43rd Porcelain Enamel Institute Technical Forum

132 Pages·2008·6.642 MB·English

by  William Smothers

Proceedings of the
43rd Porcelain Enamel Institute
Technical Forum
George B. Hughes
Conference Director
A Collection of Papers Presented at the
43rd Porcelain Enamel Institute
Technical Forum
October 6-7, 1981
The Ohio State University
Columbus, Ohio
ISSN 0196-6219
Published for the
Porcelain Enamel Institute, Inc.
by
The American Ceramic Society, Inc.
65 Ceramic Drive
Columbus, Ohio 43214
@The American Ceramic Society
and The Porcelain Enamel Institute, 1982

Proceedings of the
43rd Porcelain Enamel Institute
Technical Forum
George B. Hughes
Conference Director
A Collection of Papers Presented at the
43rd Porcelain Enamel Institute
Technical Forum
October 6-7, 1981
The Ohio State University
Columbus, Ohio
ISSN 0196-6219
Published for the
Porcelain Enamel Institute, Inc.
by
The American Ceramic Society, Inc.
65 Ceramic Drive
Columbus, Ohio 43214
@The American Ceramic Society
and The Porcelain Enamel Institute, 1982
Executiue Director & Publisher Associate Editor
Arthur 1. Friedberg Stephen C. Robb
Director of Publications Graphic Prodfrction
Donald C. Snyder Lynne Zettler
Editor Circulation Manager
William J. Smothers Gary W. Panek
Committee on Publlcatfons: J. Lambert Bates, Chairman; H. Kent Bowen;
Delbert E. Day; William C. Mohr; Richard M. Spriggs; Richard E. Tressler, ex
ofpcio; William J. Smothers, ex oflcfo; Arthur 1. Friedberg, ex oficio.
Editorial Aduisory Board: Richard E. Tressler, Chairman; R. A. Condrate;
R. T. Dirstine; L. E. Gill: I. J. Hasting; 1. Jawed; Y.S . Kim; D. R. Messier; G.
W. Phelps; T. F. Root; M. Tomotawa; J. J. Uchno.
Editorial and Subscription Oflces: 65 Ceramic Drive, Columbus, Ohio
43214. Subscription $60 a year; single copies $12 (postage outside U.S. $2
additional). Published bimonthly. Printed in the United States of America.
Allow six weeks for address changes. Missing copies will be replaced only if
valid claims are received within six months from date of mailing. Replacements
will not be allowed if the subscriber fails to notify the Society of a change of ad-
dress.
CESPDK Vol. 3, No. 5-6, pp. 229-349, 1982
The American Ceramic Society assumes no responsibility for the state-
ments and opinions advanced by the contributors to its publications, or by the
speakers at its programs.
Foreward
A Message from the Technical Forum Chairman
“he 1981 PEI Technical Forum attracted more than 200 technical represent-
atives from the supplier and manufacturer segments of the industry in
search of information, developments, research, and plant-operation prac-
tices. This year’s Forum proved as successful in providing an educational en-
vironment for its participants as the 42 forums which preceded it.
The topic of energy and ways of conserving it led off the Forum on Tues-
day morning as industry representatives related their approaches to improv-
ing and replacing furnaces and monitoring energy use. One of the highlights
of the Forum came next when representatives of two high production
porcelain enamel facilities discussed their successful use of the no-nickel-
no-pickle process.
We were happy to have Dr. James I. Mueller present this year’s A. I.
Andrews Memorial Lecture. Implementing slides and film, he discussed the
use and properties of high performance ceramic tiles in the Space Shuttle in a
most interesting and informative manner.
Tuesday afternoon’s session on metal preparation featured a paper on
electrolytic pretreatment in Great Britain and a discussion on etch-free metal
preparation. Forum participants also learned about cover-coat stress as it
relates to fired thickness, a favorable-to-porcelain enamel survey on plumb-
ing fixtures, and a new adherence-testing device.
Wednesday’s session began with a panel discussion on substrates and
continued with papers on cost-saving technological innovations such as dry-
powder porcelain enameling and electrophoretic deposition. On Wednesday
afternoon attention was given to a variety of topics dealing with waste utiliza-
tion and treatment.
It has been a pleasure for me to serve again as chairman of the PEI
Forum Committee. I am most appreciative of the officers and staff of the
Porcelain Enamel Institute, our excellent hosts at The Ohio State Univers-
ity-especially William B. Shook, and of the members of the Forum Com-
mittee who all contributed to the success of this Forum and made my job a
little easier.
I would also like to thank the Forum speakers and session chairmen for
their hard work in making this Forum possible. Next year, PEI’s 44th Annual
Technical Forum will be held at the University of Illinois on October 5-6. I
hope that you will make plans now to be there.
George B. Hughes, chairman
1981 Technical Forum Committee
iii

Table of Contents
U.S. Energy Outlook and American Standard’s
....................................
Conservation Response 229
Alan C. Root
..............................
Refinements in Furnace Design 234
Louis C. Kolar
Energy Savings with Improved Furnaces and Other Plant
............................................
Modifications 238
W. C. Bennight, Lester N. Smith, Charles C. Vicary, and Edward M. Thoben
...............
Pickle-Free Ground Coat-Production Experience 244
Daniel H. Luehrs
Use of a No-Nickel, No-Pickle System for Application
................................
of Porcelain-Enamel Powder 247
Donald R. Sauder
..............................
Ceramics in the Space Shuttle 249
James I. Mueller
................................
Etch-Free Metal Preparation 250
Dan R. Larson
Compressive Stress of Several Selected Cover-Coat Enamels
...................................
vs the Coating Thickness 257
Robert L. Hyde
Performance Criteria for Evaluating Bathtub Refinishing
................................................
Surfaces 261
Richard I. Moss
.............
Thought-Leader Attitudes Toward Plumbing Fixtures 263
Bruce L. D’Agostino
............
Enamelability of Cold-Rolled Aluminum-Killed Steels 265
Larry L. Steele
The of Volatile Corrosion Inhibitors for the Protection
Use ................................
of Steel in Storage of Transit 268
Clayton A. VanScoy
..................
A Logical Sequence for Conversion to Powder 273
Larry N. Biller and James B. Willis
..........
Survey of Porcelain-Enamel-Powder Systems Worldwide 280
William D. Faust
V
.....
Electrophoretic Enameling-An Area of Steady Advancement 284
John A. Olenick, Werner Joseph, and Hans Hoffman
...........
The Total-Energy Approach to Firing Porcelain Enamel 291
Peter B. Mackenzie
..................
Practical Aspects of Electrolytic Pretreatment 301
John E. Nicholson
Current Availability of Steels for Porcelain Enameling-
A Panel Presentation ...................................... 306
Melvin B. Gibbs, Richard S. Davies, and Donald A. Toland
............
The Latest in Spray Equipment-A Panel Presentation 310
Rodney L. Ward and Roy S. Nickerson
........
Requirements for Using Reclaimed Enamel in Smelted Frit 315
Frank Vondracek
.........................
Plant Experience with Resmelted Frit 318
Edward W. Friddle
The Growing Problem of Waste Management and
......................................
Disposalinthe1980s 319
David S. Cameron
............
Solid-Waste Management at a Major Appliance Plant 321
Dennis E. McCloskey
Barium-Free Ground Coats in Answer to Solid-Waste
.............................
Problems- A Panel Presentation 335
Archie L. Farr, Thomas L. Stalter, and Craig L. Williams
Industrial Wastewater Discharge: Experience, Analysis,
.............................................
and Control 338
Edward M. Thoben and Richard W. Moore
Problems Associated with Closing a Wastewater-Treatment
...................................................
Plant 342
Charles H. Hickox
..........................................
Attendance List 346
vi
Energy Outlook and American Standard’s
U.S.
Conservation Response
ALANC . ROOT
American Standard, Inc.
40 W. 40th St., New York, NY 10018
Production ofnatural gas in the U.S.felljrom6 50 billion m3( 23 trillionjP) annually
in the early 1970s to 540 billion m3 (1 9 trillion fr) in 1980. The projection for 1986
is 480 billion m3 (17 trillion jP). Domestic petroleum will decline slightly to 1.1
million ma/d (7 million barrels/d). Conservation at American Standard yielded
$5.7 million in savings in 1980 and will cumulatively have saved $72 million by
1986.
Domestic Supply of Hydrocarbons and Other Fuels
Them ajor domestic sources of U.S. energy are, in order of importance, nat-
ural gas, crude oil, coal, nuclear power, hydroelectric power, geothermal
power, and others. For purposes of comparison, these types of energy should
be converted to a common unit of measure. We will make that common unit
an “equivalent barrel per day,’’ that is, the energy content equivalent to that
contained in a barrel of crude oil. On this basis, natural gas has provided us
with = 10 million equivalent barreldd; crude oil, about the same amount;
coal, ‘58 million equivalent barrels; and all of the rest, =3 million barrels.
This adds up to a total current supply from domestic sources of =31
million barreldd. We have been consuming 38 million barreldd and have
had to import the difference from foreign sources. These imports of =7
million barrels/d have, in fact, been primarily in the form of crude oil.
Likely to Overcome Crisis
U.S.
If we extrapolate the current U.S. rate of consumption, in a typical year
in the late 1980s, consumption will probably be million barreldd. This
44
projection rests on the assumption that our gross national product will rise in
some of the intervening years and fall in others but, on average, will grow at a
rate < 3% annually in physical terms. We also assume continuing efforts to
reduce our use of hydrocarbons and other fuels that will probably result in
savings measured in energy at a rate of 2%/yr. By the late 1980s, we will
probably be producing = 38 million equivalent barreldd. That will leave us
short 16 million equivalent barrels, which will have to be imported. Our
economy will probably be able to afford this level of imports, which will be
c 35% of our earnings on our exports and will amount to c 3% of our gross
national product. The summary of these data is shown in Table I.
Alan C. Root is senior vice president of Operations Services for American Standard, Inc. His
responsibilities include purchasing, traffic, energy resources, technology, corporate planning,
and corporate development. He earned his degree in economics from Cambridge Universi-
MA.
ty and his M.B.A. from Stanford University. He holds memberships in numerous organizations
including the American Institute of Chemical Engineers.
229
Shift from Gas to Other Energy Sources
Production of natural gas is declining in the lower 48 states of the
Union, and North Alaskan gas will probably not have a pipeline for delivery
to domestic U.S. markets for many years. Discoveries of additions to our
natural gas reserves have been running at a lower rate than our use of the gas
we have been pulling out of the ground. As a result, production of natural
gas in equivalent barrels per day is expected to drop by 1 million barrels by
the 1988-89 period. Domestic oil production will also decline somewhat as
discovery of large, new, easy-to-tap fields becomes more difficult. Coal will
provide a much greater share of our basic fuel consumption, probably = 13
million equivalent barrels/d. Although nuclear energy faces delays, it is
hoped that nuclear power production will reach 4 million equivalent
barreldd in the late 1980s. There will be small additional contributions from
hydroelectric power, geothermics, and possibly shale. (See Figs. 1 and 2 for
supporting detail.)
Conservation Cuts Demand-Supply Gap
You may recall that the forecast is based on the assumption that we will
reduce consumption by ~ 2 %annu ally in millions of equivalent barrels per
day. The biggest contributor to these savings will probably be the individual
automobile owner, who is still the greatest consumer of energy in the U.S. In-
dustry in its many and various fields will also contribute by improving its
processes and by making capital investments in energy-conservation systems.
American Standard Controls Energy Costs Tightly
As a manufacturer of building products, transportation equipment,
security hardware, and graphic-arts products, we use natural gas, electricity,
fuel oils, propane, and coal, in that order of importance.
The cost of the energy used throughout the global operations of
American Standard rose from $38 million 5 yr ago to $67 million in 1980.
Even if we continue our conservation efforts over the next 5 yr, it is still likely
to reach ~$145m illion in the late 1980s. So far, our conservation efforts
have kept our energy costs down to 2.5% of the sales dollar, and our inten-
tion is to keep this amount at <3% in future years. Attainment of this goal
requires extensive energy-management efforts by both corporate headquar-
ters and the operating groups and their 140 plants throughout the world.
Each operating group and major division has an energy coordinator who is
specifically charged with the responsibility of achieving energy-cost-reduc-
tion objectives.
Energy Savings Goal is $10 Million by 1985-86
Over the past 5 yr, these energy coordinators, together with our head-
quarter’s Energy Resources Department, have worked hard to get the savings
rate up to the $5.7 million we actually achieved in 1980. These savings repre-
sent progress made in that year only, without taking into account the
cumulative benefit of savings made in earlier years as a result of new tech-
niques and investments.
Our plan is to continue to make additional savings in each future year
and to reach an annual rate of saving of $10 million/yr by the late 1980s.
That would make our energy bill $145 million/yr instead of $155 milliodyr.
Because of savings made in earlier years carry forward, the
90%
cumulative effect will give us an annual energy bill of $145 million, compared
230