” and “monolithic” is meant that the porous carbon is in a single piece i.e. not granular. The monolithic carbon preferably contains large transport channels through which the gas can flow and by which means the pressure drop can be controlled. The channel structure is defined by the wall thickness, t, and the channel size, W.
Preferably the monoliths have a cell structure (cells per square inch—cpi) where the channel size, W, is between 100 and 2000 microns and the wall thickness, t, is between 100 and 2000 microns and with an open area of between 30 and 80% to give a good carbon packing density per unit volume and acceptable mass transfer characteristics.
In some applications it may be desirable that the monolithic heater also functions as an adsorber. In this case the monolith preferably has a surface area of at least 450 m2/g, preferably in excess of 700 m2/g. The surface area derives from the structure within the monolith walls which is both macro and micro porous. The macro porosity derives from the voids between the primary particles that make up the wall area that are comprised of primary particles with a mean size, Dp, of between 10 microns and 100 microns but where the maximum mean particle size is <10% of the wall thickness, W. The microporosity derives from the internal porosity of the primary particles that is generated by the voids between the micro-domains, dp, created from the domains present in the original resin structure (
The monoliths can be produced in lengths from around 1 mm to 200 cm but in the present invention this will depend on the use.
The monolithic porous carbon can be made by partially curing a phenolic resin to a solid, comminuting the partially cured resin, extruding the comminuted resin, sintering the extruded resin so as to produce a form-stable sintered product and activating the form-stable sintered product.
PCT/GB01/06082.1 gives details of methods of forming the porous carbons suitable for the porous carbon used in the present invention and its contents are included herein by reference. The process comprises (a) partially curing a phenolic resin to a solid, (b) grinding the solid to form particles, (c) forming the resulting ground product into a dough and extruding to a pre-determined shape at a pressure in the range 0 to 20 MPa, (d) sintering the shaped solid so as to produce a form-stable sintered product. The sintered product is then carbonised and activated.
After carbonisation these domains are microporous with an initial surface area of typically ˜450 m2/g but that can be increased to >1000 m2/g by controlled activation.
Phenolic resins are well known materials. They are made by the reaction of a phenol and an aldehyde e.g. formaldehyde. The condensation is initially carried out to produce a partially condensed product. The condensation may be carried out so as to produce a resin which is fully curable on further heating. Alternatively the condensation may be carried out so as to produce a novolak resin which is only curable when an additional cross-linking agent is mixed with it e.g. hexamethylene tetramine (known as “hexamine” or “hex”). It is preferred to use hexamine-cured novolak resins in the process of the present invention.
The resin cure should be controlled so that it is sufficient to prevent the resin melting during subsequent carbonisation but low enough so that the resin particles produced during the milling step can sinter during subsequent processing. Preferably the temperature and duration of the partial curing step is selected as to give a degree of cure sufficient to give a sinterable product, and being such that a sample of the partially cured solid, when ground to produce particles in the size range 106-250 microns and tabletted in a tabletting machine, gives a pellet with a crush strength which is not less than 1 N/mm. Preferably the pellet after carbonisation has a crush strength of not less than 8 N/mm.
By “sintering” we mean a step which causes the individual particles of phenolic resin to adhere together without the need for a separately introduced binder, while retaining their individual identity to a substantial extent on heating to carbonisation temperatures. Thus the particles must not melt after forming so as to produce a molten mass of resin, as this would eliminate the internal open porosity of the article. The open porosity (as opposed to the closed cells found in certain types of polymer foams) is believed to be important in enabling formed articles to retain their shape on carbonisation.
In one embodiment the comminuted resin particles have a particle size of 1 to 250 microns. Preferably the resin powder size is between around 5 microns and 200 microns which provides for a macropore size of between 1 and 40 microns with a macropore volume of around 40%.
The milled powder can then be extruded to produce polymeric monolithic structures with a wide range of cell structures, limited only by the ability to produce the required extrusion die. Production of the monoliths is greatly facilitated by the extrusion of the cured resin powder rather than of a more abrasive ceramic or carbon powder. At this stage the monolith has a bimodal structure—the visible cell structure with open cells of around 100 to 2000 microns cell dimension and cell walls with thickness between around 100 and 2000 microns—and the macropore structure within the walls generated by the sintered resin particles.
The carbonisation steps take place preferably by heating above 600° C., e.g. 600° C. to 800° C. and typically 700° C. for the requisite time e.g. 1 to 48 hours but at a sufficient temperature so that an electrically conducting matrix is generated with the required resistivity properties. The process takes place under an inert atmosphere or vacuum to prevent oxidation of the carbon.
On carbonisation the material loses around 50% weight and shrinks by 50% volume but, provided the resin cure stage was correctly carried out, this shrinkage is accommodated with no distortion of the monolith matrix leading to a cell structure identical to that of the resin precursor but with dimensions reduced by approx 30%. The macropore size is also reduced by ˜30% although the macropore volume (ml/ml) remains unaltered.
At this stage the microstructure of the porous carbon develops. After carbonisation the monolith behaves as a molecular sieve due to partial blocking of the microstructure by the decomposition products from the carbonisation process. These blockages must be removed to provide rapid access to the internal structure of the carbon that is essential for the operation of the monoliths as combined low pressure drop adsorbers and heaters.
After carbonisation the monolithic porous carbon can be activated to provide an enhanced pore volume and surface area. Activation can take place in either steam or carbon dioxide at temperatures above approximately 750° C. and 850° C. respectively or in combinations of these gases. The activation process is carried out for a time that varies with the temperature and the activation gas composition, such that a carbon weight loss of between 20 and 40% is achieved. Preferably the activation is carried in CO2 at 850 to 1000° C. Such activation is not, however, a prerequisite for the heating devices of the current invention except where the device is required to function both as a heater and an adsorber. Activation will also lead to changes in the resistivity of the carbon as a function primarily of the temperature and time activation conditions.
The monolithic carbons are resistant to high temperatures and are biologically inert.
Patent application PCT/GB 2002/003259 discloses an improved method of forming complex carbon forms by sintering partially cured phenolic resin powders. In this route the novolak resin precursor is partially cured using hexamethylene tetramine (Hexamine) to an extent sufficient to just convert the thermoplastic novolak to a thermoset resin. The resin is then milled to a powder with a particle size of between 5 and 500 microns, mixed with an extrusion aid such as methyl cellulose to form a dough, and extruded to produce complex monolith structures which, after drying, can be carbonised and activated. The formed carbons have a very uniform structure, exhibit good thermal and electrical conductivity and can be produced with surface areas up to around 1000 m2/g.
The synthetic porous carbon monoliths have a high heat transfer efficiency that derives from a combination of the very high heat exchange surface area that is attainable within small cell structures and the ability to directly heat all of this available surface by passing an electric current through the monolith.
Preferably the synthetic monoliths have a cell density, produced according to our co-pending applications referred to above, with cell densities up to 6000 cells per square inch. Table 1 below shows the available heat transfer surface area per unit volume as a function of cell density and cell geometry. We have also shown that the heat transfer efficiency of the monoliths is related to the Reynolds number of the gas stream within the monolith. The low pressure drop characteristics of the monoliths allows operation at high linear velocities without excessive pressure drop penalties so that the high Reynolds numbers can be achieved without requiring feed gas compression or through the use of vacuum to draw gas through the monoliths.
The carbon monoliths used in the present invention can be electrically heated in a highly controlled fashion. For many applications a key requirement in general is to be able to operate at low voltages that are matched to the system supply. This could be around 12 volts in vehicle applications and around 30 volts in satellite applications and military applications. These low voltages also provide for additional safety as the potential for arcing is minimized. With the monoliths useful in the present invention the resistance of the monolith can be matched to the required heat input, which is critical in many applications.
We have now found that the resistance of the synthetic carbon monoliths can be varied over a very wide range through precise control of the resin monolith carbonisation or pyrolysis temperature and that, surprisingly the residence time at the pyrolysis temperature also seriously impacts on the resistance. Carbon also possesses the well known but unique property that the resistance decreases as the temperature increases preventing runaway. We have now found that a further unique property of the carbon monoliths is that the temperature co-efficient of resistivity is also a strong function of the pyrolysis conditions where the temperature co-efficient increases as the resistance increases.
The invention also provides a method for controlling the electrical resistance of a porous synthetic carbon monolith which method comprises (a) partially curing a phenolic resin to a solid, (b) grinding the solid to form particles, (c) forming the resulting ground product into a dough and extruding to a pre-determined shape at a pressure in the range 0 to 20 MPa, (d) sintering the shaped solid so as to produce a form-stable sintered resin product and (e) pyrolysing the form stable porous resin product to produce a carbon monolith in which the electrical resistivity of the monoliths is controlled by varying the pyrolysis temperature and the residence time at the pyrolysis temperature.
The resistivity is dependent on the duration and temperature of the pyrolysis step and resistivities from around 700 ohm.cm to less than 1 ohm.cm can be achieved at pyrolysis temperatures between 600 and 800° C. respectively. This resistivity can be further reduced to less than 0.1 ohm.cm by increasing the pyrolysis temperature to >2000° C.
The resistivity of the carbon can also be increased in a controlled fashion by introducing surface oxygen. This can be achieved by holding the carbon materials in air at temperatures from 100 to 500° C., preferably between 150 and 400° C., for varying times or by chemical activation methods including but not limited to treatment with nitric acid, hydrogen peroxide, sodium hypochlorite or any other known oxidizing agent.
We have also found that where it is desired to use the heater device in an air stream it is important that the monoliths are stabilised by high temperature thermal treatment.
If the synthetic carbon monoliths pyrolysed at temperatures below 1300° C. are used in air at temperatures up to 200° C. the resistance changes dramatically during use and this can cause premature failure due to local over heating. This can be avoided by heat treating a monolith initially pyrolysed at 800° C. to at least 1300° C. The stability increases with the heat treatment temperature but for operation at 200° C., treatment at 1300° C. is sufficient. A drawback to this is that the resistance is decreased significantly and may then be too low to match the operating voltage and current requirements. Under these circumstances the resistance can then be increased by controlled high severity air oxidation. The ability to carry out this modification decreases as the heat treatment temperatures increase such that by 1500° C. it is difficult to increase the resistance. The optimum treatment temperature is in the range 1300-1400° C. which provides a good balance of stability in air operation with the ability to increase the resistance. The slight air activation used in this process has the further benefit of reintroducing a significant surface area if the heater is also to be used as an adsorption device.
The combination of these flow and resistivity characteristics then provides a unique operating characteristic of these monolith heaters where, when heating a gas, the produced gas temperature is relatively insensitive to the gas flow over quite a wide volumetric flow range (see
Other materials that can also be used as the porous monolithic heater element in the monolithic heaters and are incorporated here by reference are:
1. Carbon-ceramic composite monoliths produced according to U.S. Pat. No. 6,284,705 where the activated carbon powder and the ceramic binder are co-extruded. By virtue of the high ceramic loading of these materials they tend to have a significantly higher electrical resistivity than the carbon monoliths which will restrict their use to applications where higher voltages are available. It would also be difficult to heat treat these monoliths to provide enhanced operational stability when using air as the fluid as the ceramic component could not resist the temperatures required. It is however possible that lower resistivity carbon/ceramic monoliths and monoliths with the necessary oxidative stability could be produced using the method described in U.S. Pat. No. 6,284,705 but using graphite powder in place of the activated carbon powder.
2. Ceramic carbon composite structures produced according to EU patent 0684071 A2 where a ceramic monolith is impregnated with a resin that is then pyrolysed to produce a carbon coating on the ceramic substrate. The resistance of the carbon ceramic composite can be varied by adjusting the carbon content of the finished composite. The carbon content is typically less than and up to 50% weight of the finished composite. The resistivity of these composites varied between 1.25 ohm.cm and 7 ohm.cm for carbon loadings between 8.9% and 18% weight. This will limit their use in some heater applications whilst the presence of the ceramic will also prevent the high temperature stabilisation required for the air applications.
3. Metal monolithic structures produced for instance by rolling corrugated metal sheets as described in patent U.S. Pat. No. 5,187,142. In contrast to the high resistivity of the carbon-ceramic composites these materials will tend to have a very low resistivity that will only be applicable in high current—low voltage applications, although the resistance can be adjusted by careful selection of the metal used. U.S. Pat. No. 6,572,682 describes a sintered metal filter that can be directly electrically heated but this is for the purpose of oxidizing carbon particles trapped in the matrix rather than for heating the gas flowing through the filter.
4. Silicon carbide monoliths as produced by U.S. Pat. No. 6,582,796 or by the route described in our co-pending application PCT/GB99/01749. As in the carbon-ceramic monoliths these will be characterised by a high resistance only allowing them to be used in higher voltage applications. Such monoliths, along with the metal monoliths, have the additional benefit of being operable in oxidizing atmospheres and any other electrically conducting porous monolith materials with the required resistivity and gas flow characteristics.
These heat exchange properties can be applied in a wide variety of end uses covering a wide range of scales some of which are described below, and illustrated in the drawings.
In the drawings:
FIGS. 6 and 8-14 show performance tables referred to in the examples and
A major potential use is in vehicle evaporative emission control. Carbon canisters have been used for some time now in all gasoline engined vehicles to eliminate hot soak losses. These losses are due to gasoline vapours released from the fuel tank and the hot engine when the vehicle is stationary. The simple early canister system is shown in
These early, simple, carbon canisters have now been replaced by more complex systems as the legislation covering vehicle emissions becomes tighter. The evolution of the legislation is shown in
One option is to enhance the performance of the existing, canister designs by more effective hot gas regeneration. The constraints on purge gas heaters for the canister application are complex and derive from:
We have now found that both the LEV2 and PZEV requirements can be potentially achieved using a purge gas heater based on the monolithic gas heaters of the current invention. One example of a purge heater design is illustrated in
One embodiment of the device that uses 4 monoliths is shown in
However, we have found that the carbon monoliths prepared by pyrolysis at 800° C., or the ceramic carbon-composites prepared according to U.S. Pat. No. 5,914,294 which meet the resistance targets defined above, have insufficient stability for long term use when air is being used as the purge medium, as is essential in the purge heater application. A typical purge heater application requires an exit gas temperature from the purge heater of around 130° C. at flows of up to 30 L/minute that corresponds to a monolith exit temperature of approximately 170° C. Higher temperatures would be beneficial but would lead to a significant increase in material costs for the heater and canister body that should preferably be capable of production by injection moulding.
This has been evaluated using an accelerated ageing test in which the monoliths are held in air at 200° C. for extended periods, equivalent to approximately 8 times longer at the proposed 170° C. operating temperature. As shown in
The air stability of the carbon-ceramic monolith of U.S. Pat. No. 5,914,294 is shown in
Using the 1300° C./air modified synthetic carbon monoliths in a 4 monolith device as shown in
There is a current move away from very large and expensive satellite systems to small or micro systems that might only weigh a few kilograms. For these satellites the propulsion devices are used for: (a) Orbit injection correction; (b) Phasing of each satellite with the others in a cluster and (c) Drag mitigation,
At present such propulsion systems tend to use only cold gas expansion from a pressurised or liquid gas reservoir, which severely limits the propulsion energy available and therefore the life of the fuel reservoir. Designs have been developed to use electrically heated hot gas thruster systems but existing concepts have several major problems: (i) Current low power resisto-jets for small satellites require significant energy input (˜10 minutes of heating at 15W) to raise the thruster casing to ˜300° C. before propellant flow and a maneuver can be initiated. Use of the propulsion system therefore prevents other power processes on the satellite taking place during this heating phase; (ii) an entire orbit is typically dedicated to a propulsive maneuver. Although maneuvers are expected only every month, a reduced time for imaging or data downlinking occurs when propulsion is required, lowering the utility of the satellite; (iii) due to the limited thermal transfer efficiency of current resisto-jet heater systems (nichrome heating elements spiral wound inside a steel chamber), a maximum of only 2 minutes firing can be guaranteed before the propellant cools the chamber and allows ingress of liquid propellant. Gaseous propellant is preferred as this allows a higher specific impulse, and thus longer satellite lifetime; (iv) small satellites also have applications in geostationary orbit and in interplanetary space. Beyond low Earth orbit, stabilisation by reaction wheels and magnetorquers is inefficient due to low or zero magnetic field. Conventional thruster systems using, e.g. hydrazine monopropellants are preferred for attitude control and orbit correction. However the cost of designing a system to use hydrazine, and the associated costs partially negate the cost-effectiveness of small satellites. A green propellant based small satellite propulsion system with an activation time comparable to a hydrazine system (in the millisecond range), and potentially useable for attitude control would enable a highly marketable, low cost maneuvering and attitude control capability and (v) future small satellite missions are likely to make extensive use of xenon propellant, because of its gaseous nature (no slosh effects) and high storage density. However xenon is a low performance propellant, offering an Isp of around 50 s compared to 90 s for butane in the same low power resisto-jet. To maximise the performance of xenon, the thruster must be run at the highest temperature possible. Thruster Isp is approximately proportional to temperature, so as to achieve a similar performance to butane it will require operation in excess of 1000° C. This is beyond the capability of the current design and is not feasible with butane which thermally cracks to give carbon (clogging the thruster) above ˜450° C.
We have now shown that the monolith systems based on the materials of the invention are capable of heating the required gas flows (˜2 L/minute) to temperatures in excess of 400° C. using the power available on small satellites (approx 30W) with very high efficiency and over short time cycles and of maintaining the temperature for extended periods. This eliminates both the time required for heat-up (˜1 orbit for conventional systems) and the short firing time accessible with current heated wire systems. The monoliths have the additional benefit of showing essentially zero pressure drop, allowing the full pressure drop to be developed across the thruster exit nozzle for maximum thrust efficiency.
One embodiment of this device is shown in the test device used to evaluate the application in
One method for analysis of trace amounts of organics is to concentrate the material into activated carbon and then to thermally desorb the adsorbate into the analyser. The effectiveness of such systems is limited by the rate at which the carbon can be heated and the temperature to which it can be heated. In the case of granular carbons this is limited by the heat transfer ability of the granular bed which actually functions as a good insulator. With the current invention the monoliths can be heated to temperatures in excess of 1000° C. in a few seconds using very low power allowing even high molecular adsorbates to be rapidly desorbed. The structure of the monolith allows this to be removed from a sampling environment and loaded into the analyser containing the electrical heating supplies or for a complete system to be connected to the analyser. The power required for such a system would be around 50 W for temperatures in excess of 1000° C. but depends on the purge gas flow required.
There are many environments where there is a requirement to maintain the humidity below a fixed level. One application could be for instance in boats where, during periods of non-use, the humidity in the cabin reaches 100% causing significant problems. This could be overcome by raising the air temperature to around 25° C. Whilst this could be achieved with more conventional air heaters, unmanned operation means that combustion systems cannot be used, whilst the power consumption of conventional electrical heaters would be too high for the available power supplies and the presence of very hot surfaces would be undesirable. The monolithic heaters of the current invention only consume a small amount of power to produce air at 30° C., whilst the lower pressure drop means that only fans, rather than compressors, are required to produce the required gas flow. This would allow the device to be driven from batteries that could be recharged using solar or wind power. Such systems can also be applied for instance to electronics cabinets where a low relative humidity is required. This would be achieved by holding the temperature at 40° C., for instance using a recycled gas heater.
Stainless steel trays 30 cm square and 5 cm deep were filled with a powder comprising a standard commercial Novolak, supplied by Borden Chemicals with a code number of J1011S. The trays were then placed on a trolley inside a curing oven and the cure was carried out by raising the temperature to 100° C. over a period of 1.5 hours, holding at 100° C. for 1 hour, raising the temperature to 150° C. over a further 1 hour and holding at 150° C. for 1 hour. The cured block was then hammer milled to give a coarse powder of greater than 90 microns particle size. The hammer milled powder was then jet milled using a Hozakawa 100 AFG jet mill to give a mean particle size of 50 microns.
1 Kg of the jet milled powder was then formed into a dough in a Z-blade mixer using approximately 500 g of water and standard polymeric extrusion aids—Methocell and polyethylene oxide. The dough was then extruded using a high pressure ram extruder at a pressure of around 40 bar using a conventional monolith die. The extruded monolith was air dried for at least 12 hours by rotating slowly in ambient air to ensure it remained straight, although more rapid drying can be achieved using, for instance, air less drying. The monoliths had a diameter in the resin form of 10 mm with a length of 10 cm. These monoliths were then carbonised in flowing carbon dioxide at temperatures of between 650 and 720° C. with residence times at temperature of between 1 and 12 hours. The shrinkage during pyrolysis and the resistance of the monoliths was then measured using a conventional 4 point method. The resistance was also measured along the length of the monolith. The resistance as a function of temperature and time are shown in Table 2.
It can be seen the resistance is strongly dependent upon both the pyrolysis temperature and the residence time. The variation in resistance with residence time is comprising as there is little or no change in the monolith weight or size. Without being bound to this explanation we believe that this resistance variation is caused by the presence of small amounts of high molecular weight molecules adsorbed onto the carbon surface that withdraw electrons from the carbon conduction bands leading to the higher resistance. These can only then be removed by holding for extended times where the time increases as the pyrolysis temperature decreases. The effect of residence time on resistivity for carbonisation at 650 and 660° C. is also shown in
The gradient of resistance along the monoliths is also a function of the temperature and time, with the resistance increasing along the tube. This is shown in
The resistance can be further reduced by heating the monoliths in a high temperature furnace in an inert gas such as helium or argon. The resistance of the monoliths heated at between 1200° C. and 1500° C. are shown in Table 2.
The resistivity of the pyrolysed and heat treated carbon can be modified in a controlled fashion by introducing surface oxygen by holding the carbon materials in air at temperatures from 150 to 500° C., preferably between 200 and 400° C., for varying times where the temperature varies with the severity of the heat treatment. The temperature required to bring about this effect varies with the initial heat treatment temperature. For the carbon monoliths pyrolysed at 800° C. the effect of oxidation is as shown in
At higher oxygen exposure temperatures removal of carbon occurs, eventually leading to mechanical failure of the monolith. Without being bound by this explanation we believe that, as in the case of the adsorbed high molecular weight materials, this effect is due to electron withdrawal from the carbon structure by the electro-negative oxygen group. This can cause significant problems if the heater is to be used in an air environment but can be used to control the monolith resistance if the heater is to be used in an inert gas environment, provided that the operating temperature does not exceed approximately 400° C. at which temperature the oxygen groups are removed from the surface.
Other chemical methods can also be used to modify the resistance characteristics such as treatment in nitric acid, hydrogen peroxide or with any other oxidizing species.
This combination of high temperature heat treatment and oxidation can be used to produce stable, controlled resistance monoliths, for use when heating gas streams containing oxygen.
The heating performance of the carbon monoliths for use in the resisto-jet application has been measured using the device shown in
Thermocouples are mounted such that one sits just above the monolith surface measuring exit gas temperature and the second is mounted just inside the exit of the monolith. Gas, preferably nitrogen or argon, can be flowed through the monolith at between 100 and 10,000 cm3/minute. Heating efficiency is quoted as the heat content of the gas exiting the monolith divided by the electrical input energy from the controlled power supply. The heating efficiency as a function of gas Reynolds number is shown in
The potential of the carbon monoliths in automotive purge heating has been measured using the device shown in
The purge heater was then connected to the purge air inlet of the standard MahleTennex LEVII canister, shown in
The assembly was then subjected to several adsorption-regeneration cycles, with and without the purge heater, using pentane as the challenge vapour. The adsorption cycles were carried out by passing 1 L/minute of air through a pentane saturator held at 10° C. and then through the canister via line 1 leaving the canister via line 2. The adsorption cycle was continued until pentane breakthrough was detected in line 2. In regeneration mode, air at 10 L/minute was passed through the purge heater, entering the canister via line 2 and leaving via line 3. Regeneration was continued for 30 minutes to give a total regeneration flow of 300 L, equivalent to 120 bed volumes.
A typical temperature profile in the canister and purge heater, without the purge heater in operation during regeneration, is shown in
The results with the purge heater operating are shown in
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
0311675.3 | May 2003 | GB | national |
0320280.1 | Aug 2003 | GB | national |
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind | 371c Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
PCT/GB2004/002157 | 5/19/2004 | WO | 00 | 4/4/2006 |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2004/105439 | 12/2/2004 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4212275 | Inoue | Jul 1980 | A |
4917835 | Lear et al. | Apr 1990 | A |
4950558 | Sarin | Aug 1990 | A |
5025923 | Okui | Jun 1991 | A |
5187142 | Richmond et al. | Feb 1993 | A |
5231968 | Siefkes | Aug 1993 | A |
5914294 | Park et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
6097011 | Gadkaree et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6284705 | Park et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6582796 | Joulin et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6859617 | Goodsel et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
6964695 | Place et al. | Nov 2005 | B2 |
20040045438 | Place et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20050126395 | Blackburn et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
O 310 043 | Apr 1989 | EP |
0 684 071 | Nov 1995 | EP |
WO 9962616 | Dec 1999 | WO |
WO 02072240 | Sep 2002 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20070056954 A1 | Mar 2007 | US |