3.8 Article

Quantitative Analysis of Separated Impurities inside Filter Cakes with Phantom-Aided X-ray Tomography

Journal

CHEMENGINEERING
Volume 7, Issue 3, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/chemengineering7030040

Keywords

X-ray tomography; grey value calibration; phantom; quantitative analysis; filter aid filtration

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study introduces a new approach to quantify the amount of impurity deposited inside a filter cake using X-ray tomography. A model system consisting of kieselguhr as filter aid and barium sulphate as impurity is chosen, and a calibration approach is used to gain insight into subvoxel information. The approach delivers valid results for the chosen material system and reveals unexpected characteristics of the filter cake structure.
This study presents a new approach in the quantification of the deposited amount of impurity inside a filter cake made up of filter aid material. For this purpose, three-dimensional imaging by X-ray tomography is applied. Based on the X-ray attenuation properties, a model system consisting of kieselguhr as filter aid and barium sulphate as impurity is chosen. Due to the impurity particle size being smaller than the spatial resolution of the measuring setup, a calibration approach is necessary to gain insight into subvoxel information. A so-called phantom of similar material composition is prepared. The grey values are linearly correlated with the impurity volume fraction resulting in a calibration function, which facilitates the calculation of impurity volume fraction based on grey values measured inside the filter cake. First results are presented, showing that the approach delivers valid results for the chosen material system and reveals unexpected characteristics of the filter cake structure. Challenges in the context of the phantom approach and their influence on the obtained results are discussed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available