 |
 |
Papers and Reports |
|
Triboelectric Technology
Triboelectric monitoring, now accepted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, provides continuous monitoring of particulates. |
|
AISE Dust Detector Report
American Institute of Steel Engineers Journal, describing IPSCO Steel / TRIBO.link experience. |
|
DC vs. AC White Paper
White paper comparing DC (triboelectric) with AC (electrodynamic) coated probe dust monitors. AC style circuits exhibit disproportional response to velocity suggesting they are unsuitable for long term, continuous monitoring. |
|
Important DC/AC Information
An independent study has concluded that polymer jacketed, or coated, sensor probes utilized by triboelectric/inductance dust monitors (variously marketed as: AC triboelectric; tribokinetic; electrodynamic; induction-sensing) could be hazardous when combustible dust particles are present. For this reason, Auburn intrinsically safe, DC, triboelectric dust monitors do not utilize polymer jacketed sensor probes in potentially hazardous applications. |
|
Safe Application of Triboelectric Dust Detectors
Safe Application of Triboelectric Dust Detectors An independent study has concluded that polymer jacketed, or coated, sensor probes utilized by triboelectric/inductance dust monitors (variously marketed as: AC triboelectric; tribokinetic; electrodynamic; induction-sensing) could be hazardous when combustible dust particles are present. For this reason, Auburn intrinsically safe, DC, triboelectric dust monitors do not utilize polymer jacketed sensor probes in potentially hazardous applications. Click here for the full story (PDF) It may not be commonly known that dust fires and explosions are not only limited to dust particles generally classified as “combustible” (i.e. food, coal, sawdust, etc.). In fact, “The most prevalent accident occurring in the industry during the past 50 years has been metal fires,”.(JOM, May, 2000) For ultimate safety, only DC, intrinsically safe triboelectric systems should be considered. |
|
Excerpt from EPA Document Outlining Position on Triboelectric Bag Leak Detector vs. Opacity Meters
EPA's Position on Triboelectric Bag Leak Detector vs. Opacity Meters ”The EPA believes that baghouse leak detection represents state-of-the-art compliance assurance for baghouses, and plans to implement it in all new source MACT standards, where it is applicable, and, in most cases, to existing source standards as well. Bag leak detection systems are designed to monitor events. This differs from opacity monitors which monitor continuous emissions. The EPA has provided adequate requirements in the final rule and in associated guidance* to ensure the proper operation and maintenance of these systems. New rules, such as these developed under the part 63 NESHAP program, emphasize direct measures of compliance. The bag leak detection system provides this higher level of compliance assurance and is needed for the NESHAP program.” |
|
Pollution Engineering Magazine
Seeing the Small Stuff, the Emergence of Triboelectric Technology II, published in Pollution Engineering Magazine. |
|
AIST Magazine
Practical Application of Auburn Broken Bag Detector, published in Iron and Steel Technology Magazine. |
|
Measurement Science and Technology
Vibration sensor for particle concentration measurement in pneumatic pipeline flows, published in Measurement Science and Technology Magazine. |