WEAR

ELSEVIER Wear186187(1995)215-223

Erosion testing of refractories-a new testing procedure

Ulf Engman
Studrvik Material AB, S-611 82 NY&ping, Sweden

Abstract

Earlier testing of coarse-grain refractories performed at this laboratory, to simulate fluidised bed wastage, have shown that steady-state
erosion was difficult to achieve during short test periods. Prolonged testing was therefore needed. To shorten the test periods, a new testing
procedure was elaborated. The samples are first pre-eroded at ambient temperature to reduce the effect of the initial non-steady-state behaviour.
Then measurement of steady-state erosion takes place in the true (high temperature) environment.
The time needed for pre-erosion and subsequent true environment testing is determined by the size and distance of the hard grains in the
refractory according to a simple model.
The test procedure was used on four ceramic materials; a refractory brick, two castable refractories and a special ceramic. A metallic
material was used for equipment calibration.
The results show that pre-erosion removes most of the initial non-steady-state behaviour. Subsequent measurements in a true environment,
with a particle velocity of 40 m s- ’ and a temperature of 800 “C, show that 3 h of exposure results in steady-state erosion at perpendicular
impingement. At an oblique (30”) angle more test time is needed to obtain steady state.

Keywords: Erosion; Refractories;Ceramics; Fluidised beds

1. Introduction on the test time [ 11. In order to obtain information on the

technically important steady-state erosion a steady-state sur-
face condition has to be obtained. The conclusion was that a
A fluidised bed consists of particles which are elevated,
suitable minimum wastage to obtain steady-state erosion was
fluidised, by a vertical gas flow. The fluidisation process
needed and this corresponds to a material removal depth in
causes a fierce circulation of the particles which consists of
the order of the maximum grain size of the material.
sand, fuel, ashes and sometimes calcium carbonate. This cir-
In the present work the structure properties, i.e. grain sizes
culation is beneficial for uniform combustion at a low tem-
and distances between adjacent grains, are used to determine
perature with high rates of heat transfer. But high wear,
the minimum erosion needed to obtain steady-state erosion.
predominantly erosion, of the construction materials may
The goal was to shorten the test time at high temperature. The
arise owing to the impingement of sand and/or ashes.
reproducibility of the test procedure was controlled by testing
Refractories in fluidised beds are often damaged by ero-
three different specimens of the same material.
sion. To limit the maintenance costs and the risk of unplanned
outages, resistant materials are needed. While no standard-
ized methods for determining the lifetime in fluidised beds
exists Studsvik Material has developed and built a high tem- 2. Test model
perature test equipment to make tests in simulated fluidised
bed environments. 2.1. Erosion model for heterogeneous ceramics
Refractory linings in a circulating fluidised bed are found
in the lower parts where the particle bed is most dense, at the A simple model of the time dependent erosion of hetero-
combustor top and in the cyclone where the particle separa- geneous ceramics is described below. The original idea of the
tion takes place. The primary causes of failure of refractory model came from a geometric model which described the
linings are disintegration due to thermal and/or mechanical shadowing effect where the aggregate grains protect the
stresses, erosion and anchor failure. This work only deals cement phase [2]. The erosion wastage as a function of
with erosion. Earlier erosion testing performed at this labo- impingement angle and grain size/distance was modelled and
ratory have shown that the wastage rate was much dependent as in the present model the aggregate grains were approxi-

0043-1648/95/$09.50 0 1995Elsevier Science S.A. All rights reserved

XTDJ0043-1648(95)07147-4
216 UlfEngman/ Wear 186-187 (1995) 215-223
mated by spheres and the wastage rate was proportional to
the area of exposed cement phase.
The reason for the present model is our laboratory expe-
rience of scattering in steady-state erosion which may be the
result of the coarse structure in the refractories and, in relation
to the structure, small samples and limited erosion wastage.
A model material with sparse grain distribution and fixed
grain size and distance is assumed, see Fig. 1. The grain
distance is set to 2 length units.
The wastage rate of the heterogeneous material is summed
up by wastage of cement, wastage of grains and by loss of
grains. The present model assumes that the wastage of grains
is negligible. As the cement phase is eroded the grains will
protrude out of the surface and shadow or protect the cement
phase. When grain loss occurs more cement phase will be
Fig. 1. Two dimensional model of an eroded heterogeneous material with
circular grams with a radius R and a distance 2 length units between the
grains. The sample model has a length L and is cut at an angle 0 against the
main grain line. The original sample surface is shown by the broken line.
The thick line shows the sample shape at the wastage depth, d.
Cumulative wastage
7 I,0
-_
Of.“,“‘,“““,,,‘,““““”
Minimum depth, 4.3
~-~_~___f
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Wastage depth, d
Fig. 2. Cumulative wastage as a function of wastage depth, d. The minimum
wastage depth demand, d= 4.3, is illustrated.
exposed to erosion. The course of wastage of the model mate-
rial, shown in Fig. 1, is given in Fig. 2 by using f?= 0”.
Different regions with different wastage rates are obtained:
Region a Pure cement phase erosion, wastage rate
(slope) = 1;
Region b Decreasing slope when the grains becomes
more and more exposed to erosion and less
cement phase is eroded;
Region c Constant slope with grains protecting a fixed
part of the surface;
Region d Grain loss which give a vertical slope.
Thus erosion testing of a heterogeneous material may give
different results depending on the region in which the testing
takes place. In order to obtain a good average, the testing
must reach a depth where the measured average wastage rate
is almost independent of these region variations. An estimate
of the error in wastage rate has been made by drawing two
parallel straight lines in Fig. 2 (not shown) which connects
either the lowest or the highest points of the curve. The error
dependence of the wastage depth is found by connecting these
two lines by another line which determines the worst case
deviation from the average slope. An error in wastage rate of
less than +5% will according to this procedure demand a
wastage depth d of at least 4.3 length units.
As realized from Fig. 1 the wastage rate results are also
dependent of the area of the sample to obtain a good average.
A rough estimate of this area demand was made by inscribing
squares of different sizes in a model material of Fig. 1 (not
shown). Thus the cement phase fraction, which determines
the wastage, can be plotted as a function of the square size
according to Fig. 3, where straight lines connect the calcu-
lated values for integer side lengths. To decrease the cement
fraction variations to less than &5%, the side length of the
square has to be at least 4 length units.
Altogether the area and depth demands means that a min-
imum volume must be penetrated by erosion. The minimum
volume demand thus becomes 4 X 4 X 4.3 = 70 volume units
Fraction of the cement phase
08 -
0,4 -
o~~~i
,,,,,,,, ,, ( , ,
0 2 4 6 8 IO
Sample size (side length of a square)
Fig. 3. The fraction of the cement phase as a function of sample size (the
side length of a square). The minimum size demand 4 is illustrated.
 lJlfEngman/Wearl%-187(1995)215-223
which may be translated to real dimensions if the grain dis-
tances of the material ( = 2 length units) are known. The
volume demand of 70 is probably the worst case because of
the choice of 8= O”,see Fig. 1.
2.2. Initial erosion
The initial erosion rate of ceramics is usually high, but
subsequently decreases [ 1,3]. In the simple model above no
initial behaviour is found. An explanation may be that the
erosion process in reality results in an upward sloping cement
surface close to the grains, instead of a horizontal cement
surface as shown in Fig. 1, owing to some protection from
the grain itself. The reason may be that the cement in the
vicinity of the grains can only be hit by one side of the eroding
particles which results in a low wastage. This effect makes
grain loss more difficult, more grains are kept on the surface
and the relative amount of cement will become less than is
described by the model above. Thus initially a decreasing
wastage is seen.
The initial wastage amount to reach a steady-state surface
topography depend on the structure size or grain size of the
material but probably also on the erosion parameters, e.g.
impinging particle size, shape and velocity. Our earlier results
confirms that an average wastage depth corresponding to at
least half the grain size of the material is sufficient to reach
steady state [ 11.
2.3. Test procedure
The proposed procedure to perform steady-state erosion
wastage measurements based on the discussion above is the
following:
(a> Pre-erosion of the sample at a high particle velocity at
ambient temperature to reduce the initial erosion behav-
iour. That is to shape the sample surface to a topography
which characterizes steady-state erosion. The pre-ero-
sion should be at least to a depth of half the grain size.
(b) Measurement of steady-state erosion in the true envi-
ronment, that is with the real particle velocity and tem-
perature. A certain sample volume should be penetrated
to obtain reliable results. This volume demand is about
70 volume units where the grain distance is defined as
2 length units. This measurement should be repeated
until steady state is obtained.
Table 1
Material description
Designation Type of material Composition (wt.%)
Alumina brick based on andalusite 59%Al,O, + 39%SiOz
Refractory castable based on mullite, 79%A120, + 16%Si02 + CaO
hydraulic bonding
Refractory castable with Sic grain 48%SiC + 35%Al,O,
addition
Silicon-infiltrated silicon carbide > 88%SiC + < 12%Si
Austenitic heat-resistant steel 2l%Cr+ll%Ni+Fe
217
3. Experimental details
3.1. Materials
Four ceramic materials were chosen for the present test
method study. These four commercial materials are examples
of different types of materials, a refractory brick, two castable
refractories of which one had a silicon carbide addition, and
a silicon infiltrated silicon carbide. These ceramics are
denoted A, B, C and D respectively. Furthermore a heat
resistant steel, denoted E, was used as a reference material
for equipment calibration. A material description is given in
Table 1 where type of material, composition, porosity and
density are given.
The sample dimension of materials A, B and C were
40x25~15 mm with an eroded area of 1000 mm2 at 90”
impingement angle, and 50x25~15 mm with an eroded area
of 1250 mm* at 30” impingement angle, respectively. For
materials D and E half size samples were acceptable owing
to their fine grain structure. The castables B and C where heat
treated at 1000 “C and 850 “Crespectively before testing. The
surface conditions of the ceramics were as delivered with a
smooth cut surface. The metallic sample, E, was ground with
a 1000 mesh emery paper. Before each weighing the samples
were ultrasonically washed with ethanol, dried at 120 “C and
cooled in an desiccator. The accuracy of the mass loss meas-
urements has been f 0.1 mg.
3.2. Test equipment
The high temperature erosion test rig is schematically illus-
trated in Fig. 4 and is similar to the erosion equipment used
at the National Bureau of Standards [ 41. The eroding parti-
cles are fed by a rotary vane feeder to the combined nozzle
and burner. The particle system is pressurized with air and
the particles are accelerated through an alumina nozzle. The
nozzle is surrounded by a cylindrical propane burner which
besides heat gives a combustion gas environment. An elec-
trically heated tube furnace serve as a mixing and combustion
tube and also for the temperature stabilization of the target/
specimen which is positioned inside the tube. At the specimen
position, 400 mm below the nozzle, the particles are evenly
distributed all over the cross-section of the tube. The speci-
men temperature was measured on its lower face by a ther-
mocouple.
Open porosity (%) Bulk density (kg rnm3)
14 2500
? 2750
+ Y%CaO + 6%SiOI 10-15 2800
0 3100
0 7800
218 Ulf Engman / Wear 186-187 (1995) 215-223

4. Results

4.1. Erosion wastage demands

The grain size and distance should be determined in order

to know the pre-erosion and measurement demands according
to Section 2. This information were gained by studying
eroded surfaces with protruding grains. Different grain sizes
were found but data on numerous big grains were used. The
results are given in Table 2 together with the resulting wast-
age demands. Material A has some big grains, 3-5 mm, which
have been neglected. In material D a grain size and distance
of 0.1 mm was assumed which certainly is an overestimation
to obtain safe demands.

Fig. 4. Propane-fired erosion-corrosion rig PEKA.
The velocity of the eroding particles was set by regulating
the pressure drop over the nozzle and was intermittently
measured at the specimen position using a rotating double-
disc technique [ 51.
3.3. Testparameters
All experiments were performed using angular alumina
particles as erodent. The average particle diameter was
0.26 mm with 98% of the particles in the interval 0.18-
0.36 mm. The particle velocity during pre-erosion at 20 “C
was 70ms- ‘. The steady-state measurements were per-
formed at 800 “C with a particle velocity of 40 m s-i during
3 h intervals. The choice of this rather severe erosion envi-
ronment compared with fluidised bed application was made
to be able to investigate the proposed test procedure in a short
time. Using alumina instead of sand, as used in fluidised beds,
may affect the relative wear rates and rankings of the mate-
rials. Particle impingement angles of 90” and 30” were used
and the particle dose rate depending on the angle was
1000 kgm-* h-‘and500 kg mu2 h-‘respectively.Thetest
was repeated on three different samples of each material to
determine the reproducibility of the measurement.
4.2. Reproducibility
The first pre-erosion results showed very large deviations,
up to a factor 3, between different samples of the same mate-
rial. Less but still too much deviation was found at measure-
ment conditions. These results could be related to different
amounts of nozzle wear which is known to influence the
particle distribution [6]. A more worn nozzle probably
results in less direct particle impacts on a sample.
The erosivity of the test rig at measurement conditions
(800 “C, 40 m s - ‘) was correlated to the nozzle wear using
the reference steel E. This wear is indirectly quantified by the
total flow of alumina particles through the nozzle. A straight
line fit based on these results determines the nozzle efficiency
and was used to recalculate the particle dose that hit the
samples. Using this straight line particle dose correction on
the wastage results of reference steel E the deviation or repro-
ducibility became f 1.8%. This resulting deviation reflects
the differences in the material as well as non-controlled var-
iations in the erosion environment and the measurement
errors.
4.3. Wastage results
The word wastage includes erosive wear but also other
wastage mechanisms which may arise owing to the elevated
temperature. Operating temperature also influences the ero-

Table 2
Demands on amount of wastage

Material Grain size and distance Pre-erosion demands Measurement demands

2R (mm) D (mm) Rp (kg m-‘) RPA (g) Rti (g) 7Ow213~ w 70[D/213pA (kg m-*)

90” 30” 90” 30”

A 1.2 2.0 1.5 1.5 1.9 0.18 0.18 0.14

B 2.0 2.5 2.8 2.8 3.4 0.38 0.38 0.30
C 1.8 2.0 2.5 2.5 3.2 0.20 0.20 0.16
D 0.1 0.1 0.16 0.07 0.10 0.00003 0.00006 0.00005

p= density, A =eroded surface.

 UlfEngman/
T 3
1200
1000
j (2X3=6)
Fig. 5. Rates of wastage vs. wastage for six samples of material A at 90
(filled symbols) and 30” (opensymbols) impingement angle. Demands on
pre-erosion and measurement are shown.
sive wear of refractories [ 241. The erosion results are illus-
trated in the following figures for the different materials as
wastage rate vs. wastage. The wastage rate of a sample is
given by the weight ratio between wastage and particle dose.
The amount of pre-erosion is given as wastage of the material
and is illustrated by a horizontal movement of the measure-
ment lines. At least two measurements were made for each
sample and the results are illustrated as horizontal lines which
determine the average wastage rate at a certain wastage inter-
val or wastage depth in the material. Measurements were
made on three samples of each material at the two impinge-
ment angles 90“ and 30”. The wastage demands of pre-erosion
and measurement demands as shown in Table 2 are dependent
on the impingement angle but owing to the minor difference
the highest demand (90”) is illustrated.
4.3.1. Refractory brick A
The wastage results of material A, at both 90” and 30
impingement angle, are shown in Fig. 5. The wastage rate
results are similar for the independent samples but show a
90”
Fig. 6. Pictures of eroded samples of material A both from above and in profile with the eroded surface upwards. To the left 90”and to the right 30”impingement
angle with the eroding particles coming from the right.
Wear 186-187 (1995) 215-223 219
decrease in all cases from the first to the second measurement
suggesting that steady state has not been reached. The mean
value and deviation of the wastage rate measurements
are 1220&70p,ggP’ or 55.4% for 90” and
75Ok80 p,g g-1 or _I 10.9% for 30” impingement angle.
Thus the wastage rate is lower at 30” impingement which is
a general result in this investigation and is as expected for
erosion of brittle materials like ceramics [ 2,3]. The relative
deviation is twice as high at 30” impingement that at 90”
which may be explained by the lower wastage and thus more
uncertain averages. Thus longer test times are needed at
oblique angles.
The appearance of two samples of material A after high
temperature erosion are shown in Fig. 6. The samples have
been eroded either at 90”or 30”impingement angle. A surface
with protruding 0.5-l mm grains are shown. The surface of
the 30” sample shows traces parallel to the long side which
is in the direction of the impinged particles. These traces seem
to arise owing to shadowing of the cement phase by protrud-
ing grains and traces are created aside of the hard grains.
4.3.2. Refractory castable B
As for material A the sample results of material B, as shown
in Fig. 7, are similar and also here with one exception a
decrease from the first to the second measurement is found.
The 30”impingement results show that increasingpre-erosion
gives a lower decrease from the first to the second measure-
ment. Also the wastage rates become lower at higher
pre-erosion and both these findings seem to motivate a higher
pre-erosion demand. The mean value and deviation of the
wastage rate measurements are 525 & 32 pg g - ’ or + 6.1%
for 90”and 356 f 59 p,g g g ’or + 16.6% for 30”impingement
angle. As above for material A there is a lower wastage rate
and a larger deviation at 30” than at 90” impingement. The
10 mm 30”
220 Ulf Engman / Wear 186-187
SC0 +
400
1 the mean value and deviation of the wastage rate measure-
3oo t
Preerosion demand
ZOO-
Fig. 7. Rates of wastage vs. wastage for six samples of material B at 90”
(filled symbols) and 30” (open symbols) impingement angle. Demands on
pre-erosion and measurement are shown.
results seem to motivate a much higher pre-erosion at 30”
impingement which will lower the deviation.
The appearance of two samples of material B, eroded at
90” and 30”, are shown in Fig. 8. Both black and white grains
are protruding out of the surface. The surface is more
smoothly curved around the grains than in material A and
some pores exists which results in cavities on the eroded
surface. Traces due to shadowing are seen on the 30” sample.
The erosion resistance of the cement phase is clearly better
in material B than in A.
4.3.3. Refractory castable C
A dramatic decrease in wastage rate of material C was
found from the first to the second measurement for all six
samples, see Fig. 9. At oblique impingement the decrease is
even more pronounced than at perpendicular. This behaviour
can hardly be explained by a tempering process which causes
chemical transformation since the samples have already been
10mm
I I
Fig. 8. Pictures of eroded samples of material B both from above and in profile with the eroded surface upwards. To the left 90”and to the right 30“impingement
angle with the eroding particles coming from the right.
(1995) 215-223
pretreated at 850 “C for 16 h. Extra measurements were made
to obtain steady-state conditions.
If the first measurements of the samples are not considered,
ments are 140 + 26 ug g-i or + 18.3% for 90” and
106 k 20 pg g- ’or _+ 18.7% for 30” impingement angle. As
above a higher wastage rate at 90” than at 30” impingement
angle is found but the deviations are equal and large. Further
measurements would probably give more stable results and
thus less deviations.
The pictures in Fig. 10 show a surface with protruding
black Sic grains which are bound together by a white cement
phase. These grains are much more erosion resistant than the
cement phase. As in material A and B traces can be seen on
the 30” sample. The shadowing effect is easily seen by look-
ing at a 30” sample either in the particle direction where
almost only black grains are seen or in the other direction
where about half the surface is white owing to the protected
cement phase.
4.3.4. Special ceramic D
The wastage results of material D are shown in Fig. 11.
The measurement demand is in this case too small to be
illustrated. For two of the 90” samples there is a pronounced
decrease in wastage rate between the first and the second
measurement. The third sample shows an unchanged wastage
rate. Omitting the first measurements the three other meas-
urements give a wastage rate and deviation of 54 f 3 p,g g - ’
or f 6.0%. One of the 30” samples has a higher wastage rate
than the other two and this difference is probably due to
chipping during sample demounting. The other two times
two measurements gives a wastage rate and deviation of
7.2 5~0.3 kg g-i or +4.5%. Material D has a homogeneous
structure and thus an almost even wastage is obtained as seen
 lJlfEngman/Wear186-187(1995)215-223
5.1. Steady-state wastage
500
400
300
200
100
Fig. 9. Rates of wastage vs. wastage for six samples of material C at 90”
(filled symbols) and 30” (open symbols) impingement angle. Demands on
pre-erosion and measurement are shown.
in Fig. 12. The surface becomes somewhat rougher after
erosion and some profiling can be seen.
5. Discussion
No comparison is made here of the wastage rates of the
different materials. The objective of this work has been to
examine the test procedure to answer the following questions:
0 Does the test procedure give correct results on steady-state
wastage of heterogeneous ceramics?
0 How large is the deviation of the measurements on each
material? This will determine the number of samples
needed.
To evaluate the second question the deviations caused by
limitations of the test equipment must be known. According
to the results above the deviation is less than 1.8% when
compensation is made for a changing nozzle efficiency.
I J
Fig. 10. Pictures of eroded samples of material C both from above and in profile with the eroded surface upwards. To the left 90”and to the right 30”impingement
angle with the eroding particles coming from the right.
221
The wastage rates obtained at certain wastage levels or
depths are given in the results above. The prevailing tendency
with some exceptions is a decreasing wastage rate from the
first to the second measurement, which indicates a non-
steady-state behaviour. One explanation may be the aggres-
sive pre-erosion treatment at 70 m s - ’particle velocity might
create defects or weakenings on the surface caused by differ-
ent wear mechanisms. To remove these defects wastage at
measurement condition may be needed. However, some of
the pre-eroded surfaces have been observed by light and scan-
ning electron microscopy (not mentioned above) but any
crack@g on the surface was not found. To circumvent this
problem pre-erosion at measurement conditions could be
used but then the experiment has to be run for a long time at
high temperature. The incubation period is although not a
significant part of the design life in service which is realized
by considering that the used lining thicknesses may be of the
order of 10 cm.
The wastage rate results are summarized in Table 3 where
also the heat resistant steel is shown as a comparison. Table
3 shows the number of samples and measurements on which
the averages and deviations are based, the wastage interval
in which the measurements were made, wastage rate and
deviation and finally another parameter called tendency
which is defined as the average change in wastage rate
between the last two measurements. The results for material
A and B at 90” impingement angle and for material D at both
angles are probably close to steady state because the deviation
and tendency are low (except for material D at 90’). Material
A and B at 30” impingement show larger deviations and
tendencies than at 90”. More test time is probably needed to
improve the results. Material C has a dramatic decrease in
wastage rate from the first to the second measurement. More
222 Ulf Engman / Wear 186-187 (1995) 215-223

ation and tendency results often are low or about 5%. Fur-
thermore the tendency is almost always less than the deviation
which makes extra measurements doubtful. More measure-
ments are however needed at oblique angles and if the mate-
rials are more erosion resistant to lower the deviation and
tendency.

5.2. Deviation within the same material

Different results obtained from sample to sample may also

Fig. 11.Rates of wastage vs. wastage for six samples of material D at 90”
(filled symbols) and 30” (open symbols) impingement angle. Demands on
pm-erosion are shown.
L I
Fig. 12. Pictures of eroded samples of material D both from above and in
profile with the eroded surface upwards. To the left 90”and to the right 30”
impingement angle with the eroding particles coming from the right.
measurements were therefore made and the wastage results
are not based on the first measurement. Yet there is a high
deviation and tendency.
To conclude the discussion on steady state, the results show
that steady-state wastage is usually obtained because the devi-
be interpreted as too low measurement demands. Variations
in the structure may be larger than the one which is estimated
by using grain sizes and distances. The deviations are given
in Table 3 and they are also influenced by the measurement
errors of the equipment which were f 1.8%.
Material A and B at 90” impingement has deviations
around 5%. Owing to this quite small deviation it should be
enough within reasonable accuracy to test only one sample
with the proposed test strategy. Testing at 30” impingement
of these materials results in a larger deviation which probably
is caused by less wastage and thus more uncertain results.
Material C has a large deviation at both impingement
angles although extra measurements were made.
Material D has as well as the reference material E a homo-
geneous fine grain structure and the absolute deviation is low
and about the same for both materials. The wastage of mate-
rial D is much lower than E which results in a larger relative
deviation for D.
The deviation results above thus show that measurements
according to the proposed test procedure on one sample of
each material of these coarse grain materials should be suf-
ficient to obtain reasonable accuracy at perpendicular impact.
Oblique angled and erosion resistant materials need longer
test times.

Table 3
Summary of wastage results

Material Angle Number of Number of Wastage Wastage rate Deviation (%) Tendency (%)
(deg) samples measurements (kg m-‘) (CLgg-l)

Refractory brick 90 3 6 2.4-l .2 1220.0 f 70 5.4 -5.0

A 30 3 6 2.5-5 750.0 f 80 10.9 -8.2

Refractory 90 3 6 4.8-10 525.0 f 32 6.1 -2.2

castable B 30 3 6 3.3-10 356.0f59 16.6 -11.5

Refractory 90 3 6 3.4-7 140.0 f 26 18.3 -3.5

castable C 30 3 5 3.7-6 106.0*20 18.7 -21

Special ceramic 90 3 3 0.5-0.7 54.0*3 6.0 -20

D 30 2 4 0.3 7.2rtO.3 4.5 -3.4

Heat-resistant 90 2 16 0.9-4.2 148.5 f 2.6 1.8 0

steel E 30 3 3 0.6-1.1 142.0 f 3 2.1
 Ulf Engman / Wear 186-187 (1995) 215-223
6. Conclusions
A low deviation, i.e. a good reproducibility + 1.8%, was
obtained in the erosion test equipment PEKA provided that
a changing nozzle efficiency is taken into consideration.
The test procedure using pre-erosion at ambient tempera-
ture followed by two measurements at true environment seem
to result in accurate results on steady-state wastage with the
erosion parameters and materials used. But for almost all
ceramic samples there is a tendency of decreasing erosion
wastage which is more pronounced at oblique angles. Longer
test times or extra measurements are probably needed at
oblique angles.
The deviation in results between different samples of the
same material are less than 10% and thus reproducible results
are obtained for the tested ceramics. Testing of several sam-
ples of the same material is therefore not necessary. The
deviation in results seem to be angle dependent and is larger
at 30” than at 90” impingement, probably owing to less ero-
sion wastage at oblique angle which results in more uncertain
results.
However, the main conclusion is that the equipment and
testing procedure are useful for obtaining steady-state wast-
age results of heterogeneous ceramics.
223
This work was sponsored by the Thermal Engineering
Research Institute and the Board for Non-nuclear Research
at Studsvik. The author wish to thank Leif Berglin, ABB Stal,
Jan Stider, Stockholm Energy, Stig-Bjijm Westberg, Vatten-
fall Utveckling and Eric Hgggblom, Studsvik Material for
useful discussions during this work.
References
[ 11 U. Engman, Results from high temperature erosion of ceramics, in KC.
Ludema (ed.), WearofMaterials 1983, ASME, New York, p. 319.
[2] S.M. Wiederhom, Erosion of ceramics, in A.V. Levy (ed.), Proc.
Corrosion/Erosion of Coal Conversion System Materials, NACE,
Houston, TX, 1979. p. 444.
[3] W.T. Bakker, M. Liebhard and D. Brekke, Erosion of refractories in
CFBC’s; Effect of bed materials and refractory properties; A laboratory
study, in Fluidized Bed Combustion, Vol. 2, ASME, New York, 1993,
p. 955.
[4] S.M. Wiederhom and DE. Roberts, A technique to investigate high
temperature erosion of refractories, Ceram. Bull., 55 (1976) 185.
[5] A.W. Ruff and L.K. Ives, Measurement of solid particle velocity in
erosive wear, Wear, 35 (1975) 195.
[6] P.H. Shipway and I.M. Hutchings, Influence of nozzle roughness on
conditions in a gas-blast erosion rig, Wear, 162-164 (1993) 148.